Reply to Question for Madlax Parents

Forum Index » Lacrosse

Reply to "Question for Madlax Parents"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The sport is fluid and changing all the time.  A few years ago this board would be full of parents complaining about 8th grade verbal commitments now it is about the re-class issue.  Reclassing actually did make sense when kids could gain the advantage of getting early commitment to a good school.  However, the process was not good for coaches as they took too much risk in taking an 8th grader who did not pan out.  Therefore they changed the rules.  Clubs and private schools exist to sell the dream of college athletics in this sport.  Right now re-classing works because it gives kids a early lead on the spotlight of recruiting events and top teams which leads to top HS programs, showcases, ect..  The fact they might not even be allowed to play the senior year does not matter because they would have already committed as a Junior.  The ONLY way to fix this is for college coaches to adjust.  If they take the actual age into consideration when recruiting the practice will stop.  I think this makes sense.  When looking at a sophomore or Junior it should make a difference if he is 15 or 18.  USL should pressure the college coaches to make a statement about this.  Clubs and HOCO will not change this anymore than complaining on a message board will.  [/quote]

Why in the world would colleges change? They get bigger and emotionally more mature kids who have better test scores and are easier to put through the process. We love the Navy but they are the worst. They recruit double holdbacks, holdbacks and whoever just like everyone else. Then they ask most to do another year at Navy Prep. They are getting 21 year old freshman and they love it because the demands of the academy show older students do better.

It's up to the parents to police their own children's teams and activities and I've been the one screaming about MadLax's team of 16 and 15 year olds playing 8th grade lacrosse. My kid will not be playing in divisions or tournaments against these types of teams unless his roster changes dramatically. The NY teams are very wary of playing against MD teams due to this. It's also why you see the NY teams dominate in National age based tournaments like WSYL. I've read how people trash it but it is an age based tournament with no exceptions and the MD teams aren't even trying to qualify this year due to their roster imbalances. But those same MD teams will have plenty of young men on college rosters.

I've complained to HoCo and every other tournament and it falls on deaf ears. Maybe complaining on a board like this will help.

[/quote]

You do bring up some interesting points.  I started playing lacrosse in the late 70's and through the 90's and so when I say the landscape is changing it is from this perspective of time.  Re-class was not an issue or even a term in 1983 when I applied to college.  The example of the Naval Academy is also interesting.  I am not a graduate but it would seem that the Department of the Navy would care far more about the officer than the lacrosse player.  If having a 21 year old Freshman is a desire of the academy they would create a system to encourage more or this.  Does this only apply to Lacrosse?  Navy Prep was designed to give officers siblings a way to prove they could qualify while still maintaining the extremely tough admissions requirements applied to the rest of the applicants.  I am not sure they intent is necessarily to have an older class entering the academy.

The issue of reclassing or holding a student back for an advantage in sports seems to be a fairly new trend as it was not rampant many years ago.  This does not seem to apply only to lacrosse.  The question would be is this good or bad for college coaches?  Why would colleges change?  Here is another perspective.  If two players are fairly equal when evaluated, the better option would be the younger player.  In high school if a player is 18 or 19 he would be closer to peak performance.  If a player is 15 or 16 the upside would be far better.  Do you recall Freddy Adu?  He signed a contract at 14.  I think that if there was a player who was equal to Freddy who was 18 he would not be signed or at least not for as much money.  Coaches are looking for upside.  What would it prove for a 21 year old HS player to dominate a game with 15-16 year old players v. dominating v. kids in college?  One issue may be that access to age is not considered when the coaches evaluate.  Clearly all things being equal a coach would want the younger player.  I agree with you that the current system is flawed (an understatement) but I feel only the recruiting process will fix this.  The private HS programs benefit from an extra year of tuition and the clubs get an extra year of fees.  They would not want to stop the practice of reclassing.  However for the college coaches there would be an advantage to having a more complete evaluation of players if they were all the same age.  Clearly the younger player has more upside.  Unlike Basketball a coach will get four years with a lacrosse player.  [/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