US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Boys 2025- 4th Grade Fall 2016/ Summer 2017

You are totally right!! When a team has 28 kids on the team, it is just not right!

Exactly, playing limited or not playing kids at all is terrible for a kids confidence, at any age. I agree just don't take them, because winning has become everything, charge more to make up the more, parents will gladly pay it. And of your son doesn't give that training and practice time line, that's justification for spending the money. There are 100s of good coaches and trainers, it's Long Island. There are so MANY choices out there, why leave your kid on the bench when he can contribute on a very good team. Go be the star on another club. Replay the last 2 championship games you watched and if you son didn't play 10 minutes, it's time to leave.

This statement is pure lunacy. Club lacrosse is about competition. Kids work for minutes. There is a role for everyone on the roster, but equal playing time has never been part of the equation. You can barely find that in PAL.

The term that should be used is equitable, not equal. Playing time should be equitable.

And to be honest, the time should be less equitable when the game is on the line. The idea that you play all your kids at some point during a Tournament is fine, but to put a kid on the field that costs his team the game just for some crazy vision of equality or equity is not right for the whole team. Losing because you are evenly distributing time is just dumb and it hurts the ones who often have the most talent and not surprisingly the best work ethics. Frankly, sometime the best way to get better for a youngster is just to watch and see how your peers get their jobs done.

Talent and effort play into what is considered to be "equitable", so not sure that your premise goes against the idea of equity.

Enough said

https://www.uslacrosse.org/blog/good-coaches-get-players-into-games

Look, I'm not arguing with your statements, but club is certainly pay to play. Example: my son makes team, I get bill for 2k. I pay said bill. Son goes to every practice and busts his butt, he is not as good as middie A. He doesn't get same playing time. I complain to coach. What are the chances he refunds my money because my son is not playing enough? Or is he going to pro rate for playing time? Or should I expect him to be moved to B team? It's 100% pay to play gents.

Coach should tell you to pipe down, junior will get in when he deserves to. If you do not like it, then quit or get the kid on the wall so he can catch up and get a few minutes.

Yeah, that is how we should develop all 10 year olds.

There are teams where you can "develop" kids, they are called B teams and PAL teams. If they aren't good enough, no amount of $ should get them on the field and the parents need to keep the kids out of that situation by being honest about their skill level. Why screw it up for the ones who are playing to win and playing at a high level?

If he is not as good a "middie A" why should he get the same playing time? And zero chance of a refund because you want to quit because your kid is not getting enough playing time? Get him to work harder, improve his game and his playing time will increase. Or stick to PAL.

You have unrealistic expectations - unless said coach promised you that play is equal you are NOT getting shortchanged in that you pay the same as other families. Any prorated idea is an unsustainable from a business revenue model. Feel free to find a team/coach that lives up to your expectations, but it sounds like the only place you can go then is down.

Just remember that you are paying to get team gear, coaching, training and practice time in addition to the prospect of playing time in tournaments. That should be enough, but the wack jobs who think their last kid on the bench son should play in crunch time will not be satisfied. This is a STRONG reason why coaches and the top level organizations need to keep the roster rather short. Save the team the headache and awkward sideline and send the marginal kid to the B team if after a conversation, the parents don't fully acknowledge that they understand that the team will shorten the bench to win and playing time is earned.

There is no equal playing time in club lacrosse

Just sit back and watch your kids have fun it will all fall into place down the road no matter what team you are on. Right now this all means nothing so stop arguing who the best is and just let your Son play the game.

That's a sad perspective and you represent with your comments represent everything that is wrong with the current state of club lacrosse, in my opinion. This is a coach/club issue. If the kid isn't good enough don't take him. If you take a kid, that means they are good enough to play and should play. You don't take a kid and only concentrate on 60% of the roster.

Its called PRACTICE! More important than the games. Also your kid needs to take it upon himself to get better. We have all heard the "the wall never takes a day off" saying. The everyone gets a medal crowd is what is sad. Top level club lacrosse is not for the masses, it is for the elite.

Again, I repeat myself: equitable, NOT equal!

This ignores the fact that the primary differentiator amongst kids is speed, quickness and athleticism. All the practice and wall ball in the world won't change this.

