|
Forums20
Topics3,799
Posts399,683
Members2,638
| |
Most Online62,980
Feb 6th, 2020
|
|
 Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
As a former college coach , not lacrosse, I feel that both perspectives have validity. When we were recruiting watching games we needed to know how the athlete played within a system, what kind of team player he was and how that athlete could contribute to a team. We found that multi sport team athletes had a higher sports iq then single sport athletes. An athlete that can play within a system is usually coachable also. The skills portion of individual workouts were important but has a great flaw. Many many times we saw athletes look like absolute stars when working through skills and drills. These were talented can't miss star type players. However, these same players just had no team iq and shrunk in a game. It was more frequent a player was a little less talentd in drills but a better game performer. It was no easy process and all coaches make mistakes. The one thing that always stood out was speed you can't teach it in any sport.
I'll agree with the speed assessment, definitely true. You couldn't be any more wrong on your other points. Multi-sport athletes are just that, multi-sport athletes. Kids that have different interests, that's it. If two kids are of the same talent, multi-sport has nothing to do with anything. It does not make the kid any better. All you need to do is look at the Thompsons... I assure you, no amount of football or basketball gave those kids the stick skills or lacrosse IQ they have. They had talent, and it was honed for years with constant practice and a love of the game. Hence, they won lacrosse's high honor. This fact is the final nail in the coffin of this silly notion about multi-sport athletes somehow being superior lacrosse players. Once again, no amount of football will give you the skills that these Thompsons have, period, end of story. To dispute this or say otherwise is pure ignorance. Not sure where I said the multi sport kid was better or even made that inference. You pick a very interesting example are you sure the thompsons played no other sports? Or how about kavanaugh from notre dame? How about miles from duke? What I wrote was fact about recruiting and the way many college coaches assess talent and potential. There is also a burnout factor in players who only play one sport. I speak frequently to my friends still coaching college sports and they continue to support what i saying. You can sit and think what you want and pick examples of great college players but how many of them played multi sports that made them better. Look at some of the great high school Long Island players and you will see an assortment of multi sport stars with a high team sport iq. We have all seen that player who looks like a star in practice and drills but come game time disappears. Does your son play just one sport? It would be a shame because one sport is so limiting athletically. All these kids should at least be trying or have tried other sports. Honestly, to think that playing multi sports doesn't help an athlete develop skills is ignorant. There are many aspects of football, basketball, hockey and soccer that can translate well into overall lacrosse ability. Specifically stick skills no but athletic ability to run, dodge, take a hit and know how to fit into a team while being coached by different coaches are also great skills. I don't think I said one negative thing maybe that's the problem. The two sport athlete doesn't make a better lacrosse player it is clearly obvios with one of the Thompsons who played ice hockey for three years in high school and Kavanagh who played junior hockey in the EJHL. I guess a sport like hockey doesn't translate at all being you need to create time and space in a smaller space, the game is faster, they are tremendous physical athletes. lower body shooting techniques very similar , they need to play both ways learning body control yeah no relevant skills that would make a lacrosse player better. Then you have that kid from Duke Miles who was his high school Qb. Nothing gained there at all leadership, quick decisions, foot speed...... Yeah as I said clearly obvious a multi spot athlete can never really transfer any of those skills to lacrosse.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Li showcase team announced, some deserving, some head scratchers. Another flawed process, Suffolk will smoke that Nassau team. You may not even get the ball.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
After all the debates and bashing of MD reclassified kids, LI tough guys, etc. I thought I would put the UA underclass teams that have been posted to a test. If you are going to reply to this post with something snarky, don't bother. I admit I am a loser for doing this, but would rather pass time and kill my curiousity in this horrible hotel room doing this than being in the bar with MD lacrosse parents.
Without further adieu:
** In the data some kids did not report their class year, birthdate or either, so the percentage of population is kids who did report both class and d.o.b. LI has 4 missings, MidWest has 3, Philly has 2, Upstate NY has 1, West has 3. Baltimore and South had zero missings.
** Not all the UA teams are roster posted yet, and some have not had tryouts yet. I will update this data later for all the regions as they come in.
** There are two double holdback kids on UA underclass teams thus far; one from Midwest and one from West.
** There are 3 2017s qualified. One in Philly and two in LI.
** Shout out to the two LI 2017s each of whom are in the calendar year 1999 birthdate.
** Shout out to Marshall McGlove, a Maryland class of 2015 public school kid who made the Baltimore UA team. Marshall is the only November or December birth month kid in the data so far who is not a holdback kid. Bravo.
** I have been reminded that in some states, like California, the d.o.b. cutoff for grades is Sept 30th, and therefore kids who are old by a calendar quarter to their calendar birth-year class are not repeat kids. Those are just states with different calendar cuts for entering a school grade. It is notable a lot of the California kids who list out as calendar year holdbacks are not school year holdbacks because they had Oct, Nov or Dec birth months.
