Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Lacrosse
Reply to "Maryland Lacrosse"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous] Not sure how someone is “acting” in any way by asking questions. [b][You're not "asking questions". You are arguing, absurdly, that Maryland's season is somehow discredited because they have some older players.][/b] Why are you defensive about how UMD builds its team, if you think it is OK? [b][It's not "defensive" to point out that your argument is ridiculous.][/b] Your assertion that 19-21 year olds are at the same level physically as 24-25 year olds, however, is absurd. Physical peak in male athletes varies by sport but is generally understood to be at around 25 years old. [b][Maryland did not beat Cornell, or anyone, because they were physically superior. They beat Cornell because they played better lacrosse. As I said, the implication that this is equivalent to high school age athletes playing in HoCo - a time when a small age difference does confer significant physical advantage - is ridiculous.][/b] [/quote][/quote] What “absurd” or “ridiculous” arguments do you think I am making? Maryland plays by different rules than Cornell and other Ivies, and Maryland had 24 and 25 year olds on their roster. Those are just facts. As to your continued HoCo comparison—I understand that with your HoCo laxdad background, your perspective is limited and so you keep falling back on that even though it is completely different. And I don’t know how you define and draw the line between “physically superior” vs “playing better lacrosse.” But when sports scientists study these issues for team sport athletes, physical peak encompasses athletic peak in their analysis and your supposed distinction is not real. Let me ask you this: do you think 24 and 25 year old NHL players would say that they aren’t any better than they were when they were 21 or 22 and playing major juniors or college hockey?[/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