BOTC - US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) Boys 2017 Fall 2014/Summer 2015

Reality vs perception.

Tough call. Reality it is cheating. Perception you're ok with it.

Reality you are holding him back a grade to gain an advantage on the sports fields to gain an otherwise advantage getting into a better school. We understand just admit you are cheating. Look at the definition of cheating.

Now you can sometimes get away with cheating. And in life unless you are called out for your miscues you are barely remorseful. Some of us may have cheated on a test or two and in the end it helped us.

It is the ole the ends justifies the means. You don't need to justify it to anyone, you've decided to do it.

Sounds like rope a dope wins for some NCAA coaches who are fans of the reclassified game. When you really think about it what the coaches are stating is they don't think your kid is a recruit in his class. Now for a December boy, we are really picking the nit and I would never pick on some 2017 who is still 14 for a few more weeks since I live in a state where my son who turned 13 in October is a 7th grader in the correct grade because of the Sept cut off, so don't take as an attack on prior poster's kid. That said, coaches "love reclassified kids"? Said another way lacrosse is such a cash poor sport that they don't do redshirting in their program with scholarship kids who cost them money for 5 years.

To any NCAA coach I would say back take my son in his grade and we will pay tuition and board full for a redshirt year. Then his deal starts in year two as a redshirt freshman. I'd rather have my kid get adjusted to university life and academics and also get a taste of the training for a year in a college environment rather than running bully over 14 year olds as a 19 year old high school senior. I think this artificial technique to prop kids is pathetic. What's next, pretend they are special needs kids so they can win gold medals in the Special Olympics? We are close to situations that crass right now with this repeat a grade contest.

Another factor I see is repeating grades is so common in Maryland now that it is unusual to be a normal aged kid. Two points there...1. the kids who can hit elite status as natural aged kids for their grade are STUDS, period and everyone knows it and coaches are FOOLS to not project more positive on those kids. 2. since repeaters are so common the RELATIVE advantage is closed out. Now it is 16 year old middies trying to get by 16 year old short sticks and so on. The kids who need the artificial advantage aren't finding it as easily in Maryland now.

By that reasoning my 13 year old can play in a U-11 tournament this weekend and it would work out for him too. Time for birthdates in the tournament programs? No. Time for a orange sticker on helmets with letters reading SISSY.

"etiology of the myopic position"

since I played lacrosse in college I have no idea what this means. quite certain my frat boys friends who spent their afternoons playing foosball and video games wouldn't either. I would have been with them had I not had something more purposeful to attend. I've had 2 jobs over the years that were directly attributable to lacrosse connections -- specifically that all important 1st one. Lacrosse connections have helped in various business deals. Today show did a segment this morning on MIT football team. starting QB studying to be rocket scientist and back-up has played violin at Carnegie Hall. So maybe you can be a serious student and athlete. Also I met my beautiful wife because she was on the woman's team. College sports are not for everyone but those of us with real passion for our sport have no regrets. [/quote]

There is no maybe about it...

Had you and the frat brothers cared to take a page from the MIT guys; then perhaps the meaning would not have been lost on you. A dual major in foosball and video games and a minor in beer typically relegate the standard D1 athlete to a much more narrow set of options if they actually manage to graduate. (The 6 year plan will likely come into play for many; minimizing any potential financial advantage they may have received).

While having the chance to reach out to the alumni support system with any school is a
Great concept; many again don't get to that level and the opportunity is negligible in those cases.

The students who can integrate and associate wth the entire student body will far exceed the success of those who rather limit their associations to small populations of frats and teams.

Understood, however I disagree. Again, I would say I am correcting my original mistake of not keeping him back when he was younger. Additionally, he is not gaining any advantage, we are simply leveling the odds for him, because as I stated in my earlier post, he will still be young for a 2018. He is not the kind of kid that will dominate at any level, he is a smart, tough, hardworking lacrosse player. Academically, he is a good student, maintaining a 3.5 in all honors courses. Going to a prep school is going to benefit him the most academically, which again is the point of all this. Im not justifying, rather explaining and sharing my particular case with everyone.

Thanks for sharing, but your case is really the exception in the controversy of reclassification and doesn't fit the profile of what angers opponents of the method.