Conclusions:
1. LI walks the walk. Only two kids who are out of calendar year, or 10% of reporting d.o.b. UA team members. And one kid deserves an asterisk...his birth date was 12/30. If we grace that kid out it is only one kid on the LI team with a year ahead d.o.b.
2. The generalization that MD kids are overwhelmingly holdbacks is false. Sort of. "Only" 12 kids, or 50% of the reporting d.o.b. UA team members are holdbacks. The generalization that MD kids are double holdbacks is false, at least in this data.
3. Upstate NY sort of walks the walk. They are second place after LI with "only" 9 holdbacks, or 39% of the reporting d.o.b. UA team members are holdbacks.
4. West region UA team has 13 holdbacks, representing 62% of the reporting d.o.b. kids on roster. Again, the California school year dates asterisk above deserves some note.
5. Philly checks in with an abysmal 68% of UA underclass rostered kids who are holdbacks. 15 of the d.o.b reporting kids are holdbacks.
And, the "we really loved 8th grade...twice" award goes to....
6. It's a tie. Midwest and South regions statistically tie at a whopping 71% of the d.o.b reporting kids on the US underclass rosters who are holdbacks. 15 kids in the Midwest and a whopping 17 in the South.
We do have a few more contenders for the title...Jersey tryouts were yesterday and DC ones next week. DC might be a doozy boys. Some IAC schools won't admit 9th graders unless they have a drivers license picture ID.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51
Back of THE CAGE
|
Back of THE CAGE
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 51 |
Curious, what date did you use to establish a holdback? VA school year cut off is Sept 30th.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Curious, what date did you use to establish a holdback? VA school year cut off is Sept 30th. Calendar year
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
As a former college coach , not lacrosse, I feel that both perspectives have validity. When we were recruiting watching games we needed to know how the athlete played within a system, what kind of team player he was and how that athlete could contribute to a team. We found that multi sport team athletes had a higher sports iq then single sport athletes. An athlete that can play within a system is usually coachable also. The skills portion of individual workouts were important but has a great flaw. Many many times we saw athletes look like absolute stars when working through skills and drills. These were talented can't miss star type players. However, these same players just had no team iq and shrunk in a game. It was more frequent a player was a little less talentd in drills but a better game performer. It was no easy process and all coaches make mistakes. The one thing that always stood out was speed you can't teach it in any sport.
I'll agree with the speed assessment, definitely true. You couldn't be any more wrong on your other points. Multi-sport athletes are just that, multi-sport athletes. Kids that have different interests, that's it. If two kids are of the same talent, multi-sport has nothing to do with anything. It does not make the kid any better. All you need to do is look at the Thompsons... I assure you, no amount of football or basketball gave those kids the stick skills or lacrosse IQ they have. They had talent, and it was honed for years with constant practice and a love of the game. Hence, they won lacrosse's high honor. This fact is the final nail in the coffin of this silly notion about multi-sport athletes somehow being superior lacrosse players. Once again, no amount of football will give you the skills that these Thompsons have, period, end of story. To dispute this or say otherwise is pure ignorance. Not sure where I said the multi sport kid was better or even made that inference. You pick a very interesting example are you sure the thompsons played no other sports? Or how about kavanaugh from notre dame? How about miles from duke? What I wrote was fact about recruiting and the way many college coaches assess talent and potential. There is also a burnout factor in players who only play one sport. I speak frequently to my friends still coaching college sports and they continue to support what i saying. You can sit and think what you want and pick examples of great college players but how many of them played multi sports that made them better. Look at some of the great high school Long Island players and you will see an assortment of multi sport stars with a high team sport iq. We have all seen that player who looks like a star in practice and drills but come game time disappears. Does your son play just one sport? It would be a shame because one sport is so limiting athletically. All these kids should at least be trying or have tried other sports. Honestly, to think that playing multi sports doesn't help an athlete develop skills is ignorant. There are many aspects of football, basketball, hockey and soccer that can translate well into overall lacrosse ability. Specifically stick skills no but athletic ability to run, dodge, take a hit and know how to fit into a team while being coached by different coaches are also great skills. I don't think I said one negative thing maybe that's the problem. The two sport athlete doesn't make a better lacrosse player it is clearly obvios with one of the Thompsons who played ice hockey for three years in high school and Kavanagh who played junior hockey in the EJHL. I guess a sport like hockey doesn't translate at all being you need to create time and space in a smaller space, the game is faster, they are tremendous physical athletes. lower body shooting techniques very similar , they need to play both ways learning body control yeah no relevant skills that would make a lacrosse player better. Then you have that kid from Duke Miles who was his high school Qb. Nothing gained there at all leadership, quick decisions, foot speed...... Yeah as I said clearly obvious a multi spot athlete can never really transfer any of those skills to lacrosse. Back to the inner