Reply to lax culture from an insider

Forum Index » Sports General Discussion

Reply to "lax culture from an insider"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My God you are dense.

Here's an actual lacrosse roster for you to consider:

http://www.gonzaga.org/page.aspx?pid=490

You'll see a 205 lb freshman, a 230 lb sophomore a 285 junior and a 165 lb senior -- according to your data this is impossible because none of these living breathing student athletes are "average" -- how dumb can one person be?  Please stop before you embarrass yourself further.  Also, note that the 285 lb player would still be out there to play against you fragile snowflake even under a no red shirt rule.[/quote]

I am familiar enough with that roster to call bunk -- again -- on everything you are trying to argue. The 205 lb freshman is a strong player who was also 16 in the fall of his freshman year, which is one of the problems in the sport being debated. There are two other rostered kids at 230 pounds and at 285 pounds. Both of those kids were recruited to play football at Gonzaga and both are among the top recruits in the nation for college football. One is going to Alabama next year, and the younger boy has SEC football offers.

The CDC growth charts don't lie and are conclusively representative. To be specific to your point, 285 lb living and breathing people and 45 lb dwarfs are possible, and represent the outliers in the data. One lacrosse roster at a prep school well known for elite prep football, which they recruit for, where two prominently sized kids play lacrosse in the spring is representative of nothing and is misleading to extrapolate from. The point is plain, simple and is supported by the data you argued does not exist. There are material spreads in physical size and development between adolescents two years apart, and there are jarring differences when that spread is widened to 5 years considering 14 year olds and 19 year olds.[/quote]

Umm . . . you do realize the CDC charts support red-shirting don't you?  The greatest year to year changes in size are 13-15, not 18-20.  The problem is that some kids are too YOUNG when they begin playing varsity.  If the 205 lab freshman hadn't red shirted he'd be a 205 sophomore - and still playing. The 285 lb junior would be a 285 lb senior - and still playing.  You aren't going to eliminate big kids from playing varsity high school contact sports.  As the CDC charts prove, even non-red-shirt seniors are fully grown.  [b]The problem is kids being allowed to play varsity as freshman when they aren't big enough.[/quote][/b]

Cmon, how many Freshman are getting major playing time on any compettive lacrosse team? We were at one of the "noted" lacrosse schools and while there were a few freshamn that made the team every year, they got very little playing time and non were starters unless one of the older kids got injured. Almost always the kids  with the most playing time are the juniors and seniors for a reason, They are bigger, stronger and have more experience. It really isn't rocket science.[/quote]

the "problem" being addressed here is the alleged problem of enormous size mismatches caused by allowing 19 year olds to play varsity.  The CDC charts show that even at the 97% the average weight difference is about 4 lbs. Between 14-15 the average weight difference is 14 lbs.

If kids don't play there is no issue, but wouldn't they be better off on a JV squad where they could play more against kids who are the same size?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics