BOTC - US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Early Recruiting

Sorry Triple Holdback!

So the implication is that you have no job, as you have nothing to wake up to except BOTC postings with misspellings. Whatever floats your boat friend, I don't care. To devalue the importance of education in today's climate is foolish at best. Just because you were apparently born into money doesn't mean every kid can follow your plan. Most people need an education from the best institution they can possible get into. the values you posted, character, drive, passion and balls also have a place, but most need that piece of paper to get a foot in the right door. So by all means, wake up whenever you want, check on your trust fund and post away, but please don't use that as a blueprint for success for others. Thanks, and have a great day.

Ty has who it is...Its official! earliest recruit ever!

While intentions are good, I'm not seeing this passing as it is near impossible to enforce. What if a kid has a brother or sister that plays for a school (Junior, go stand over there)? What if a kid is visiting a school and runs into the coach (Sorry, kid, you're ineligible and I'm gonna be sanctioned)? How can a coach run a camp with kids who haven't entered their junior year (uh, they can't. . .good bye assistant coaches!!!)? If a coach isn't returning your call, it's for a reason and for a reason that may change down the road...no amount of rules is ever going to level the playing field. Look at the list of kids who have committed in the 19s and 20s. Have you seen these "kids?" They are not going to get worse, they are going to try harder, they are not going to get smaller, they are going to hit the gym and challenge themselves to be the best. Educationally, they are going to some of the best schools in the country. I don't know one kid who is lacrosse only, in fact, this has freed up our son's time to play other sports because we're NOT going to every single event, esp. in the fall. I don't know one kid (or parent) who hasn't enjoyed the entire process from start to finish, including their commitment. The "no contact at all" crowd either aren't aware of how this works, or are being blinded by perceived injustices they've endured ("injustices" that may correct themselves down the road), all so that "someone will remember the children." Will kids change commitments? Sure. . .but it will be for reasons that you and I really don't need to care, worry and fret about, i.e. mind your own business. The kids are alright, and are doing pretty darn well for themselves. . .let's keep the nanny-ism to a minimum, please.

I'd say that the fact that it will go before the NCAA for consideration pretty much counters all of your outright dismissal of the idea - while there are clearly those that are on the extreme end of the either side, there are plenty in the middle that are weighing the pros and cons (and BTW, not being able to enforce such a policy is not a "pro"). Add in that there are plenty of notable figures deeply involved in the sport at levels that exceed the average parent and their friends et al, and it is apparent that many consider it a problem worth dealing with.

While I agree with a lot of what you said if you don't see something wrong with a 12- 13 year old committing 9 years of their future to a life in the military than you are just refusing to look at both sides . Great school and honorable thing to pursue but can a kid really have any idea what that committment is .

If you want to go Academy (you dope), then you need to start preparing physically and acedemically from the minute you get to HS, lacrosse or not. That decision doesn't just fall out of the sky and hit a kid in the head.

So why can't they make their decision as they see fit? It's just a dumb argument.

I'd put it passing at medium to low. The NCAA has no intentions of actively policing a non-revenue generating sport beyond what is already in place. And agreed, inability to enforce is not a "pro," but if you're going to say "no contact at all" until junior year, then you have to go the full monty: no calls, no visits, no camps (the poster above is wrong, camps are allowed), no scouting at tournaments, nothing (except your club coach being the liaison because that's not contact!). I don't think that's unreasonable. Isn't that what happened pre-club? Otherwise, you are now creating a system in which club lacrosse becomes the liaison between coaches and players at tournaments and camps and Xander's twitter feed is miraculously blowing up the first three weeks of junior year. . .and the players and coaches have had one, maybe two conversations before they're bumping up against the NLI signing day. Of course, you could do away with club, but they how would coaches know who to scout? And who would take our money???

Is this passes, you'll be able to get married (14) in NY before you can verbally commit to play lacrosse (16-17). Maybe the coaches can get that changed too so the NCAA can enforce that? JK, of course, and your point is taken, but there can be a big difference between a 12 year old and a 15 year old. Some fifteen year olds are more responsible and mature than the posters on this site! And, as noted, don't we live with enough regulations and people telling us not to make seriously ridiculous "first world problem" decisions like where our kids play lacrosse?

Before you start calling people dopes you may want to have a clue about what you are saying. Academically the academies are not exactly MIT and the physical exam is not very difficult especially for an athlete. Start preparing the minute you get to HS just shows what a clown you are. The reason a 12 year old can't make that decision is because their life experiences and the way their brains work are not adequate enough to make that decision.

My son is going to one of the Academies and he has known he wanted to do that since he was 6 or 7 years old. Fact is most of the kids that attend the Academies have wanted to do that since they were in Elementary School. It takes a special commitment that shows at a real young age.