The problem with club lacrosse now (and its one of many problems, really) is that the almighty dollar dictates that they reach a certain number (usually in the low 20s) for each team. The club owners and coaches will do this no matter the abilities of the kids who are offered spots 18, 19, 20, etc. As said by others, if a kid is not good enough, he should not be on the team. The team should only include kids who are good enough to play at the level the team anticipates playing at. But the clubs don't care. They will load up the team to reach their magic number (each additional kid is pure profit) without regard to the abilities of some of the kids who are offered.

IMO, I am paying for practices.
To practice vs. better kids will make my kid better.
I can opt to play lower level teams and be best 12 year old on the field.
I choose not to.

You said it perfect. I couldn't agree more. If a club is taking a families money, that kid should be good enough to play. Clubs want it both ways, I get it. They want to make tons of money(nothing wrong with that, all businesses do), they also want to win every single game. Sometimes to please all your customers, you need to sacrifice things. If I had a choice the rosters would be 19 kids and everyone is good enough to play. Some rosters are 28 kids, how can a coach play all these kids. The 10 last kids on roster, leave the tournaments hardly playing and in some cases, never playing. As far as club is concerned those 10 kids are 40 thousand bucks, but now those families want satisfaction and that falls on the coach. I understand you get practice and that's most important, but families spend money and many summer weekends based on their sons lacrosse schedule. They miss graduation parties, other non lacrosse vacation weekends,family parties, their other kids events, barbaques, etc. They do all this to watch their child play and have fun. To not have these kids play is unacceptable. If that was my son, I'd rather someone after tryouts say he is not good enough to make the team. That would save me money and a year of aggravation and my son being sad not playing. I can then look for another team more suitable to his ability.

In NY, when you are 12, often times your son is hoping to be the best 7th grader on the field (not 4th grader). Oh wait - I thought the age difference was only a couple of months - guess not. I know, I know - I'll go cry and whine about age somewhere else.

If johnnie is 12, get on the 2023 board. But good practice and good coaches running those practices is what is most important.

Okay, everyone has their opinion and justification. For me, I obviously want my kid to improve, but practice is IQ. The stick skills and training is apart from that. Further, I enjoy watching my kid on the field. If your son is not playing, that will not change. And his enjoyment in the sport is limited. My opinion, my view different. I think this is good discussion because this is now the norm and we are way to accepting of this. Lastly, not an advocate for equal play, because coaches should try to win. I advocate of a coach having plan to get every kid minutes. If they can't get on the field, than shame on that coach for taking the kid at tryouts.

“It is a tenet of good coaching that you get kids into games,” writes Jim Thompson, founder and CEO of the Positive Coaching Alliance, a US Lacrosse national partner. “Most of the benefits of playing a sport are tied to competing in games.”

I took issue with the fact that he wrote it as if he is the kid playing

He did. Just another parent living through his kid.

You are the only one who saw the point to my post. If a club team takes your child and your money then there is an expectation. Most of you saw it as me whining about my sons playing time and made the obvious [lacrosse] responses. My son is a very good parent payer, the team took money from kids who shouldn't be there. The parents have EVERY right to be angry. Perhaps the greedy directors should have been honest. Again, if you take someone's money and offer a spot the assumption is that the child will play. By the way, most of you are jerkoffs, but that's a story for another day!

Can we get back to making fun of Blast and complaining about how much we all hate Channy?

Are you a child. Lacrosse season is over. How about you make fun of 10 year old kids and complain about coach. I got 1pm tee time with my 3 friends. Then a couple beers before dinner. It's called having a life. Beautiful 80 degree day.

Oh, and I was just thinking how this had turned into a great discussion of different opinions and reasoning where no one made disparaging remarks or used bad language and then you showed up: You should be proud. And of course, your kid is a "very good" player....I rest my case.