There is no maybe about it...

Had you and the frat brothers cared to take a page from the MIT guys; then perhaps the meaning would not have been lost on you. A dual major in foosball and video games and a minor in beer typically relegate the standard D1 athlete to a much more narrow set of options if they actually manage to graduate. (The 6 year plan will likely come into play for many; minimizing any potential financial advantage they may have received).

While having the chance to reach out to the alumni support system with any school is a
Great concept; many again don't get to that level and the opportunity is negligible in those cases.

The students who can integrate and associate wth the entire student body will far exceed the success of those who rather limit their associations to small populations of frats and teams. [/quote]

You state your opinions as fact without any evidence supporting your "factual statements". For someone who comes off as having a superior intellect, that shreds your credibility.

I love this line "integrate and associate with the entire student body". Really? What university did you go to? Everyone finds a clique in large social situations; it's human nature. For athletes, it's their team and perhaps a few or many others outside of their team if the person is social and involved. To say that non-athlete cliques definitely produce better positive networks is ignorant at best.

Please we know who you are. It's about lax end of story you just said he has a 3.5 average.

You state your opinions as fact without any evidence supporting your "factual statements". For someone who comes off as having a superior intellect, that shreds your credibility.

I love this line "integrate and associate with the entire student body". Really? What university did you go to? Everyone finds a clique in large social situations; it's human nature. For athletes, it's their team and perhaps a few or many others outside of their team if the person is social and involved. To say that non-athlete cliques definitely produce better positive networks is ignorant at best. [/quote]

Nice try at a weak retort. Unsubstantiated and fueled by a completely emotional knee jerk response. Clearly the cleat must have fit? Statistically in a purely empirical observation; one would have to agree that the athletic cliques represent an extreme minority in any large school and are then further subdivided by their individual sports and then smaller associations internally within each sport thereby reducing said potential network to insignificant levels except for those few who may end up in the same field, ironically possibly competing against each other for jobs and or connections and favors.

The student body at large, however, will form broader and more diverse associations that are not limited by the social fences that athletic teams tend to build around themselves while placing themselves on pedestals. They not only keep others out, but also deny themselves access to vast numbers of potential connections within said student body.

To deny that these barriers exist would be pure ignorance on your part and expected based on your narrow perspectives.

As a former nationally ranked D1 athlete; I speak from personal observations and experiences.

You need to clarify month of birth please? true 2018 are born in 2000, so how is your late 1999 birthdate kid young for 2018?

You said he was young for 2018? That can only be possible if the rest of the kids on that club also reclassed and as such you felt some pressure? Did they tell you his chances of d-1 were better if he reclassed? It is all about you wanting him to play d-1 at whatever cost...let's not feel sorry for ourselves please...

Be careful where you send him to prep school. If its an all boys school it will be a PG factory and he'll never see the field and you'll be wasting your money.

Hes a Nov. 1999 bday. Most of the kids on his club team are Fall 1999 bdays and even some summer. Maybe hes not young for a 2018 but hes certainly not older and therefore not gaining a competitive advantage. IMO like I said we are leveling the playing field for him. Not sure where I came across as feeling sorry for myself, I am simply sharing my story for some personal perspective. Additionally its not about D1 at all costs, I will be perfectly happy with him playing at a quality D3 program with strong academics, which would be a tremendous accomplishment in and of itself.

wasnt there a guy for duke last year that was 29?

what a cheater!!

Im sincerely hoping your being sarcastic and being inflammatory on purpose. If you are referring to Casey Caroll, the Duke Defenseman, yes he was 29 years old. He was an all American at Duke and he left the school to join the Army and he ended up doing two tours in Afghanistan. He had one year of eligibility left, so he came back and played last year for Duke. This is an American hero, an example that all young men that play this sport can follow and it was a tremendous story.

May be an American hero but he does not belong competing with 21 year olds. Time to move on! A 29 year old is too old for college level lacrosse

A 21 year old can spin circles around a 29 year old so why does it matter that that he is 29? Go get a life.!!

This ^ has to be the most boneheaded post ever on this site.
you are a complete [lacrosse]. I'm sickened by you.

I think he said what a lot of people were thinking. You respect he served but was there a need to play.

