Joining a club is not a suicide pact. If improvement isn’t being seen and doesn’t appear to be likely what is the appropriate response from the parents

no dog in the hunt myself, and I am curious why you are so passionate that families were wrong to leave this team. they had their reasons, that is their choice. are you a parent or coach on the 2028 team, or are you just adamant that players generally should not leave teams mid year?

Anonymous wrote:Just to make it clear - when confidence in the team is lost - - there’s no more team. So all the talk about moral character and sticking to your commitments doesn’t make sense if there’s no team.

Ask yourself, why was confidence in the team lost? Did you as a parent contribute or cause that loss of confidence and spread that to your kid? You saw a little bump in performance in the fall and panicked and are now trying to justify an attempt to buy your way to success for your kid by jumping programs?

Is it possible for you to look in the mirror and accept your part of the responsibility to what happened or is happening? Or are you sticking with the story that the club wronged you?

Just to make it clear - when confidence in the team is lost - - there’s no more team. So all the talk about moral character and sticking to your commitments doesn’t make sense if there’s no team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VLC brought this on themselves. Last year The parents on the 27 and 28 teams sent numerous messages to Dico and Company warning of problems on both teams. The 27s issues were never addressed, and the team folded.

After a bad tryout in the fall, and a very rough fall season, parents on the 28 teams are not sticking around to have a team fold on Their kids. This is a classic run of the bank scenario where nobody wants to be the last kid off the team.

It has nothing to do with character or adversity or even a bad team. This is just an old fashion loss of confidence.

It has everything to do with character. If they had character, they would allow the team to play out the season and work internally to fix whatever problems they thought existed. Is it bad coaching at the 28 level? Wrong competitive level?
Instead, they are running. If I were any of the remaining parents on the 28 team, I would want to know where the others went to so I could avoid that team in the future.

my gosh you are silly. sure, refuse to let your son play on any team where you think you are morally superior to the parents of one or more players on said team. good thinking, let us know how that works out for you!

Nope, not morally superior. Just want to know where the toxic families are going so there isn't a repeat of the drama same time next year. Pretty sure that will work out just fine.

Anonymous wrote:Are you insane? This is club lacrosse - it’s not your country, family or even your highschool. This is a product you buy your kid so he can get better at lacrosse. Why do you think VLC constantly pumps the tournaments they are going to? It’s so the players get exposure to college coaches. It’s not for the team. Think before you write.

No, not insane at all.

Yes, it is a product you buy. It is a team based product. So without a team, and a willingness to sacrifice a little, you won't have anyone to play with to get exposure to college coaches. So the strictly transactional approach might work with an individual sport like tennis or swimming. But good luck getting exposure as a team of one in lacrosse.
However, lets take a look at it from the transactional perspective. The club has or is fulfilling what they said they would do, which is to provide coaching on a team and competition in leagues and tournaments. The club, by all accounts, it providing the product. The parents that are leaving haven't lived up to their end of the deal (again, in a team sport, it is a two way bargain), which is to have their player attend practices and games. So I really hope they don't get any money back. And I hope that any new team charges full price. $3000+ down the drain for a year because you decide to throw a fit and leave mid season without a good reason. But I guess that is just disposable income/couch change for most families around here.
And as for college exposure. We are still talking about 7th graders. Pretty sure Tillman, Gait, etc., aren't tracking anyone's games yet. But keep dreaming the D1 or bust dream!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:VLC brought this on themselves. Last year The parents on the 27 and 28 teams sent numerous messages to Dico and Company warning of problems on both teams. The 27s issues were never addressed, and the team folded.

After a bad tryout in the fall, and a very rough fall season, parents on the 28 teams are not sticking around to have a team fold on Their kids. This is a classic run of the bank scenario where nobody wants to be the last kid off the team.

It has nothing to do with character or adversity or even a bad team. This is just an old fashion loss of confidence.

