BOTC - US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Long Island Express Lacrosse

Terps only had 5 Barracudas play vs CT and only 1 Barracuda for Jesters game. Even without those players who are exceptional the Terps would have come away with 3 victories. The 2017 Terps are a very good and balanced team with great coaches.

If they are so good why have any older cudas help out? What's the point? And what about the field time lost by the regular terp players to the mercinaries who show up? How is that ok? Typical express.

They only played 2 games. The 5 cudas and outsiders played most against CT chargers. These 5 or so players made the difference in a 2 goal game. Most of the Terps sat the first game or played very little. CT chargers are good not elite. Terps probably would not have won without the help. Nothing to be ashamed of just the truth. Outstanding coaching and they are a very good team. Jesters are weak.e

Your 2017 terps gave up 6 goals against 2016 teams and won which is impressive and your team plays and wins a lot. But isn't your roster growing which is around 31 players! No way all those kids play.

Was the regular 2017 terps team short a few and thats why the cudas showed up? Still no excuse ever for having older cudas play with younger terps. The right way is to have other 2017s from the other express teams in the grade fill in. So what if you don't go 3-0!! If I was a terp parent and my kid was short changed playing time because of this I'd be pissed. This is the kind of nonsense that the express does time and time again. And shame on the cuda parents for participating. How would the same cuda parents like it if some of the 2015 Orange kids showed up "to get a run in" at some cuda games and took up playing time from their precious cudas? My guess, wouldn't go over big.

Don't blame the cuda parents - they can't help themselves. The offer to play with younger kids is just too enticing.

How can the Terps 2017 be short of players? they have 75 kids on the roster. If you just say hello to MC he will put your kid on the team.

"was 2017 terms short a few", I don't think thats POSSIBLE!

Now that was funny!! But true.

"Wouldn't go over big" is a massive understatement. More like they would freak out and there would be mass outrage. I would love to see some of the 2015 Orange show up unannounced at a cuda event and see how it goes. But, that would never happen as the directors would most likely have it incredibly well orchestrated (or not happen at all) with the cuda parents unlike the lack of courtesy that was probably given to the terps parents who were probably surprised and not given any forwarning that the marines were on the way to save them. The bizarro world of the express.

Anxious to watch the fireworks when a few Turtles are "called up" (or some other ringers are found elewhere) to take time away from any non-starting cudas for the U15 in Florida. Thats the only way they can win it.

considering some of the terps are actually 2016's I get they dont play up

I've seen tiered pricing in other club programs - at least in the younger grades. See below. Makes sense.

3rd Orange Registration Fee ($250.00)
4th Orange Registration Fee ($250.00)
5th Orange Registration Fee ($250.00)

3rd Blue Registration Fee ($150.00)
4th Blue Registration Fee ($150.00)
5th Blue Registration Fee ($150.00)

These prices are like a way-back roll-back to Express circa 2003. Pre-greed and fear.

That's why we live in America,options and choices if you don't like it go somewhere else.

Oh, here we go. Meathead not wanting to discuss alternatives.

Pretty sure the turtle will be there on their own

oh, hear we go with the name calling, I think they were discussing alternatives. the obvious one being "go somewhere else"

Meathead? Nice really ??? This forum has become a huge disappointment. I guess some of you need a place for disgruntled parents that don't like one organization or another for various reasons to do their bashing. Some of us would prefer to actually talk great lacrosse that is being played and coached by many different levels of kids. Respect others opinions and differences, try it, you may one day get some yourself.

We agree - ignore the peanut gallery comments and get back on topic! Happy to have the discussion more focused on lacrosse than a discussion of Michael Stivic from All in the Family.

Just read on the Express website,nice addition to the Express coaching staff AJ Haugen! Great guy!

Tiered pricing is the way to go, but probably won't happen until someone "moves on" and starts their own lacrosse club, and Express figures out that their pricing is usury minus the loan aspect. Any smarty pants out there get a 50% raise this year?

c'mon man, are you kidding? - "go somewhere else, thats why we live in america" is the best you can do? Really? I gather you did not make the cut for your high school debate team. Why not take the side of the current "one price fits all" pricing scheme and defend its merits vs tiered pricing. Now that would be interesting. I haven't seen a good answer for this yet. Lets hear one.

one price fits all vs tiered pricing would indicate that the lower tiered coaches would be recieving inferior pay for their time unless all of the coaches were to pool their fees and be paid equally out of that.

then there is the question of how to determine a tier? what happens if that team does great and moves up? do they pay more, or less if they move down?

one price seems to fit as you'd expect same level of coaching and not expect that your higher or lower fee means you're paying to be on a good or lesser team, so to speak; but rather paying to ensure that the younger and less experienced will recieve the same level of coaching and expertise regardless of ability of the player. Thus, hopefully all levels of players will continue to grow in ablility and confidence.