city Basketball player, plays BBall 24/7 all year round. Many do 1 or 2 years in college and straight to the NBA. By your assertion, the mult-sport athlete is the better athlete. If this is the case, why aren't the multi-sport athletes from the suburbs destroying it in the NBA? Why, because it has nothing to do with playing multiple sports, it has everything to do with innate athletic ability. All the baseball and football you can play will never allow your kid to do what Lebron does. Just like no amount of football will ever give you better stick skills... Sorry. You just can't accept it. Look, you have your kid play football in the fall, mine will be in the gym. Try to comprehend this, if your son is a star running back, it's about athletic ability not because he plays lax in the spring. He'll be good at lax in the spring, because of that athletic ability and only because of that. You think Michael Phelps became the greatest swimmer of all time because he played a year of HS golf? I'm sure you do. BTW what was the sport the Williams sisters played to get better at Tennis? Hold on, I have to go play two hours of basketball to better my golf game. So silly.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Back to the inner city Basketball player, plays BBall 24/7 all year round. Many do 1 or 2 years in college and straight to the NBA. By your assertion, the mult-sport athlete is the better athlete. If this is the case, why aren't the multi-sport athletes from the suburbs destroying it in the NBA? Why, because it has nothing to do with playing multiple sports, it has everything to do with innate athletic ability. All the baseball and football you can play will never allow your kid to do what Lebron does. Just like no amount of football will ever give you better stick skills... Sorry. You just can't accept it. Look, you have your kid play football in the fall, mine will be in the gym. Try to comprehend this, if your son is a star running back, it's about athletic ability not because he plays lax in the spring. He'll be good at lax in the spring, because of that athletic ability and only because of that.
You think Michael Phelps became the greatest swimmer of all time because he played a year of HS golf? I'm sure you do. BTW what was the sport the Williams sisters played to get better at Tennis?
Hold on, I have to go play two hours of basketball to better my golf game. So silly.
You are truly ignorant. Go look at the Duke roster 38 of 44 multi sport stars. You point out one population, inner city basketball players, who have very little opportunity to play anything else. These inner city athletes are all looking to go pro and spend only as you say one or two years in college then move on often NOT graduating. There only way out more often than not is basketball so that's what they do. The chance to make millions is there in hoops not in lacrosse at that level. To compare an inner city athlete to an athlete in the suburbs is ignorant in itself. If your kid is like one of the 6 kids on Duke that didn't list a second sport in their bio so be it. DO I think that a player like Kavanaugh who played junior hockey , Thompson who played hockey, Fowler a better FOGO because of wrestling and Miles who was the HS qb are better athletes because they play two sports absolutely. Better yet read last months Lacrosse USa magazine for the article where the D1 coaches talk about the plus of being a 2 sport athlete vs a lax only player. If you cant see the value of playing multi sports you are contradicting what coaches are saying in baseball, hockey, lacrosse, football........ I am sure you know better. Once again the guys from Duke and ND must all be very lucky because close to 90% of their two teams were star multi sport athletes but I guess they are wrong also.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The biggest flaw of the entire UA selection wrt 2017's is that as far we know; there weren't any committed 2017's at these tryouts. Thus, the selections would then be deemed the "best of the rest". After all the debates and bashing of MD reclassified kids, LI tough guys, etc. I thought I would put the UA underclass teams that have been posted to a test. If you are going to reply to this post with something snarky, don't bother. I admit I am a loser for doing this, but would rather pass time and kill my curiousity in this horrible hotel room doing this than being in the bar with MD lacrosse parents.
Without further adieu:
** In the data some kids did not report their class year, birthdate or either, so the percentage of population is kids who did report both class and d.o.b. LI has 4 missings, MidWest has 3, Philly has 2, Upstate NY has 1, West has 3. Baltimore and South had zero missings.
** Not all the UA teams are roster posted yet, and some have not had tryouts yet. I will update this data later for all the regions as they come in.
** There are two double holdback kids on UA underclass teams thus far; one from Midwest and one from West.
** There are 3 2017s qualified. One in Philly and two in LI.
** Shout out to the two LI 2017s each of whom are in the calendar year 1999 birthdate.
** Shout out to Marshall McGlove, a Maryland class of 2015 public school kid who made the Baltimore UA team. Marshall is the only November or December birth month kid in the data so far who is not a holdback kid. Bravo.
** I have been reminded that in some states, like California, the d.o.b. cutoff for grades is Sept 30th, and therefore kids who are old by a calendar quarter to their calendar birth-year class are not repeat kids. Those are just states with different calendar cuts for entering a school grade. It is notable a lot of the California kids who list out as calendar year holdbacks are not school year holdbacks because they had Oct, Nov or Dec birth months.
Conclusions:
1. LI walks the walk. Only two kids who are out of calendar year, or 10% of reporting d.o.b. UA team members. And one kid deserves an asterisk...his birth date was 12/30. If we grace that kid out it is only one kid on the LI team with a year ahead d.o.b.