Agreed.

He went to serve his country. He left what he loved for a higher purpose. To fight for your freedom and security. Came home to fulfill and unfinished goal. What is the problem with that??

All of your children should experience what he did and then let us see if your opinion changes. That is if they actually come back. Would you deny them? I think not.

Big difference here guys... Lets not confuse an Americsn war hero whom put his life on the line, and decide to finish out his final year of sports eligibility -
To some over privileged 8th grader, whom has the means to flip a $40,000/ yr prep tuition - only to athletically stand out on against a bunch of middle schoolers...
Don't take the bait...

Elephant in the room time. The one fraternity at UVa most joined by UVa lacrosse players? Phi Psi. Been that way for decades. Even now it is a place players take recruits to party. Sh7t show if a lacrosse player is involved in any way in this frat scandal.

Anyone who makes a derogatory remark about Casey Carroll should have their head examined. Casey represents what was and is great about not only College sports but also this Country. Yes he spent 4 years at Duke and graduated but left with 1 year of eligabilty left due to a severe knee injury his Sophmore year, spent 4 years with the Army Rangers doing 2 tours in Afganistan. He returned to Duke and was granted his year of eligability by the NCAA, he suffered a severe knee injury and needed surgery. The NCAA again granted him his year back and he was able to play his last year in 2014. In my opinion a Great ending to a Fascinating 10 year ride. Tell me another player you should admire more!

Well said!!!!

Rumor has it there is a strong movement out there to bring all tournaments into an age based grid. Including HS and recruiting tourns. It will be much like soccer and hockey, birth certificate need to get card. No card, no play. The reclass thing is about to come to screeching halt. Feel for all those that tried to game the system. Time to pay up folks... I hear the college coaches are tired of watching older kids play against younger competition, they feel like they're getting duped. Many of these holdbacks and reclass kids can't compete when they set foot on campus.

That thread is proof of ignorance at all costs by the insecure dads sheltering these insecure repeat kids. Casey went off to serve his country. If some kid graduated HS and went off on Peace Corps or a Mormon Mission I would think of those kids, together with Casey, as being a great story for an older kid coming back to finish college and play the college game.

It is disgusting but not surprising that Maryland dads hide behind these shrouds. Now don't call their kid reclassifieds. With the negative connotation to that term, they now want their kid to be considered "prepping" for another year with no reference to repeat or reclassified.

The older generation must be whincing. I know the Stanwicks well. If one of those kids asked his parents if he can reclassify they'd have him raking leaves on all the lawns of Baltimore County for having the tamarity to be such a coward.

Rumor has it there is a strong movement out there to bring all tournaments into an age based grid. Including HS and recruiting tourns. It will be much like soccer and hockey, birth certificate need to get card. No card, no play. The reclass thing is about to come to screeching halt. Feel for all those that tried to game the system. Time to pay up folks... I hear the college coaches are tired of watching older kids play against younger competition, they feel like they're getting duped. Many of these holdbacks and reclass kids can't compete when they set foot on campus. [/quote]

US Lacrosse has tried and tried, but club owners just go the other way and run grade based tournaments that are not US Lacrosse sanctioned or under the USL insurance policy. So US Lacrosse in effect is neutered and not taken seriously. I don't think the college coaches feel "duped". Do they really offer a kid not knowing some baseline information including his d.o.b.? Rather doubt it. I could relate to a point that BETTER evaluations are possible when the kids are age bracketed for club play like in soccer and hockey. Quite honestly the club guys would run a tournament with rats chewing on kids' socks if they could make more money and get away with it. The honest arbiters need to be elsewhere. USL is useless and the college coaches have NEVER voted with their feet to only attend age based events or said/done anything that would indicate a disdain for repeat kids.

It is pretty obvious already if you have a 2015 or 2016 or 2017 son (I have 2016 and 2017 sons) that the U-15 darlings are not developing to be the best soph, juniors and seniors. That is absolutely true in the hotbed we are in, and looks the case in other areas. NCAA coaches who filled up their cups with early commits that were also reclassified kids are in trouble and they know it. For now, it looks like the more likely scenario is to keep recruiting and just drop the verbal commits to 9th graders later on. That will be cruel onto the early commit kids, but does anyone really 100% trust what a NCAA lacrosse coach says or promises? I don't for sure.