That sounds well and good but the reality is if you do some market research and speak to families that have been through a summer on an express team that isn't considered the top team, the attention paid (communication, # of practices, off-season tournaments in the fall, winter, spring, experience of coaches and attention from the directors) is a stark contrast from the top team (orange, cudas or whatever) in the grade. Everybody understands that not every team in a particular grade can receive the same amount of attention equally - its impossible - we get that. But, as such, the cost should be different too. There has been evidence posted on this board that other clubs are doing tiered pricing (fl$ Lite, good town clubs etc) so it would not be unique to the Express. My guess is that Express is pricing high for everybody because they can - not because its good business and customer centric. The model seems to be let the lower level teams subsidize the best teams when it should be the other way around and there would be a lot less bitching about the sticker shock of the lower level teams.

It's not realistic that you should expect the same level of coaching from top to bottom in a grade - you get MC or one of the other directors at the top and they are the best. Below that you get good coaching but definately not the best that the program has to offer and that the top teams are getting. As such, I would think you should pay less for that and even the lower team coaches would be ok with that and undersand where they are in the pecking order when it comes to compensation.

and you expect that the parents who are paying their fees to be ok with that sentiment? I think that is unrealistic...

All will want their kid to be exposed to the best that their money can buy and expect a program of the level of Express to establish uniform levels of coaching and not a "pecking order" of economy coaching.

would you settle for that?

If I'm realistic about my kid's ability I'm fine with it. But most parents are not realistic.

true that...thus the conflicts and petty arguments about who is better and bigger and faster and ...ad nauseum

Uniform levels? - you really believe that? what kind of fantasy land do you live in? Would the Express have the guts to advertise "uniform levels of coaching" regardless of team? Of course not, nobody would believe it. Please, we are adults and the concept of "A" team, "B" team and "C" team is not foreign to anybody. It's ok - until you want to charge "A" team service for a "C" team experience. All I'm saying is that the Express should try tiered pricing (as others have) and see how it goes. I bet the response would be overwhelmingly positive.

its a discusion...not an argument. clearly all options are on the table for review. it was asked for an argument for or against...it has to start somewhere.

I stillfeel that bargain hunters then should not be disappointed with bargain results...as they say, "ya gets whats ya pays for"..

is that really what you want? I'd rather pay more and insist on higher levels of coaching; else move to a different program to satisfy tht need.

hopefully, all of the high LIE fees will go towards that end. (I know...wishful thinking!)

Do you think a 6th grade player should pay the same as a high school player?

Its not just the difference in the coaching (there is no way that Mike C or anybody of similar caliber is going to spend an entire hot summer coaching a "C" team.) Aside from that, its the entire rest of the experience. The "A" teams are practicing and doing tournaments/scrimmages all-year round. The "B" and "C" teams won't see much of eachother until the summer. In the older grades the "C" and most of the "B" (except for a couple) will not get much recruiting support/exposure because the directors are completely consumed with placing the "A" team kids. Thats fine as many (except a few) on the "B" and "C" are probably not good enough to play college anyway - at least not D1. That's ok and I can understand that the directors want to spend their time with the kids that have the highest chance of being placed onto D1 rosters - no issue there, I get it. But, those disparities in the overall experience justify not paying the same price across the board.

I don't think that all the non "A" team coaches are inferior, so why discriminate and pay an "A" team coach differently than a "B" team coach. Besides, don't some of these guys coach multiple teams at multiple levels especially the directors, I don't think they change their coaching style or performance as a coach at least I hope not. With the amount of money coming into this organization, I think there is enough to make everyone happy and still charge tiered pricing. The cost went up dramatically in one year, probably $800 per player. $800 x 20 teams (minimum) x 25 players = are you kidding? We are worried about how we are compensating the coaches?? Does the same teacher make more or less money if they teach an AP math class one period and regular math class the next? This is not about the great coaches and who they coach, they will be there as long as the organization is around, it's about the kids and exposure and hopefully recruitment. Simply put, a 7th grade athlete is not being recruited the same way an 11th grade athlete is nor does an "A" team player get the same exposure in the same grade on a "C" team. They attend different tournaments, which demand different amounts of money, and draw a different amount and level of college coaches. Let's be real, if an "A" and a "C" team attended Tristate, where are the college coaches looking first and possibly never giving "C" the time of day. Are they looking at the teams competing at the top level or the tier 3 team?

The number of teams is irrelevant and could be off, but even if they had 20 (more realistic number), players on a team with a substantial differential for "A" team players ($1,200), proper compensation for the coaches at all levels would be a moot point.

This can work at all ages. In the younger years, families may not see the value in traveling incurring what proves to be an unnecessary expense since it won't impact their later years where colleges start reaching out and it matters most. The most important thing in the Summer for primary grades is that the kids have a stick in their hand and are playing on a good club team being coached by great coaches, i.e. Express. There are also those kids that want to be the best on their team or still building their confidence levels to play with “A” team players, it could be immature, but it certainly is a possibility especially at the younger years where confidence levels are developing. It doesn't benefit a 10 year old to play on an "A" team if they are going to be a benchwarmer, that child's parents may choose after facing this reality or experience, my kid is better off playing for a different coach or not an "A" team until he matures both physically and mentally, again given that option. It happens in many sports and parents don’t often share this with others especially since it could be a sensitive matter and involves a child and a parental choice.