It has everything to do with character. If they had character, they would allow the team to play out the season and work internally to fix whatever problems they thought existed. Is it bad coaching at the 28 level? Wrong competitive level?
Instead, they are running. If I were any of the remaining parents on the 28 team, I would want to know where the others went to so I could avoid that team in the future.

my gosh you are silly. sure, refuse to let your son play on any team where you think you are morally superior to the parents of one or more players on said team. good thinking, let us know how that works out for you!

Are you insane? This is club lacrosse - it’s not your country, family or even your highschool. This is a product you buy your kid so he can get better at lacrosse. Why do you think VLC constantly pumps the tournaments they are going to? It’s so the players get exposure to college coaches. It’s not for the team. Think before you write.

Anonymous wrote:VLC brought this on themselves. Last year The parents on the 27 and 28 teams sent numerous messages to Dico and Company warning of problems on both teams. The 27s issues were never addressed, and the team folded.

After a bad tryout in the fall, and a very rough fall season, parents on the 28 teams are not sticking around to have a team fold on Their kids. This is a classic run of the bank scenario where nobody wants to be the last kid off the team.

It has nothing to do with character or adversity or even a bad team. This is just an old fashion loss of confidence.

It has everything to do with character. If they had character, they would allow the team to play out the season and work internally to fix whatever problems they thought existed. Is it bad coaching at the 28 level? Wrong competitive level?
Instead, they are running. If I were any of the remaining parents on the 28 team, I would want to know where the others went to so I could avoid that team in the future.

Anonymous wrote:VLC brought this on themselves. Last year The parents on the 27 and 28 teams sent numerous messages to Dico and Company warning of problems on both teams. The 27s issues were never addressed, and the team folded.

After a bad tryout in the fall, and a very rough fall season, parents on the 28 teams are not sticking around to have a team fold on Their kids. This is a classic run of the bank scenario where nobody wants to be the last kid off the team.

It has nothing to do with character or adversity or even a bad team. This is just an old fashion loss of confidence.

Perfect example of why there are good and bad reasons to leave a team, but nobody knows all the circumstances affecting a particular family's decision, and should not pass judgment.

VLC brought this on themselves. Last year The parents on the 27 and 28 teams sent numerous messages to Dico and Company warning of problems on both teams. The 27s issues were never addressed, and the team folded.

After a bad tryout in the fall, and a very rough fall season, parents on the 28 teams are not sticking around to have a team fold on Their kids. This is a classic run of the bank scenario where nobody wants to be the last kid off the team.

It has nothing to do with character or adversity or even a bad team. This is just an old fashion loss of confidence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A one year commitment by a player only means something if the club gives a commitment in return that the roster is fixed and they won't add players. But all programs add players anytime they think they can upgrade their roster (look at Next Level 2026, for example), and in the same vein, players will upgrade they spot an opportunity to join a better team. I have nothing against VLC, in fact my son is on one of their older teams and is having a good experience. But players come and go all the time, and you are mistaken if you think anybody (team or player) cares about the one year commitment.

And that is a shame. We should do better.

The club or the player? It's a two way street, stop trying to shame kids. Long gone are the days when the coach/club is always right and kids don't know what's best.

Absolutely not shaming the kids. They are in 7th grade and are following the lead of the parents. I am shaming the parents. By all accounts, the parents of these kids won't be happy anywhere, at any club. They are seeing adversity for their kids and instead of encouraging them to work through it until the next tryouts where they can switch teams above board, they secretly reach out to other clubs and abandon a commitment they (the parent) made. The parents are quitting, and are demonstrating and communicating their bad attitude around their kids, who pick that up.
Never said the coach/club is always right. VLC, MadLax, Next Level. All can do better. They need to be clear and communicate the expected commitment and anticipated competition level. If the club is bringing new players in mid-season then that is bad as well. From what I have heard in the VLC 2028s case though, bringing in new "ringers" is not what is happening.