I believe the rule that boys can't play in the MIAA after turning 21 years of age is referred to as the "Stanwick" rule...do you know them well????

To the gentleman who "knows" the Stanwicks well...Wells will be 24 at graduation, Steele was 23...most students graduate at 21 or 22

Of the 14 first team AAs for Division I during 2014, 9 were seniors, 4 were juniors and 1 was a soph (21 yrs old and from Bmore - shocking). So don't say that age doesn't matter, it all changes in HS/College. The reclass/holdback/PG/Junior High Redshirt crap is obvious - it helps your boy by competing against younger kids. The impact at the youth level is more pronounced, but let's stop with the BS that holdbacks don't have a distinct advantage. Almost without fail, the best kids from 2017 down through 2024 age groups are born in the second half of the calendar year and were held back. Put those same kids in the appropriate grade/age group and they wouldn't be nearly as good. Something needs to be done about it by USL - it's not a safety issue, it's a fairness issue.

BOOM, MD kids have and always will play down...

Age, it's just a number.

Another ignorant poster. Wells turned 19 in fall of his senior HS year. Shack turned 19 mid senior year of HS. So many idiots posting on here. And by the way, I don't fault them at all. MIAA rules state that you cannot turn 19 BEFORE Sept. 1 of your senior year. I think repeating has many advantages for a kid and zero downside and I have no problem at all with a family making that decision. Main reason? None of my Business!

That is funny. Is Shack also old for his class? That whole Boys Latin stuff with the jokes about a student parking lot on the middle school side of the street are pretty funny too. It is amazing to me how much being a sissy is celebrated in Baltimore. Crabs and holdbacks, that is what they do best.

The biggest sissies are on this site. Dad's whining and complaining that little junior might play against kids a few months older than there little boy. Get out of your kids way and let him grow up.

Yes, because you have to cheat to beat the real talented on age kids. That would make you a sad little loser.and your kid

Haha. I guess you're getting tired of little Johnnie getting run over on the field and have to come on this board to vent your embarrassment. Hard to teach a kid to be a man when the dad is a whining excuse maker.

I am pretty sure Steele was 22 when he graduated UVa. Not at all sure on the brothers. What was written earlier seems wildly inaccurate.

The point isn't 19 year old seniors playing against 18 year old seniors or a matter of a few months age spreads. People get upset when there are 14 year olds out there with 12 year olds. Or 16 year olds against 14 year olds on the same "level" grade playing field in the grade where recruiting is extremely consequential. The response to that is can't beat em so join em and pony up prep school tuitions. Be for or be against, but nobody can argue it is fair for the kids who go the straight line. The integrity of the sport is just gone, and this is not a spiteful point. And really, why is there even an argument against age based club play? Let me answer that one for you: the reclass kids lose a forum to look good. No college coach goes to HS games in spring during their own season. The only place to show your stuff in games live before coaches is club ball. If it was 16 year old ninth grader against all other 16 year olds, I really don't believe that the 9th grader looks comparatively better in most instances. With grade based play he will. There is a huge difference between being a 16 and being a 14 year old. Much bigger than in later teens and twenties with the two year spread.

My 14 year old 9th grader last spring started varsity and most of the players guarding him here in maryland were 19 year old seniors or 18 year old juniors. He competed well and played well but took a brutal beating and had lingering injuries all summer. So pardon me when I call this holdback scam a sissy game.

I will take the bait. I watched on the sidelines a weekend ago as my son who is in the sixth grade and plays up on a 6th / 7th grade team (and no, it is not a Baltimore team) was mauled by a team of 8th graders playing down. It was great sport (for the older boys who were 4 to 6 inches taller and 30 to 40 pounds heavier). My mistake was allowing my son to play up when I thought it was only kids a year older that he would be playing against rather that boys two and three years older. The issue is not boys "a few months older", but boys a few years older. If this makes me a "sissy" and a "whiner" and being concerned about "little junior" then that's fine, that's my role. By the way, I think I am doing just fine trying to help my son "grow up". It would be nice, however, if he was allowed to do so without parents and club owners insisting on playing kids down to get size and age advantage.