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]Not true at all. College coaches want to win and win now. They don't care about age or upside or development. Each coach is looking to extend their short term contracts or parlay their results into a better school. Your example is not a good one with 3 deep at one spot because neither the 20 or 17 year old will go to that school. If there is a need, they will take the 20 year old  and tell the 17 year old to take a gap year or repeat or go to a college prep school to get bigger physically. [/quote]

I am guessing you decided to hold your kid back and are now wondering why he is not committed yet.  There are several people here who are not agreeing with your logic.  This is because it does not make sense.  It is easy to say college coaches want to WIN and WIN now.  Do they want to Loose?  However fact is that Lars at UVA told alumni and fans that he was building a program.  Each coach is in a different position.  Let's skip that for now and address the recruiting process.  Would you agree that most players that are active recruits are being evaluated during the summer of sophomore and fall of junior year?  If you do not accept this premise there is little else to discuss.  If you do then you would agree that a 20 year old junior could cause a red flag.  You claim that a coach does not care about age or upside development?  That is silly.  That is 100% the point of recruiting.  Future potential is the only thing they are looking at.  You state if there is a need they take the 20 year old.  How many 20 year olds will be in the Underclass group at Under Armour this summer?  FYI, age is provided at registration.  Sure ESPN will feature 19 and even a few 20 year old players, how many will be available.  I think 99.9% were already committed when they play on TV coaches are not recruiting these players.  Taking two players of relative equal size and skill the 17 year old would be more appealing to a coach.  The key is equal size and skill.  The 20 year old may even be at a disadvantage as the PG year would be less of an option.  There are far more 20 and 21 year old players in the NCAA final than there are 24 and 25 year old players.  If a player is a great player with D1 potential they will get recruited either way but all things equal it is only logical that a 17 year old would be more desirable than a 21 year old.  If an 8 year old is holding his own in the U15 division he would be considered a phenom.[/quote]

If I'm a NCAA coach, why do I care how old a recruit is. Is there an age limit on athletes, nope. You lose me when  you say 19 and a few 20 year olds are featured on ESPN. These kids are being recruited and that's why they are on TV. It's been stated before, a few years ago UnderArmour accidentally posted the birth dates of their rosters and almost every one was 19 and 20. This isn't a theory, it's real. And when you say there are far more 20 and 21 year olds in the NCAA finals, you show it again. There are very few 18/19 year olds. The best teams have the older players and are physically mature. At that point, college coaches have an equal field of players to choose from to get playing time.

But that's college. These arguments started because 16 and 15 year 9 month olds are playing 8th grade lacrosse in HoCo. So if you think there are a bunch of 13/14 year olds able to compete against 16/15 year olds in 8th grade based on potential, you are wrong. [/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