2. The generalization that MD kids are overwhelmingly holdbacks is false. Sort of. "Only" 12 kids, or 50% of the reporting d.o.b. UA team members are holdbacks. The generalization that MD kids are double holdbacks is false, at least in this data.
3. Upstate NY sort of walks the walk. They are second place after LI with "only" 9 holdbacks, or 39% of the reporting d.o.b. UA team members are holdbacks.
4. West region UA team has 13 holdbacks, representing 62% of the reporting d.o.b. kids on roster. Again, the California school year dates asterisk above deserves some note.
5. Philly checks in with an abysmal 68% of UA underclass rostered kids who are holdbacks. 15 of the d.o.b reporting kids are holdbacks.
And, the "we really loved 8th grade...twice" award goes to....
6. It's a tie. Midwest and South regions statistically tie at a whopping 71% of the d.o.b reporting kids on the US underclass rosters who are holdbacks. 15 kids in the Midwest and a whopping 17 in the South.
We do have a few more contenders for the title...Jersey tryouts were yesterday and DC ones next week. DC might be a doozy boys. Some IAC schools won't admit 9th graders unless they have a drivers license picture ID.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
As a former college coach , not lacrosse, I feel that both perspectives have validity. When we were recruiting watching games we needed to know how the athlete played within a system, what kind of team player he was and how that athlete could contribute to a team. We found that multi sport team athletes had a higher sports iq then single sport athletes. An athlete that can play within a system is usually coachable also. The skills portion of individual workouts were important but has a great flaw. Many many times we saw athletes look like absolute stars when working through skills and drills. These were talented can't miss star type players. However, these same players just had no team iq and shrunk in a game. It was more frequent a player was a little less talentd in drills but a better game performer. It was no easy process and all coaches make mistakes. The one thing that always stood out was speed you can't teach it in any sport.
I'll agree with the speed assessment, definitely true. You couldn't be any more wrong on your other points. Multi-sport athletes are just that, multi-sport athletes. Kids that have different interests, that's it. If two kids are of the same talent, multi-sport has nothing to do with anything. It does not make the kid any better. All you need to do is look at the Thompsons... I assure you, no amount of football or basketball gave those kids the stick skills or lacrosse IQ they have. They had talent, and it was honed for years with constant practice and a love of the game. Hence, they won lacrosse's high honor. This fact is the final nail in the coffin of this silly notion about multi-sport athletes somehow being superior lacrosse players. Once again, no amount of football will give you the skills that these Thompsons have, period, end of story. To dispute this or say otherwise is pure ignorance. Not sure where I said the multi sport kid was better or even made that inference. You pick a very interesting example are you sure the thompsons played no other sports? Or how about kavanaugh from notre dame? How about miles from duke? What I wrote was fact about recruiting and the way many college coaches assess talent and potential. There is also a burnout factor in players who only play one sport. I speak frequently to my friends still coaching college sports and they continue to support what i saying. You can sit and think what you want and pick examples of great college players but how many of them played multi sports that made them better. Look at some of the great high school Long Island players and you will see an assortment of multi sport stars with a high team sport iq. We have all seen that player who looks like a star in practice and drills but come game time disappears. Does your son play just one sport? It would be a shame because one sport is so limiting athletically. All these kids should at least be trying or have tried other sports. Honestly, to think that playing multi sports doesn't help an athlete develop skills is ignorant. There are many aspects of football, basketball, hockey and soccer that can translate well into overall lacrosse ability. Specifically stick skills no but athletic ability to run, dodge, take a hit and know how to fit into a team while being coached by different coaches are also great skills. I don't think I said one negative thing maybe that's the problem. The two sport athlete doesn't make a better lacrosse player it is clearly obvios with one of the Thompsons who played ice hockey for three years in high school and Kavanagh who played junior hockey in the EJHL. I guess a sport like hockey doesn't translate at all being you need to create time and space in a smaller space, the game is faster, they are tremendous physical athletes. lower body shooting techniques very similar , they need to play both ways learning body control yeah no relevant skills that would make a lacrosse player better. Then you have that kid from Duke Miles who was his high school Qb. Nothing gained there at all leadership, quick decisions, foot speed...... Yeah as I said clearly obvious a multi spot athlete can never really transfer any of those skills to lacrosse. Back to the inner city Basketball player, plays BBall 24/7 all year round. Many do 1 or 2 years in college and straight to the NBA. By your assertion, the mult-sport athlete is the better athlete. If this is the case, why aren't the multi-sport athletes from the suburbs destroying it in the NBA? Why, because it has nothing to do with playing multiple sports, it has everything to do with innate athletic ability. All the baseball and football you can play will never allow your kid to do what Lebron does. Just like no amount of football will ever give you better stick skills... Sorry. You just can't accept it. Look, you have your kid play football in the fall, mine will be in the gym. Try to comprehend this, if your son is a star running back, it's about athletic ability not because he plays lax in the spring. He'll be good at lax in the spring, because of that athletic ability and only because of that. You think Michael Phelps became the greatest swimmer of all time because he played a year of HS golf? I'm sure you do. BTW what was the sport the Williams sisters played to get better at Tennis? Hold on, I have to go play two hours of basketball to better my golf game. So silly. Been watching the world cup? I wonder what other sports the kids in Brazil play to become such amazing soccer stars??? Oh I know, probably American football or Baseball. It couldn't be that they play soccer all the time, right? I'm sure all the other South and Central American countries also produce all their soccer stars by having them play something other than soccer as well.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
If you are a committed kid and are ducking outb of competing at UA tryouts, I'd call that a character flaw and a huge red flag to the coaches who recruited the kid. At the Baltimore tryouts were a lot of committed 2017 kids. None made it, but respect to them for competing.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
If you are a committed kid and are ducking outb of competing at UA tryouts, I'd call that a character flaw and a huge red flag to the coaches who recruited the kid. At the Baltimore tryouts were a lot of committed 2017 kids. None made it, but respect to them for competing. Yes...what 17 year old freshman from MD could hope to compete with the 20 year old seniors?
