Under Armour All-Americans

D1 Mens Lacrosse
foreverlax
Posts: 3219
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:21 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by foreverlax »

How many players receive a scholarship of more than 35%-50% even at fully funded programs?
Goalies, fogos and studs get a full slice....the rest get to share a slice. Some studs, in their final year, can wind up with some cash in their pocket.
laxpere
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:40 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by laxpere »

foreverlax wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 10:03 am
How many players receive a scholarship of more than 35%-50% even at fully funded programs?
Goalies, fogos and studs get a full slice....the rest get to share a slice. Some studs, in their final year, can wind up with some cash in their pocket.
Might be a little off track, but the recruiting game is full of intrigue. Also intrigued because I have heard so many parents say that their kids had multiple full ride offers. A full slice is a full ride? Is this math correct? Is this the way the scholarship money works?

Isn't a fully funded program capped at 12.6 scholarships? Assume $60k/year of total tuition/board cost, there is $756k to award each year. If top eight players are full rides for $480k, there is $276k left for the rest of the team. For the 27-32 remaining players, there is $10k/player left at best.

It's dynamic so every school is different and there are so many assumptions required for different combos, but is the concept right? I assume that the Ivies, for instance, would use merit awards and financial aid, instead of athletic scholarships. State schools have lower tuition for residents. There is probably some financial aid and/merit awards layered on top at almost every school, but the scholarship money doesn't seem to cover much more than 15% for the "normal" players.

How does a player end up with some cash? Finish early? Financial aid or merit awards factor in?
“The greatest accomplishment is not in never falling, but in rising again after you fall.” Vince Lombardi
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are...." John Wooden
foreverlax
Posts: 3219
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:21 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by foreverlax »

laxpere wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 10:47 am
foreverlax wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 10:03 am
How many players receive a scholarship of more than 35%-50% even at fully funded programs?
Goalies, fogos and studs get a full slice....the rest get to share a slice. Some studs, in their final year, can wind up with some cash in their pocket.
Might be a little off track, but the recruiting game is full of intrigue. Also intrigued because I have heard so many parents say that their kids had multiple full ride offers. A full slice is a full ride? Is this math correct? Is this the way the scholarship money works?

Isn't a fully funded program capped at 12.6 scholarships? Assume $60k/year of total tuition/board cost, there is $756k to award each year. If top eight players are full rides for $480k, there is $276k left for the rest of the team. For the 27-32 remaining players, there is $10k/player left at best.

It's dynamic so every school is different and there are so many assumptions required for different combos, but is the concept right? I assume that the Ivies, for instance, would use merit awards and financial aid, instead of athletic scholarships. State schools have lower tuition for residents. There is probably some financial aid and/merit awards layered on top at almost every school, but the scholarship money doesn't seem to cover much more than 15% for the "normal" players.

How does a player end up with some cash? Finish early? Financial aid or merit awards factor in?
Multiple full ride offers....doubt it.

12.6 is correct....your concept is correct, how they carve is up is as varied as their are coaches.

The size of the pool of money is a great question....as you alluded to, private schools have one price, public have two - in/out of state. Two studs - one in state and one out of state, getting a full ride for that year, could wind up a WIDE variety in the amount(s).

Not sure how a coach is able to get a player net cash...but rest assured, it happens. (Maybe they get the total for room, board, food etc etc, but they live off campus, which is cheaper and leaves a net. 9 semester kids often get paid for that last semester, even though they are no longer eligible.
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 32144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

Peter Brown wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 8:31 am I know well over a 100 sets of parents whose kids play lacrosse in high school. I don't know even one parent (let alone many) who has "held" his kid back for lacrosse; I don't even know a PG parent, though of course they exist. I know a few parents who held their kids back one grade because of the dreaded August/September 'Fall birthdays', but those holdback decisions were made around 1st grade, when the kid was having the snot beat out of him at recess and visions of lacrosse glory weren't so close in the mirror.

