Interesting debate here about placement on teams. I just told my daughter that life is full of unfairness, so she may as well get used to it now. But in the end, college coaches don't play FAF, legacy kids, kids with demanding parents, kids whose Mom or Dad is a coach, or kids who have been a YJ since the age of 7. They play the best. So be your best no matter what team CR deems you worthy of.
Looking at the college commits from year to year for YJ, it seems like they generally get it right. The Blue players go to the better college programs and the Gold players the next tier. Seems like the college coaches generally agree w the YJ assessment.
There are also Blue girls who do not go to top tier schools and Gold ones who go to Stony Brook (5th in Nation this year). Proves the point of many posters that some (NOT ALL!)Gold girls could easily be on a Blue team and nobody would even notice.
I also think that the unfairness with placements is more prevalent with the younger teams. As they get older, the placing is more accurate.
I'd calm your jets on the 5th in the nation crap w Stony Brook. They finished 11th in the polls, which is about right. Still excellent, but not 5th. I wonder how many Gold players are starters at SB as well. Bench players are not the same thing and my guess would be that the Gold players, with maybe an odd exception, were not major contributors to SB's success this year.
Of course the bottom end of one team and the top of the next in any organization will be very similar in terms of talent. That is obvious, but the cut needs to be made somewhere. The lower team's parents seem to miss the point, however, that there is a clear difference between player 10 on the top team and player 1 on second team.
Reply
Quote