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The debate of multi sport athletes is ridiculous. I was just making it clear what the coaches in college are looking at. It isn't solely about skills or individual sports. Quite simply when I had a choice between two equally talented players, one who was a two sport athlete and one a singleton athlete , I choose the two,sport athlete IF it was a sport I felt contributed to athleticism. The concept being that the two sport athlete is usually better ll around athlete developing muscle and muscle memory in greater depth then a single sport athlete. This is not hard to believe or comprehend. That is not to say that an athlete that played the single prt wasn't better than the multi sport but as a college coach you also need to project futures because your scholarship space is limited. It isn't an easy job but ask the d1 coaches what their feeling on it and the majority will encourage the multi sport athlete. I never recruited inner city basketball players becaus they didn't have the skill set I needed for the sport I coached nor did I go to Brazil to get soccer players. Even more insight is that the two sports must be related in some way developing certain skills. Individual sports like bowling or golf didn't translate but wrestling did it really isn't an exact science but a valid way to project athletes. To say a multi sport athlete isn't an advantage is contradicted be the rosters and bios of many many athletes in d1 programs in all sports.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Back to the inner city Basketball player, plays BBall 24/7 all year round. Many do 1 or 2 years in college and straight to the NBA. By your assertion, the mult-sport athlete is the better athlete. If this is the case, why aren't the multi-sport athletes from the suburbs destroying it in the NBA? Why, because it has nothing to do with playing multiple sports, it has everything to do with innate athletic ability. All the baseball and football you can play will never allow your kid to do what Lebron does. Just like no amount of football will ever give you better stick skills... Sorry. You just can't accept it. Look, you have your kid play football in the fall, mine will be in the gym. Try to comprehend this, if your son is a star running back, it's about athletic ability not because he plays lax in the spring. He'll be good at lax in the spring, because of that athletic ability and only because of that.
You think Michael Phelps became the greatest swimmer of all time because he played a year of HS golf? I'm sure you do. BTW what was the sport the Williams sisters played to get better at Tennis?
Hold on, I have to go play two hours of basketball to better my golf game. So silly.
You are truly ignorant. Go look at the Duke roster 38 of 44 multi sport stars. You point out one population, inner city basketball players, who have very little opportunity to play anything else. These inner city athletes are all looking to go pro and spend only as you say one or two years in college then move on often NOT graduating. There only way out more often than not is basketball so that's what they do. The chance to make millions is there in hoops not in lacrosse at that level. To compare an inner city athlete to an athlete in the suburbs is ignorant in itself. If your kid is like one of the 6 kids on Duke that didn't list a second sport in their bio so be it. DO I think that a player like Kavanaugh who played junior hockey , Thompson who played hockey, Fowler a better FOGO because of wrestling and Miles who was the HS qb are better athletes because they play two sports absolutely. Better yet read last months Lacrosse USa magazine for the article where the D1 coaches talk about the plus of being a 2 sport athlete vs a lax only player. If you cant see the value of playing multi sports you are contradicting what coaches are saying in baseball, hockey, lacrosse, football........ I am sure you know better. Once again the guys from Duke and ND must all be very lucky because close to 90% of their two teams were star multi sport athletes but I guess they are wrong also. Has nothing to do with playing two sports, all about god given athletic ability. Being a star in two sports is nothing more than evidence of that athletic ability. Like I said, your kid or mine could play 14 other sports, they'll never be able to do what Lebron does. They don't have that level of athletic ability, get it? Probably not. I give you example after example where it proves that people are at the top of their sports all over the world by playing one sport, but a few college coaches say differently and so its law to you, go figure. BTW why are you trolling through every bio of every player on Duke and ND just to try and prove me wrong with more anecdotal information? Here's another one for you, David Beckham never played anything but soccer. In fact, he dropped out of school as a teenager and went pro at 18. Oddly, he became one the best players in the world. Imagine if he just would have played American football... Wait, a few Old School lax coaches said something so it must be true. Then they go and recruit lax only kids. I've heard the Duke coach say they've never recruited a non multi-sport athlete. Yet he has 6 lax only kids? Kind of like the UVA coach saying early recruiting has got to stop and yet they are recruiting 9th graders left and right. One more for you, UMD's graduating senior middie, Tawarrton finalist and former Ivy rookie of the year was lax only in HS. Here's something else for you to chew on, these coaches will recruit the best available player. One sport, multi-sport, 8th grade, they don't care. Now go pay attention to the Rangers, I'm sure all those Eastern European players got to the NHL because they were playing Baseball growing up, you know to get better at hockey.