Who are these parents and where are they? Or is this a case of confirmation bias story telling?
You must not get around.... 25% of my son's 8th grade travel lacrosse team reclassified.
“You lucky I ain’t read wretched yet!”
Peter Brown
Posts: 12878
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2019 11:19 am

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by Peter Brown »

Typical Lax Dad wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:21 am
Peter Brown wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 8:31 am I know well over a 100 sets of parents whose kids play lacrosse in high school. I don't know even one parent (let alone many) who has "held" his kid back for lacrosse; I don't even know a PG parent, though of course they exist. I know a few parents who held their kids back one grade because of the dreaded August/September 'Fall birthdays', but those holdback decisions were made around 1st grade, when the kid was having the snot beat out of him at recess and visions of lacrosse glory weren't so close in the mirror.

Who are these parents and where are they? Or is this a case of confirmation bias story telling?
You must not get around.... 25% of my son's 8th grade travel lacrosse team reclassified.

The parents I know whose kids play lacrosse have never even discussed it; I mean, money is an issue for most households in America, even lacrosse households. The only parents I know who have considered reclassing entertain the idea of a PG year, but that's for a variety of reasons, almost never strictly to get their lacrosse skills up!

None look at lacrosse as the ONLY way to gain admission to whatever college they are looking at. A fair number have incredibly talented sons playing lacrosse. I just don't know anybody who has 'reclassed' for lacrosse; I know some older kids who were held back in 1st grade or so because they were tiny relative to their peers, but this was all about the August/September birthdate issue and well before we knew they might have some flash skills as a lax player.

Admittedly I have no kids who play the sport, so I don't know as much about the club lacrosse scene.
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 32144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

Peter Brown wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:55 am
Typical Lax Dad wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:21 am
Peter Brown wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 8:31 am I know well over a 100 sets of parents whose kids play lacrosse in high school. I don't know even one parent (let alone many) who has "held" his kid back for lacrosse; I don't even know a PG parent, though of course they exist. I know a few parents who held their kids back one grade because of the dreaded August/September 'Fall birthdays', but those holdback decisions were made around 1st grade, when the kid was having the snot beat out of him at recess and visions of lacrosse glory weren't so close in the mirror.

Who are these parents and where are they? Or is this a case of confirmation bias story telling?
You must not get around.... 25% of my son's 8th grade travel lacrosse team reclassified.

The parents I know whose kids play lacrosse have never even discussed it; I mean, money is an issue for most households in America, even lacrosse households. The only parents I know who have considered reclassing entertain the idea of a PG year, but that's for a variety of reasons, almost never strictly to get their lacrosse skills up!

None look at lacrosse as the ONLY way to gain admission to whatever college they are looking at. A fair number have incredibly talented sons playing lacrosse. I just don't know anybody who has 'reclassed' for lacrosse; I know some older kids who were held back in 1st grade or so because they were tiny relative to their peers, but this was all about the August/September birthdate issue and well before we knew they might have some flash skills as a lax player.

Admittedly I have no kids who play the sport, so I don't know as much about the club lacrosse scene.
That right there my friend is the right answer. Of the 6 8th grade kids that reclassified, only 1 played D1 college lacrosse. One played two years of D3 and the others didn't play in college..... Another HS club teammate reclassified and went 11th grade to 11th grade from one of the top "public" schools in the state to a very good private school. His father mentioned he had a learning disability which may have been true. He committed that next summer and played D1. We had another kid (HS teammate) that transferred/reclassified but it wasn't to raise his stock. He continued to play with his friends a grade up and then fell back when they all graduated from high school two years later. He went on to be an AA in college.
Last edited by Typical Lax Dad on Wed May 29, 2019 12:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“You lucky I ain’t read wretched yet!”
laxpere
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:40 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by laxpere »

Typical Lax Dad wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:21 am You must not get around.... 25% of my son's 8th grade travel lacrosse team reclassified.
If you don't mind, were the reclassed players going to public or private schools? Lacrosse related reasons? In pursuit of the golden ticket of recruiting? What area of the country?

