Crazy that in lacrosse now if you’re not on the “right” club team by 9, people act like you missed your window.

We have a handful of local girls who played rec through 4th grade and tried to come to a B team of a top club. They likely would have made it had they started with the club earlier. I think they got left behind. If there athleticism really develops, I think they can come in. For now, they need to find a lower level club team.

I do think the crème of the crop athletic girls could come in later, like 6th/7th grade, and possibly break into a top 10 team. Rest, hard to see how they’d get into an M&D or Hero’s A team.

Flip side is being on top teams early if you’re not too athletic likely means you’ll get displaced by the end.

Athletic girls that aren’t that top echelon of athlete probably can find a top 40-100 team. But there’s going to be an expectation there that they’ve developed some stick skills.

It's also possible that your DD and the two travel girls on her team are not that good.

It's also possible that since this is only 4th grade lacrosse, not enough separation yet between a rec player and a casual travel player.

I wouldn't say that travel lax is a requirement for elementary school lax. But it does help with development, more so than doing rec.

Anonymous wrote:It probably depends on the team. I find it hard to believe that rec players just starting out would compete with or beat players from A level NGLL teams.

And it does get pretty hard to get on those types of teams as you reach middle school if you have not been playing in late elementary school.

My two oldest daughters currently play in college and when they were coming up we had a lot of late starters completely pass girls who had been playing A level travel since they were 9. I love lacrosse but this isn't ice hockey or gymnastics where there are massive skill gaps. A lot of lacrosse skills are developed in other sports and can be refined quickly.

I will say, getting on a team young makes it easier to stay on a team because the coaches are more likely to pick "their players" and "lifelong lacrosse players" because they don't want to lose them to other teams or sports next season.

Your daughter should join HOCO Black.

Anonymous wrote:It probably depends on the team. I find it hard to believe that rec players just starting out would compete with or beat players from A level NGLL teams.

And it does get pretty hard to get on those types of teams as you reach middle school if you have not been playing in late elementary school.

Agreed. To the other posters, travel lacrosse is only a scam if your kid is a mediocre player on a mediocre team with no desire to improve your stick skills or level of play. You don’t make or play on an A level team by accident.

It probably depends on the team. I find it hard to believe that rec players just starting out would compete with or beat players from A level NGLL teams.

And it does get pretty hard to get on those types of teams as you reach middle school if you have not been playing in late elementary school.

Travel lacrosse before late middle school or high school is a scam. But it is a very financially lucrative one which is why so many clubs exist to feed the market.

Softball players already have good hand-eye, hockey players already have good stick skills, soccer players already have good movement. Play a bunch of other sports and lacrosse will come naturally.

The one upside is you learned it early and don't have to spend 4 more years of wasting money on elementary school travel lacrosse.

Anonymous wrote:My daughter is a 2034 as plays year-round ball on her travel team but, like a lot of girls, also plays for fun on her local neighborhood rec team in the NVYLL.

Her team has her and two other travel girls (one from her team and one from another team) and then a bunch of girls who just play lacrosse for fun in the spring. So I had thought that throughout the season that having three travel players on a team would make them dominant, but no. This isn't even the top division, so I was a little surprised they didn't do better. I don't remember but we were maybe a .500 team.

We had rec (NVYLL) playoffs this week and got crushed. I assumed it was because the other team was loaded with travel players but talking to some of the other team's parents on the sidelines, these girls basically just pick up a stick in spring and play for a couple months and then are back to whatever other sports they play. They had 3-4 players who would have been amongst the top players on my daughter's travel team and a few others who maybe could have made the team.

So yah, I'm not complaining about the other team because they are exactly what rec should be - people who are playing the sport for fun for 2-3 months in a casual setting. I'm more sad because I feel like we've all been sold on the idea that travel lacrosse at a young age is the way to go for development, when this weekend/season made it pretty clear that other athletic girls from other sports can pick it up pretty darn quick and be as good or better than people who have been doing travel training for years. I'm sure these girls are doing other sports at a travel level but it really goes to show that the local travel clubs are good at selling us on the idea that it's "travel or be left in the dust".

You're way too invested in this OP. Your "sadness" is of no concern to anyone. You bought a pig in a poke and now you know.

Oh, and "we" didn't get crushed in the tournament. Your daughter's team did.

She's 10

Travel is stupid before 7th grade... maybe 6th. The high school game in no way resembles the 4th grade game.

At that age, play rec and train on the side. Travel clubs are just about making money. Even for full time travel players, they have to train on the side. Start travel around middle school.

I don't know much about lacrosse but I do know a couple of athletic kids who picked it up very late and were quickly very good at it. One went on to play D3 and had never played prior to high school.

Maybe it's just one of those sports a lot of "training" isn't required?

My daughter is a 2034 as plays year-round ball on her travel team but, like a lot of girls, also plays for fun on her local neighborhood rec team in the NVYLL.

Her team has her and two other travel girls (one from her team and one from another team) and then a bunch of girls who just play lacrosse for fun in the spring. So I had thought that throughout the season that having three travel players on a team would make them dominant, but no. This isn't even the top division, so I was a little surprised they didn't do better. I don't remember but we were maybe a .500 team.

We had rec (NVYLL) playoffs this week and got crushed. I assumed it was because the other team was loaded with travel players but talking to some of the other team's parents on the sidelines, these girls basically just pick up a stick in spring and play for a couple months and then are back to whatever other sports they play. They had 3-4 players who would have been amongst the top players on my daughter's travel team and a few others who maybe could have made the team.

So yah, I'm not complaining about the other team because they are exactly what rec should be - people who are playing the sport for fun for 2-3 months in a casual setting. I'm more sad because I feel like we've all been sold on the idea that travel lacrosse at a young age is the way to go for development, when this weekend/season made it pretty clear that other athletic girls from other sports can pick it up pretty darn quick and be as good or better than people who have been doing travel training for years. I'm sure these girls are doing other sports at a travel level but it really goes to show that the local travel clubs are good at selling us on the idea that it's "travel or be left in the dust".