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The debate of multi sport athletes is ridiculous. I was just making it clear what the coaches in college are looking at. It isn't solely about skills or individual sports. Quite simply when I had a choice between two equally talented players, one who was a two sport athlete and one a singleton athlete , I choose the two,sport athlete IF it was a sport I felt contributed to athleticism. The concept being that the two sport athlete is usually better ll around athlete developing muscle and muscle memory in greater depth then a single sport athlete. This is not hard to believe or comprehend. That is not to say that an athlete that played the single prt wasn't better than the multi sport but as a college coach you also need to project futures because your scholarship space is limited. It isn't an easy job but ask the d1 coaches what their feeling on it and the majority will encourage the multi sport athlete. I never recruited inner city basketball players becaus they didn't have the skill set I needed for the sport I coached nor did I go to Brazil to get soccer players. Even more insight is that the two sports must be related in some way developing certain skills. Individual sports like bowling or golf didn't translate but wrestling did it really isn't an exact science but a valid way to project athletes. To say a multi sport athlete isn't an advantage is contradicted be the rosters and bios of many many athletes in d1 programs in all sports. Nobody cares that you were a volunteer assistant coach 20 years ago. You're just another lunatic on this board.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
So just to be clear because I am not sure I understand what I am reading on this site. Parents of athlets that play one sport feel that is the best way to get better but the actual coaches of successful division one programs like duke and notre dame that look for two sport athletes are wrong? This forum continue to prove that lacrosse parents are insane and perhaps the most delusional parents of all the sports in our area.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Any one sport focused athlete is not just training in their sport- their workouts include cross training- so while they may not be actually on another field or rink playing a game- they are in fact cross training and using muscles in different ways. My sons hockey team does three on land practices a week. Sometimes it includes a a ball, and sometimes track and field activities. Ballet, yoga and pilates is also beneficial to the athlete and strengthens, lengthens and stretches the muscles in another way. While it is fun for a kid to play with friends in multiple sports, not everyone needs to play 3-4 sports. Some kids enjoy just two and some just one. As long as they are getting trained in a variety of ways, the body will respond and so will the brain.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
So just to be clear because I am not sure I understand what I am reading on this site. Parents of athlets that play one sport feel that is the best way to get better but the actual coaches of successful division one programs like duke and notre dame that look for two sport athletes are wrong? This forum continue to prove that lacrosse parents are insane and perhaps the most delusional parents of all the sports in our area. My final post on this, because if someone has a differing opinion based in evidence and fact they have to be a nut. We're saying the same thing. We're both saying that an athlete that can be a star in two sports is clear evidence of athletic greatness. Here's the difference. You say one sport makes you better at the other. I say its innate god given athletic ability that makes you the athlete you are. To be able to play D1 lacrosse you have to be a great athlete, hence many of these kids would find it EASY to be a star in two sports, BECAUSE OF ATHLETIC ABILITY. The only lunacy here is the thinking that playing six football games at tight end in the fall is going to somehow give you the ability to do what the Thompsons are able to do in the spring. That's NEVER EVER going to happen. BTW two kids in my town on the very young age of the recruiting spectrum both play lax, both great players, one plays two other sports the other just lax. Guess which one is being recruited by a top 3 ACC school? Not the one your theory would suggest. Sorry. Also, as stated above, why are these same ACC coaches telling their recruits to stop playing football? Last question: If playing another sport does make you better at lacrosse? Why then wouldn't every D1 lax coach in the country demand that you continue to play that sport in college. Think of how much better all these players would be if they played football or soccer in the fall instead of fall ball? Oh I know, you stop getting better in college. A magic switch goes off. Your theory just stops working. But in the two years before college that other sport is making you so much better, I got it now.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The debate of multi sport athletes is ridiculous. I was just making it clear what the coaches in college are looking at. It isn't solely about skills or individual sports. Quite simply when I had a choice between two equally talented players, one who was a two sport athlete and one a singleton athlete , I choose the two,sport athlete IF it was a sport I felt contributed to athleticism. The concept being that the two sport athlete is usually better ll around athlete developing muscle and muscle memory in greater depth then a single sport athlete. This is not hard to believe or comprehend. That is not to say that an athlete that played the single prt wasn't better than the multi sport but as a college coach you also need to project futures because your scholarship space is limited. It isn't an easy job but ask the d1 coaches what their feeling on it and the majority will encourage the multi sport athlete. I never recruited inner city basketball players becaus they didn't have the skill set I needed for the sport I coached nor did I go to Brazil to get soccer players. Even more insight is that the two sports must be related in some way developing certain skills. Individual sports like bowling or golf didn't translate but wrestling did it really isn't an exact science but a valid way to project