If you had tiered pricing, it might change the makeup of the "A" team in the high school years. Since college interest seems to be getting earlier and earlier, in the high school years, this allows opportunities for better college exposure at an earlier age leading to hopefully more athletes receiving the college interest they desire and more college commitments, a win win!! Yes, ultimately, the entire “A” team could switch to “B”. Some of the older better players may also have gained the interest of the coaches they desire and/or may prefer to put price differential money into showcasing solo rather than being on an “A” team. Solo showcasing can be beneficial as well since if you do not get adequate playing time on your Summer travel team, the college coach you are trying to impress may not even see your talent since you may have been in the game minimally and possibly not made a positive lasting impression in the time allotted. It’s much easier and more controlled with individual showcasing. Most parents/players won’t have the gumption or opportunity to approach a travel team coach to work the issue of playtime out until it may be too late. Colleges and showcase applications only want to know what Summer team you play on, they don’t ask A, B or C, Express is reputable and impressive enough.

If you are going to have different levels of play, it will take some coordination at the beginning but perhaps more satisfied customers in the end. At the time of the tryout calling, the price structure, coaches and tournaments to be attended by all levels should be announced. If all of this information is not available, which the majority should be available, provide what is, at the very least the pricing especially if there is a spike.

The more informed people are, the happier they will be especially when it has to do with planning and finance. Whatever the balance of the information is then available at the actual tryout, this information should be disclosed. Finally, this information is most critical especially when there is a spike, and if necessary, people have opportunities to shop around without it being too late and other organizations teams are already formed.

Based on a tryout, the "A" team players should be approached first, given all the particulars again, i.e. tournament to be attended and coaching menus for the upcoming Summer for all levels and let them choose:

$2900 “A”
$1700 “B”
$1600 “C” if available

People would have the opportunity to review and better plan for the balance of their Summer without concerning themselves with an overlap or conflict of any sort. Additionally, people will know what they are paying for most importantly. Certainly people deserve to be informed of pricing especially when there is a spike, and budgeting could be a concern, not everyone wants to share their financial concern, it’s awkward and not something easily spoken about.

The soonest this information is available, the better, you know what you are paying for as well before you are approached for a team, a true time saving tool when those invites go out. Families can make intelligent financial decisions especially since parents are certainly a part of process. It also opens up the option of shopping around if this is not the pricing you, and not when the kid is already invited on an “A” team and wants to play and the family is shocked and possibly not able to face this bill.

Invites for the “A” team would be first and staggered until the positions are filled. They could reach out to the balance of their initial targets for the other teams at the same time, and simply state, we are inviting you to play for our organization for this Summer, we will be contacting you shortly as to what team you are being considered for. The “B” team may fill faster or may not, it’s worth a try.

Ultimately, the entire “A” team can go to “B”, and visa versa because everyone’s needs have been met, leading to “getting what you pay for and a job well done by Express”. Let the parents decide what works best for their kid and their pockets in the right order, “A” team players first, and at the same time, the organization will be taking in the same amount of money. College interest is getting earlier and earlier, it may not be necessary for a some high school players to pay big bucks for their Summer travel teams when they have already gained the interest they desire. In the high school years, if an original “A” team player goes to “B”, chances are Express has done their job well, and most importantly customers are satisfied since they were part of the decision. For parents or kids who care what team their kid was asked to be on, kids talk, everyone will know the initial “A” invites and the subsequent second stringers, it’s part of life, and what does it really matter in the end when you were part of the decision making process. Everyone likes to say their kid is on an “A” team, it’s normal, but if you’re confident in your kids ability, he will rise on a “B” team, if you’re good, you can rise at an individual showcase event, after a while it becomes overkill, the over achievers and wealthy will still pay the “A” team price even though their kid already has the interest they desire, but there could be some who will be realistic and say, “My kids needs are met, I don’t need to spend $2900 to play this Summer, or I can holdoff because my kid is too young, I don’t have the money, I want to save the money and put it towards other lacrosse events or workouts to hopefully enhance his skills, or he is getting or will be getting the support from his high school coach or recruiting service that he needs, all these are options and certainly possibilities.

That is definitely not true. He coached both his sons in 91 last year. This is his first time coaching Express. He was all over the tournaments and at practices coaching 91 last year and he coached my friends son at 91 last year.

Now that the schedule is out can somebody post it for 2015 blue and white? Hope they are going to get good exposure.

Does the Express have a 3rd grade team? I could not tell by looking at their website. I know it's probably too late but I am thinking about teams for my son next year (when he will be in 4th grade). He is a very good player but probably not at "elite" level and thus want to find a good fit for him. Thank you.

If the schedule and exposure clearly justifies the $2400 cost it will be posted. If it doesn't... hmmm.

As a very longtime lax parent ...just wondering how you"justify the cost" What one person sees as fair another deems robbery. So for each player the needs,wants and results will be an individual justification. So like I say you don't like the price tag,dont buy it. Find another product that is right for your family.