You appear to be the jerkoff! You went to tryouts, you saw the competition and knew it was a real stretch and when your little star made the team and they called you and said he needs a little work you figured they weren't being polite and hinting you should decline. You thought that the coaches overlooked the dropped passes and lack of lax IQ. When you spoke to the coach and he casually mentions skill development directly to you and to all the parents at practice, you missed that too, but now the differences are starting to show at every turn. But you don't get Johnnie to the wall or take him for a run or a HS or NCAA game to watch, you blame the Coach and the organization. Now you want him playing during the meaningful games and crunch time instead of just the blowouts and are angry that doesn't happen. You Sir, need a mirror! For yourself and your son. It isn't his fault, or the coaches or the organization. It's you! And now your boy needs to work with the bad hand you dealt him. He is young, there is still time, don't waste another year being ignorant of the truth. Your kid deserves better.

You must live in fantasy land. Not every coach makes a personal phone call to a player's parents. And moreover, not every coach will, as you say "hint" that the kid should decline. In fact, they have a financial incentive to not do any of these things. They want and need the extra 2 grand from this and every other kid deemed marginal to the team. The last thing they want is for little johnny's dad to think that the kid may be less of a player than the others BEFORE the check is written. This is why communication is often a complaint that parents have.

What happens when the kid declines the spot because daddy watched the tryout, noticed a lot of kids faster than his kid, and said "I don't think my kid will get playing time on this team, so we will go elsewhere". This is when the phone call comes - "we need your kid, he is good that is why we picked him, ect, ect." But in your fantasy world the coach and director are fine with having only 17 kids on the team (and only 17 checks). They secretly want players 18-23 to walk away and spend their money elsewhere. Please oh please give me directions to the planet you live on so I can go their immediately, because it seems better than the one I am living on.

And you are completely ignorant of the most important differentiator between top players and non-top players - speed, quickness, and athletism. There a TON of youth players that have great stick skills and lacrosse IQ, and are extremely successful for their Town and former travel teams. They go to a tryout and make a team. Its not always clear at one tryout how much faster certain other kids are - moreover, many incumbent strong players miss tryouts because they are going to Disney or Aunt Suzzie's wedding or whatever, safe in the knowledge that all they need to do is email the coach that they are still in and the spot is there's. And you don't know how many of the really quick kids are coming vs who will join another team instead, nor do you know if the team will be adding a couple of top kids after tryouts. The bottom line is that especially for the popular clubs that get large turnouts at tryouts, even the most skilled observers of youth talent can't predict how the roster will play out 10 months later when the real games happen.

You are the ignorant one, no matter how much some kids practice, kids are better than others. Fact. So taking 25,28 kids is a way to make money. Take 19 kids, this isn't even a discussion. Ps my son is in the 19. I'm just making a point. If you take money, you have some obligation, or simply don't take their money.

Seems to me that if your son is not a top 3-4 attackman, a top 3-4 defenseman, a top 5 middie or top goalie then you should realistically expect that he will see minimal minutes. You should be able to determine this by the level of talent at the tryout. You're investing a lot of time and money in the team, so look at the competition at his position during the tryout and jot down the numbers of the better kids. Also, figure out if any coaches kids play his position because that will inevitably hurt his chances of getting on the field. If your son doesn't securely meet the above mentioned criteria, it would be best to find another team. Clubs will take the money of every parent that is willing to give it to them. As parents, we are responsible for doing our due diligence. There are plenty of teams out there. Everyone should be able to find the one that's best for their child. It may not be a top club, but at this age, that's of minimal importance. Lastly, don't pick a club with the expectation that your son will work his butt off and leapfrog a player or two on the depth chart. While possible, it's very unlikely.

Equitable, equitable, equitable, equitable, equitable, . . . say it to yourself over and over, all the while realizing it does not mean anything like equal!

Some coaches are now using the, "he is on the team, but break my chops about playing time..." run from that. so yes, if you take a kid he should play, not equal, but should play or don't take him. Not even a debate, if you think otherwise, you are honestly warped in your thinking.

It's amazing to me that a person who can write in full sentences can be so ignorant when evaluating their own son. You act like it happens all at once. It doesn't! You know the obligation to help your boy as much as possible falls to you, and if you drink the koolaide, overrate him and then expect him to play, then you are a dumbazz and the planet you are looking for is Mars.

Does anyone know anything about Tenacious Turtles? I see they are having tryouts at SB. Are they from eastern Suffolk? Don't really know anything about them. Looking for options from my son's current club.

2017 all star team, Crush before Crush. Owner of Lax Unltd is involved. Different landscape now. It's a startup.