athletes. To say a multi sport athlete isn't an advantage is contradicted be the rosters and bios of many many athletes in d1 programs in all sports. Nobody cares that you were a volunteer assistant coach 20 years ago. You're just another lunatic on this board. My favorite response by far  . It wasn't volunteer and it wasn't twenty years ago but as I have read so many times on this board if you don't agree with someone insult them. Funny, is I never claimed to be right, never insulted anyone , never said anything negative but was consistently told how I am wrong. Never actually claimed to be right. Made some simple factual statements on how the recruiting process went and what the staff I was part of were looking at. You can agree or disagree but open your eyes and try to look at both sides. There is always the exception to every rule and single sport athletes can be great dominant athletes in their sport no doubt. But there is validity in the two sport athlete. Anyone who doesn't think a superior athlete like Lebron wouldn't pick up a lacrosse stick and be a competitor immediately is crazy. The stick skills would be lacking because that is sport specific but once he became competent his previous learned basketball training, vision, muscle memory and team sport iq would make him a great player. If I had a chance to get a Lebron James type over an equally talented lacrosse only player being they both played lax I would pick Lebron. Good luck to you all and may all your children be given the opportunity to play some college sport whatever it is. I am going to enjoy my day watching some lacrosse after I drink my morning coffee and head to the fields.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The debate of multi sport athletes is ridiculous. I was just making it clear what the coaches in college are looking at. It isn't solely about skills or individual sports. Quite simply when I had a choice between two equally talented players, one who was a two sport athlete and one a singleton athlete , I choose the two,sport athlete IF it was a sport I felt contributed to athleticism. The concept being that the two sport athlete is usually better ll around athlete developing muscle and muscle memory in greater depth then a single sport athlete. This is not hard to believe or comprehend. That is not to say that an athlete that played the single prt wasn't better than the multi sport but as a college coach you also need to project futures because your scholarship space is limited. It isn't an easy job but ask the d1 coaches what their feeling on it and the majority will encourage the multi sport athlete. I never recruited inner city basketball players becaus they didn't have the skill set I needed for the sport I coached nor did I go to Brazil to get soccer players. Even more insight is that the two sports must be related in some way developing certain skills. Individual sports like bowling or golf didn't translate but wrestling did it really isn't an exact science but a valid way to project athletes. To say a multi sport athlete isn't an advantage is contradicted be the rosters and bios of many many athletes in d1 programs in all sports. Nobody cares that you were a volunteer assistant coach 20 years ago. You're just another lunatic on this board. My favorite response by far . It wasn't volunteer and it wasn't twenty years ago but as I have read so many times on this board if you don't agree with someone insult them. Funny, is I never claimed to be right, never insulted anyone , never said anything negative but was consistently told how I am wrong. Never actually claimed to be right. Made some simple factual statements on how the recruiting process went and what the staff I was part of were looking at. You can agree or disagree but open your eyes and try to look at both sides. There is always the exception to every rule and single sport athletes can be great dominant athletes in their sport no doubt. But there is validity in the two sport athlete. Anyone who doesn't think a superior athlete like Lebron wouldn't pick up a lacrosse stick and be a competitor immediately is crazy. The stick skills would be lacking because that is sport specific but once he became competent his previous learned basketball training, vision, muscle memory and team sport iq would make him a great player. If I had a chance to get a Lebron James type over an equally talented lacrosse only player being they both played lax I would pick Lebron. Good luck to you all and may all your children be given the opportunity to play some college sport whatever it is. I am going to enjoy my day watching some lacrosse after I drink my morning coffee and head to the fields. And just think how much better Lebron would be at hoops if we was spending time playing lacrosse. Maybe they could have gotten by the spurs.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Two other concerns to consider. One is turning the kid off to the sport. It is one thing if the particular kid just wants to play that one sport and no other. But for those parents that insist their kids concentrate on lax year round, a relatively recent phenomenon, it will be interesting to see if those kids stick with it thru college (or high school even). Be careful not to make it into a job for that kid. The other concern is a medical one. More and more doctors are becoming concerned about repetitive nature injuries arising out of year-round one sport athletes. Don't take my word for it - just do some research and you will find articles like this: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/opinion/sports-should-be-childs-play.html?_r=0. Just something to think about.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Was that a new team who played Nyla as the 2017 terps? Didn't look like terps from last year. Had a bunch of st Anthony's and chaminade kids, but not the same group fromast year.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Nice day from the Outlaws 2017 who were missing 7-8 of there top end players. Beat up on Jesters and 91 white. Then beat fl$ in convincing fashion. 6-4 and wasn't that close..