What a crock. 6 or 7 year olds? They are choosing to attend service academy?

Can you sound any more pompous...get over yourself and stop living through you son

Pretty sure a 6 or 7 year old would not focus his or her life on a service academy . You sir are a windbag.

My son likes Legos , drawing, cartoons, toy trains, He is 7. He has no idea what an academy is.

up to age 12 my son wanted an academy! No I am not so sure. it goes both ways

I can easily envision a kid being enthralled with an academy at a young age, especially if they attended an Army-Navy football game, or even another game at West Point or Annapolis. As an adult, I still am amazed and caught up in the whole thing at West Point when I go. The kid may not know exactly why they are enamored by the academies, or maybe it's for the 'wrong' reasons, but that doesn't mean they can't aspire to go there from a fairly young age.

Many kids do want to go to some military academy or join some service branch at a young age. What boy wouldn't want to carry a giant gun, drive a tank , fly a plane, etc when young.
Most do grow out of it. But some dont like my neighbor who went to West Point. Wanted to be a soldier since around First grade.

Wow! ...you are in desperate need of Business writing course.
Sounds like you are struggling to convince yourself, of this incoherent rant...:l

Maybe your kid has been [lacrosse] in his development by you. Probably just another overprotected wimp and he has you to blame.

Be careful because he will grow to hate you and your low expectations.

The funny thing is obviously you would know something about being [lacrosse]. Seems the poster you are saying has low expectations for their kid actually thinks the academies are "not exactly " teaching for the stars .That said if you do not see that any 12-13 year old committing 9 years of their life to something as anything other than ridiculous tells me you are truly a moron . How about a 6 year old .

Something tells me your kid is drifting through his youth with no goals or vision for their future. You probably held the kid back and are planning his PG year, just to make sure he is ready. Sounds like he is a monster! HeHeHe, probably a limp, soft pansy like you.

Okay now go back and beat your kid into submission and tell them exactly what they are going to do with their lives. You are the type who beats his kid telling yourself it will make them tougher when in actuality your poor kids just become beaten down shells .Good luck with that approach loser.

The four years of education can't be considered part of the commitment - if these are boys that are going to play college lacrosse one place or another, they are going to go to school somewhere for at least four years, so it's only an additional 5 years of commitment.

"The four years of education can't be considered part of the commitment - if these are boys that are going to play college lacrosse one place or another, they are going to go to school somewhere for at least four years, so it's only an additional 5 years of commitment."

The commitment is much greater than what you think . First off after 2 years you cannot transfer out so it's not like going to school somewhere. Second after your 5 years of service you are required to do many years in the reserves .

I thought the big vote to end (or not) early recruiting happened April first. Anyone know what happened?

do you really think it happened and not all over the internet and word of mouth...April 15th pal

It is a 5 year active duty commitment after graduation.
It's actually 3 years in the reserves, but you can do IRR. Individual Ready Reserve. You don't have to do anything. You might get recalled if they really need you, which is very rare. Everyone who ever enlisted or went to school has a IRR component to their commitment.
And after 18 months you have to designate what you will be doing in the service (any Academy), so basically you are committed after 18 months (half way through your sophomore year), not after 2 years.

It's coming up in mid-April:
"Now the NCAA DI Council will vote on Proposal No. 2016-26 when it meets April 13-14 in Indianapolis, and its passage could make lacrosse the pilot of a new anti-early recruiting movement. The landmark measure would ban all recruiting contact, including phone calls, between college coaches and lacrosse players until Sept. 1 of their junior year of high school."

Source: US Lax Magazine

I know the details, probably better than you.

Wrong

NCAA has approved a new rule on Friday that prohibits D1 lacrosse coaches from contacting potential recruits until 9/1 of their junior year. Its about time!

read here:
http://www.syracuse.com/orangelacro...g_to_new_ncaa_rul.html#incart_river_home

Hallelujah! But doesn't say when it goes into effect.

Good news..See how this plays out. Espcially in regard to grade based no age limit leagues...and the current rush of kids being reclassed/heldback etc..

So I guess this means that college coaches will have to actually do some recruiting again. Not just wait around for a "stud" 9th grader to contact them and/or attend a few summer tournaments just watching the 8th/9th graders. Let's hope this puts some sanity back into the process. Anyone else see any potential changes, ramifications, or unintended consequences??

Finally!

Careful what you wish for. Get ready to have club coaches being the middlemen and basically speaking for our kids. And if you don't play for an elite AA team. . .well, good luck with that. Nothing changes, just driven underground. Regulations like this, which, I add, are LACROSSE ONLY, are going to make things a lot worse. But "it's about time!," right? SMH. . .

Glad mine is committed already. Best decision he will make for his future!