Tend to agree with this observation. As a long time VLC family the 2023-2025 teams are a great offering and we have been very happy with the club and it's guidance. I have seen a lot of this where families keep chasing new clubs and promises but if everyone stayed put on one team and allow it to develop it would be ideal. Watched talented players leave but then also jump from team to team and that is not good for anyone, especially the player.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A one year commitment by a player only means something if the club gives a commitment in return that the roster is fixed and they won't add players. But all programs add players anytime they think they can upgrade their roster (look at Next Level 2026, for example), and in the same vein, players will upgrade they spot an opportunity to join a better team. I have nothing against VLC, in fact my son is on one of their older teams and is having a good experience. But players come and go all the time, and you are mistaken if you think anybody (team or player) cares about the one year commitment.

And that is a shame. We should do better.

The club or the player? It's a two way street, stop trying to shame kids. Long gone are the days when the coach/club is always right and kids don't know what's best.

Absolutely not shaming the kids. They are in 7th grade and are following the lead of the parents. I am shaming the parents. By all accounts, the parents of these kids won't be happy anywhere, at any club. They are seeing adversity for their kids and instead of encouraging them to work through it until the next tryouts where they can switch teams above board, they secretly reach out to other clubs and abandon a commitment they (the parent) made. The parents are quitting, and are demonstrating and communicating their bad attitude around their kids, who pick that up.
Never said the coach/club is always right. VLC, MadLax, Next Level. All can do better. They need to be clear and communicate the expected commitment and anticipated competition level. If the club is bringing new players in mid-season then that is bad as well. From what I have heard in the VLC 2028s case though, bringing in new "ringers" is not what is happening.

Sounds like you are in the know. What are the issues (right or wrong) that are causing players on this particular team to leave?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A one year commitment by a player only means something if the club gives a commitment in return that the roster is fixed and they won't add players. But all programs add players anytime they think they can upgrade their roster (look at Next Level 2026, for example), and in the same vein, players will upgrade they spot an opportunity to join a better team. I have nothing against VLC, in fact my son is on one of their older teams and is having a good experience. But players come and go all the time, and you are mistaken if you think anybody (team or player) cares about the one year commitment.

And that is a shame. We should do better.

The club or the player? It's a two way street, stop trying to shame kids. Long gone are the days when the coach/club is always right and kids don't know what's best.

Absolutely not shaming the kids. They are in 7th grade and are following the lead of the parents. I am shaming the parents. By all accounts, the parents of these kids won't be happy anywhere, at any club. They are seeing adversity for their kids and instead of encouraging them to work through it until the next tryouts where they can switch teams above board, they secretly reach out to other clubs and abandon a commitment they (the parent) made. The parents are quitting, and are demonstrating and communicating their bad attitude around their kids, who pick that up.
Never said the coach/club is always right. VLC, MadLax, Next Level. All can do better. They need to be clear and communicate the expected commitment and anticipated competition level. If the club is bringing new players in mid-season then that is bad as well. From what I have heard in the VLC 2028s case though, bringing in new "ringers" is not what is happening.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be easy to do better if clubs would make a commitment to families not to add players or increase the roster size at any time besides August. If a player did leave for whatever reason, then the club could hold a tryout or somehow fill that one spot, but otherwise no additions.

But the clubs that preach "one tryout per year" and "one year commitment" continue to add players all year long. I am not a fan of MadLax, but at least they are honest about their policy - "anytime we can find a player better than your son, from anywhere in the country, your son will be on the bench or on DMV in two seconds. and your son is free to jump to another program any time he likes." Why can't VLC and Next Level be honest about it too?

Madlax is not like you described. It has been documented multiple times that top players who left mid season or didn’t return were verbally abused/bullied by ML owner.

Very true, but that is merely a flaw in his personality. Verbal abuse/bullying is part of his DNA, and he treats current and former players equally. But ML teams do add players all year long (both local players, and fly-ins) so they have no valid objection when players leave mid-season.