Parents are often easy targets, but what role do club coaches play? I have seen some club coaches promote their clubs based on early recruiting commitments to strong lacrosse schools that never panned out. The club coach lists on the club web site the players as still committed to those schools even though they didn't end up there. Seems like resume building for coaches in some cases may be more important than the player finding the right school. Does it relates to UA too because some club coaches control tryouts for the region's under class team? They can lobby hard for their own and then possibly highlight "their" players played in the UA game.
“The greatest accomplishment is not in never falling, but in rising again after you fall.” Vince Lombardi
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are...." John Wooden
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 32144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

laxpere wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 12:10 pm
Typical Lax Dad wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:21 am You must not get around.... 25% of my son's 8th grade travel lacrosse team reclassified.
If you don't mind, were the reclassed players going to public or private schools? Lacrosse related reasons? In pursuit of the golden ticket of recruiting? What area of the country?

Parents are easy targets, but what role do club coaches play? I have seen some club coaches promote their clubs based on early recruiting commitments to strong lacrosse schools that never panned out. The club coach lists on the club web site the players as still committed to those schools even though they didn't end up there. Seems like resume building for coaches in some cases is more important than the player finding the right school. Relates to UA too because some club coaches control tryouts for the region's under class team, lobby hard for their own and then boast about placing "their" players in the UA game.
Most of the kids went to private schools. There were two that went to private and came back to public later. I am pretty certain they had used up all their HS eligibility for public schools but it never came up. What is fairly common is kids go from 9th grade public to 9th grade private at boarding school. I knew kids that played down in the summer and once identified as a recruit, they would re-classify. Hell one kid played 2018 with one team and 2017 with another.
“You lucky I ain’t read wretched yet!”
Cooter
Posts: 1795
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by Cooter »

Looking at the Under Armour kids from public schools
On U-19 tryout roster
Canyon Birch, Manasquan (N.J.), Penn State
Dylan Pallonetti, Ward Melville (N.Y.), Maryland
Kenny Brower, Massapequa (N.Y.), Duke
Jake Caputo, Middle Creek (N.C.), Duke
Angelo Petrakis, Massapequa (N.Y.), Cornell
Quentin Matsui, Eden Prairie (Minn.), Virginia
Aiden Blake, Haddonfield (N.J.), Cornell
Patrick Hackler, Skaneateles (N.Y.), Yale
Colin Hart, Garden City (N.Y.), Brown
Max Schalit, Ponte Vedra (Fla.), Notre Dame
Ryan Schriber, Wilton (Conn.), Michigan

Not on U-19 tryout roster
Ed Arnold, Manhasset (N.Y.), Penn
Live Free or Die!
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 32144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

Cooter wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 1:37 pm Looking at the Under Armour kids from public schools
On U-19 tryout roster
Canyon Birch, Manasquan (N.J.), Penn State
Dylan Pallonetti, Ward Melville (N.Y.), Maryland
Kenny Brower, Massapequa (N.Y.), Duke
Jake Caputo, Middle Creek (N.C.), Duke
Angelo Petrakis, Massapequa (N.Y.), Cornell
Quentin Matsui, Eden Prairie (Minn.), Virginia
Aiden Blake, Haddonfield (N.J.), Cornell
Patrick Hackler, Skaneateles (N.Y.), Yale
Colin Hart, Garden City (N.Y.), Brown
Max Schalit, Ponte Vedra (Fla.), Notre Dame
Ryan Schriber, Wilton (Conn.), Michigan

Not on U-19 tryout roster
Ed Arnold, Manhasset (N.Y.), Penn
Thanks..... those are some hard scrabble school districts... I am shocked they would have lacrosse :o
“You lucky I ain’t read wretched yet!”
pcowlax
Posts: 1638
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 9:16 am

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by pcowlax »

Typical Lax Dad wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 12:16 pm
laxpere wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 12:10 pm
Typical Lax Dad wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 11:21 am You must not get around.... 25% of my son's 8th grade travel lacrosse team reclassified.
If you don't mind, were the reclassed players going to public or private schools? Lacrosse related reasons? In pursuit of the golden ticket of recruiting? What area of the country?

