Reply to DC Express?

Forum Index » Lacrosse

Reply to "DC Express?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]DCE former owners can now focus solely on coaching and the BLC people can handle the business that distracts owners who coach. Considering some of the owners who coach around here this like a good separation of church and state to me. [/quote]

Anzelone was the former owner and he got out just like i said he would when his son graduated. Mission accomplished. Now Urick can launch his kids. [/quote]

Sadly this is the way of these clubs. Their kids and their kids' friends above all others.[/quote]

IF BLC's recent track record with the boys' club program is any indication of how daddy ball is going to work with the older kids at DCE, this merger seems like it's going to be a disaster. [/quote]

BLC is where they don’t do daddy ball - see ML 2027, NL 2030, NL 20 whatever McCavera - all teams formed at BLC with dad coaches who wanted to keep going so had to take their entire teams - cutting more and more original players every year of course - to these other places. [/quote]

Ah, no. These BLC daddy ball teams didn't implode because BLC wouldn't let the coaches continue to coach their teams. They imploded because the daddy coach model that BLC permits got so toxic that team after team disbanded in order to play for [b]NL, ML, etc. where they largely avoid dad coaches.[/b]

I really was hoping for DCE to find a way through the fact that the BLC pipeline for talent in the 2030, 2031, 2032, 2033 etc. classes is so weak. Tying themselves even more strongly to the BLC pipeline is the worst thing they can do to build DCE from within. [/quote]

But the problem is that ML and NL DON'T avoid Dad coaches.  MadLax has Dad coaches on many of their teams - I know for sure 27, 28 and 29, and I bet there are others. (in fairness, the 28 coach is the program owner).  NL has at least one (2030 or 31, I think).  It is somewhat unavoidable because there are not other good options.  you can have a daddy coach and all the toxicity and nepotism that brings, or you can have a chill lax bro kid in his 20's thinking he can make a living from lacrosse (spoiler alert, you can't), or you can get a HS coach with a good name but is spread too thin, so he is MIA most of the team (Dave Mitchell, for example), which means the assistants are frequently running the team, so you are back to the daddies or the 20-something lax bro's. club owners usually consider the daddies the "least bad" option because the price is right (i.e., free).  If anyone knows a mature, quality coach in his 30's/40's with D1 college playing experience, not a nut case, not a team parent, and able to attend close to 100% of the games, and willing to give up their weekend for the pittance that travel coaches are paid, I would love to know who that is.  If your son is lucky enough to have such a coach, be grateful, because they are very rare.
What does this mean for DCE under its new ownership?  it means they will be fine, because if their coaching is flawed, it will be no different than their competitors.[/quote]

Mitchell hasnt been coaching HS for a few years now...[/quote]

Fair eniguh,  but he’s still spread too thin[/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