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Nice day from the Outlaws 2017 who were missing 7-8 of there top end players. Beat up on Jesters and 91 white. Then beat fl$ in convincing fashion. 6-4 and wasn't that close.. If 2 and 3 goal victories in a Collage Showcase is reason for you to Brag I have some beutiful beachfront property for sale in Arizona
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Nice day from the Outlaws 2017 who were missing 7-8 of there top end players. Beat up on Jesters and 91 white. Then beat fl$ in convincing fashion. 6-4 and wasn't that close.. Anyone can beat fl$. They r the size of 2nd graders
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The outlaws kids are how old?
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The outlaws kids are how old? Pretty sure they are 16/17 Wow
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
How are things going at Adrenaline?
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
how about that nassau showcase roster?? what were they thinking? bunch of really good varsity players kicked to the curb.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The outlaws kids are how old? Pretty sure they are 16/17 Wow The outlaws kids are how old? Pretty sure they are 16/17 Wow The outlaws kids are how old? Pretty sure they are 16/17 Wow
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
The outlaws kids are how old? Pretty sure they are 16/17 Wow All 2017s and missing some of the top kids.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Stop. Talking out of your arse
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
91 and done. 2017 is going to change color designation from orange to pink.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Which tournaments this past weekend had the best turnout for coaches? The NSCLA or the Adrenaline? There were other tournaments as well advertising large #s of coaches at Delaware and the Baltimore Kickoff. Since it is quality as well as quantity, where did the head coaches of the big programs go?
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Which tournaments this past weekend had the best turnout for coaches? The NSCLA or the Adrenaline? There were other tournaments as well advertising large #s of coaches at Delaware and the Baltimore Kickoff. Since it is quality as well as quantity, where did the head coaches of the big programs go? Danowski was at NYLA.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
How did the Turtles, 91 do?
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Nice day from the Outlaws 2017 who were missing 7-8 of there top end players. Beat up on Jesters and 91 white. Then beat fl$ in convincing fashion. 6-4 and wasn't that close.. It is about being seen by coaches at this age, not bragging rights of who won. At one game, a parent asked the score and the ref said "we're not keeping score". In the fl$ game, the Outlaws goalie was simply amazing so to say it wasn't that close is inaccurate. That game had a ton of coaches on the sideline, including Danowski. Too bad for the other Outlaws goalie who didn't see one second on the field.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
"Then beat fl$ in convincing fashion. 6-4 and wasn't that close" Ladies and gentlemen, I think we have found the Yogi Berra of Lacrosse quotes. Better hope your kid has your wife's brains. Nice day from the Outlaws 2017 who were missing 7-8 of there top end players. Beat up on Jesters and 91 white. Then beat fl$ in convincing fashion. 6-4 and wasn't that close.. It is about being seen by coaches at this age, not bragging rights of who won. At one game, a parent asked the score and the ref said "we're not keeping score". In the fl$ game, the Outlaws goalie was simply amazing so to say it wasn't that close is inaccurate. That game had a ton of coaches on the sideline, including Danowski. Too bad for the other Outlaws goalie who didn't see one second on the field.
|
|
|
Re: Boys 2017 Fall 2013/Summer 2014
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
Which tournaments this past weekend had the best turnout for coaches? The NSCLA or the Adrenaline? There were other tournaments as well advertising large #s of coaches at Delaware and the Baltimore Kickoff. Since it is quality as well as quantity, where did the head coaches of the big programs go? Adrenaline was great. Coaches that I noticed were North Carolina, Duke, Maryland, Penn State, Rutgers, Navy, Villanova. I'm sure there were many others but those are the schools that were close to where I was sitting at a few of the games. There were a lot of very good lacrosse players for the coaches to look at. I have to say that if your town coaches (2018, 2017, 2016, 2015) are telling you not to play for a team that goes to this type of tournament you have to question their thought process. Great event.
|
|
|
Moderated by A1Laxer, Abclax123, America's Game, Annoy., Anonymous 1, baldbear, Bearded_Kaos, BiggLax, BOTC_EVENTS, botc_ne, clax422, CP@BOTC, cp_botc, Gremelin, HammerOfJustice, hatimd80, JimSection1, Ladylaxer2609, lax516, Laxers412, LaxMomma, Liam Kassl, LILax15, MomOf6, Team BOTC, The Hop, TheBackOfTheCage, Thirdy@BOTC, TM@BOTC |
|