Parents are easy targets, but what role do club coaches play? I have seen some club coaches promote their clubs based on early recruiting commitments to strong lacrosse schools that never panned out. The club coach lists on the club web site the players as still committed to those schools even though they didn't end up there. Seems like resume building for coaches in some cases is more important than the player finding the right school. Relates to UA too because some club coaches control tryouts for the region's under class team, lobby hard for their own and then boast about placing "their" players in the UA game.
Most of the kids went to private schools. There were two that went to private and came back to public later. I am pretty certain they had used up all their HS eligibility for public schools but it never came up. What is fairly common is kids go from 9th grade public to 9th grade private at boarding school. I knew kids that played down in the summer and once identified as a recruit, they would re-classify. Hell one kid played 2018 with one team and 2017 with another.
Yes, this is quite common. Certainly not the majority but a goodly number of kids will reclassify when they move from public to private, often in 9th. What Peter was saying about 1st grade in jest actually is an even bigger thing. Where I live in CT the average boy is about a year older than the average girl in the same grade. There are clearly a number of exceptions to this. But when kids are finishing pre-school or pre-K and deciding when to start Kindergarten, a tremendous number of parents of boys hold them back a year while the girls go ahead. This is indeed often for maturity issues and there are not many who are planning ahead as this is how we get a D1 ride. But, god help me, there are some (and not 1 or 2) who are considering how this will affect their sons' athletic careers in high school. This has led to the average age of graduating boys at publics to rise over the years. The boarding schools are indeed older but the idea that publics have a bunch of 17 year old seniors is very outdated, they are virtually all 18 by the season and many 18.5.
foreverlax
Posts: 3219
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:21 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by foreverlax »

Each district has rules regarding when the player's age impacts eligibility. One well-known Baltimore player, evidently, drove up to school as a 9th grader and was able to play all 4 years in the MIAA.

Most of the age thing is done by privates and parochial...the more expensive, the older the kid at graduation.
pcowlax
Posts: 1638
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 9:16 am

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by pcowlax »

I hate looking these up every year when this argument comes out so, from memory, for MIAA you can't turn 19 before August 31 of your senior year. New England preps say you must be 19 or younger September 1st. So in theory you could turn 20 Sept 2 and play in the spring. The league has had the very rare 20 year old but by very I mean very rare, its not like hockey where that happens much more. It also means in MIAA you can be 19 3/4 and play.
molo
Posts: 1910
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 2:14 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by molo »

I graduated from a MSA school in 1967 and was probably the youngest in my class at 17 due to turn 18 in September. Plenty of students who entered in middle and upper school repeated a grade. This was before the era of preK and the now common practice of starting males late. Just anecdotally, it seems to me that the boys at MIAA schools tend to be more likely to be older those in the local public schools.
I spent 40 years as a counselor in Baltimore County Schools, coaching at several different schools, and we did not let students choose to be in certain grades. Your grade was based on the number of credits. If you were a senior and earned the number of credits needed for graduation, you got your diploma. You couldn’t stick around for an extra year. Students who took more than four years to graduate did so because it took them more than four years to pass enough classes to graduate. It was pretty rare because they were encouraged to take classes in programs like evening and summer school. Students who did not graduate with the class with which they entered ninth grade hurt the schools’ individual report cards. By the time I retired, I found some of the efforts to help struggling students earn their diplomas fairly interesting.
After I retired, I did work part time at a school in which most of the students were not on pace to graduate with their original ninth grade classes. It was located in Towson and was more secure than the other schools in which I had worked.
In short, in my 40 years in one public school system, only those who had repeated a year in elementary or middle or who had fallen behind in credits failed to graduate “on time” if they graduated.
smoova
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 11:35 am

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by smoova »

Regarding reclassifying, a new trend I've seen is parents/kids "committing" to do a PG year after high school so club programs will allow the player to play down a year in summer/fall ball. For example, a 2021 player "commits" to do PG year and, therefore, would not enter college until 2022. The player is then permitted to play out the remaining years of club ball with a 2022 team.
Fanlax999
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2018 8:37 am

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by Fanlax999 »

smoova wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 7:55 pm Regarding reclassifying, a new trend I've seen is parents/kids "committing" to do a PG year after high school so club programs will allow the player to play down a year in summer/fall ball. For example, a 2021 player "commits" to do PG year and, therefore, would not enter college until 2022. The player is then permitted to play out the remaining years of club ball with a 2022 team.
Just another money making scheme....smh...
smoova
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 11:35 am

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by smoova »

Fanlax999 wrote: Thu May 30, 2019 2:18 am
smoova wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 7:55 pm Regarding reclassifying, a new trend I've seen is parents/kids "committing" to do a PG year after high school so club programs will allow the player to play down a year in summer/fall ball. For example, a 2021 player "commits" to do PG year and, therefore, would not enter college until 2022. The player is then permitted to play out the remaining years of club ball with a 2022 team.
Just another money making scheme....smh...
I'm not sure I see the financial scheme angle, but the practice definitely raises some ethical questions. Appears to be yet another way for the well-heeled to rig the system in favor of their athletically-deficient progeny by usurping the opportunities of younger players.
foreverlax
Posts: 3219
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:21 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by foreverlax »

Fanlax999 wrote: Thu May 30, 2019 2:18 am
smoova wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 7:55 pm Regarding reclassifying, a new trend I've seen is parents/kids "committing" to do a PG year after high school so club programs will allow the player to play down a year in summer/fall ball. For example, a 2021 player "commits" to do PG year and, therefore, would not enter college until 2022. The player is then permitted to play out the remaining years of club ball with a 2022 team.
Just another money making scheme....smh...
1. The reclassification of a player does give the club another year of fees. NBD.

2. It also helps the new team he joins.

3. It does take away a spot from another player.
smoova
Posts: 982
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 11:35 am

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by smoova »

foreverlax wrote: Thu May 30, 2019 10:11 am
Fanlax999 wrote: Thu May 30, 2019 2:18 am
smoova wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 7:55 pm Regarding reclassifying, a new trend I've seen is parents/kids "committing" to do a PG year after high school so club programs will allow the player to play down a year in summer/fall ball. For example, a 2021 player "commits" to do PG year and, therefore, would not enter college until 2022. The player is then permitted to play out the remaining years of club ball with a 2022 team.
Just another money making scheme....smh...
1. The reclassification of a player does give the club another year of fees. NBD.

2. It also helps the new team he joins.

3. It does take away a spot from another player.
I guess the validity of point 2 depends on the definition of "help"
foreverlax
Posts: 3219
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:21 pm

Re: Under Armour All-Americans

Post by foreverlax »

smoova wrote: Thu May 30, 2019 12:41 pm
foreverlax wrote: Thu May 30, 2019 10:11 am
Fanlax999 wrote: Thu May 30, 2019 2:18 am
smoova wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 7:55 pm Regarding reclassifying, a new trend I've seen is parents/kids "committing" to do a PG year after high school so club programs will allow the player to play down a year in summer/fall ball. For example, a 2021 player "commits" to do PG year and, therefore, would not enter college until 2022. The player is then permitted to play out the remaining years of club ball with a 2022 team.
Just another money making scheme....smh...
1. The reclassification of a player does give the club another year of fees. NBD.

2. It also helps the new team he joins.

3. It does take away a spot from another player.
I guess the validity of point 2 depends on the definition of "help"
Everything else being equal, a player who had success at his current level, should have incrementally more success at a lower level - whether that makes any difference in the longer run, remains to be seen....no rules of thumbs apply.
Post Reply

Return to “D1 MENS LACROSSE”