Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

HS Boys Lacrosse
TXLaxCO_OP
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:25 pm

Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by TXLaxCO_OP »

In Texas, the High School Lacrosse League allows Programs (Private and Public) to have teams in both Division 1 and Division 2.

They are able to compete for State Championships in both Divisions.

Most teams' reasons for doing this is that they have too many players for just a Varsity and a JV, and that our JV level games are not competitive enough for their teams.

I am interested to find out other perspectives on this from throughout the lacrosse community.

Thank you all!
pcowlax
Posts: 1638
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 9:16 am

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by pcowlax »

Well, looking from Connecticut, this seems (and always has seemed) bizarre to me. I know there are some combined high school programs in Texas as well, are they allowed to do this? For most of the rest of the country this would be crazy and I suspect, though please correct me if I am wrong, that it would seem crazy in Texas in other sports as well. For most sports such as football or soccer, the majority of states organize divisions based on school sizes. Sports such as lacrosse pose a challenge as the quality of a team is usually much more closely tied to the lax culture of the town and quality of its youth programs than than the absolute number of boys per high school class. Most areas still do it by size though some give teams the option of playing up. Virtually nowhere else though would allow you to field a second varsity team and enter it into a different division (or class or whatever you call it). Surely there are dozens and dozens of boys at Allen would would like to play high school football but get cut from the team. Maybe they then have a JV roster of 150 but I doubt it. Some kids just are not good enough to compete at the high school level if they happen to live in a town that has a dynamite program in that sport. Texas football fans would go nuts if Allen or Southlake Carroll or whomever tried to field a second varsity and enter it into 3A or something. Many publics up here have a varsity, JV and Freshman team. Most won't cut anyone from JV but the majority end up cutting themselves, not many seniors, regardless of love of the game, want to be on JV, playing with a bunch of younger kids and none of their friends. Privates here may also have a 3rds team either in place of (usually) or in addition to the frosh team. 3rds vs 3rds games would typically be expected to be competitive, if not of high quality. I understand how in an area where only a few towns take the sport very seriously it would be hard for those towns' JVs to find competitive games but entering a varsity squad in Div 1 and Div 2 seems to be trading one problem for a worse one.
Laxxal22
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:58 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by Laxxal22 »

As long as you have two distinct teams from the school, and not having the bottom half of the A roster dropping down to win games for the B team, then I don't have a problem with it in a state where the game is relatively small.

I believe Brunswick has a Varsity B that plays varsity teams but not NE West 1 competition. Neither of the Wick teams are competing in any sort of playoff though. I believe IMG and Culver both have "prep" teams that are who we think of when talking about those schools and then "varsity" which plays against Florida and Indiana high schools respectively.
TXLaxCO_OP
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:25 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by TXLaxCO_OP »

pcowlax wrote: Wed Nov 20, 2019 2:37 pm Well, looking from Connecticut, this seems (and always has seemed) bizarre to me. I know there are some combined high school programs in Texas as well, are they allowed to do this? For most of the rest of the country this would be crazy and I suspect, though please correct me if I am wrong, that it would seem crazy in Texas in other sports as well. For most sports such as football or soccer, the majority of states organize divisions based on school sizes. Sports such as lacrosse pose a challenge as the quality of a team is usually much more closely tied to the lax culture of the town and quality of its youth programs than than the absolute number of boys per high school class. Most areas still do it by size though some give teams the option of playing up. Virtually nowhere else though would allow you to field a second varsity team and enter it into a different division (or class or whatever you call it). Surely there are dozens and dozens of boys at Allen would would like to play high school football but get cut from the team. Maybe they then have a JV roster of 150 but I doubt it. Some kids just are not good enough to compete at the high school level if they happen to live in a town that has a dynamite program in that sport. Texas football fans would go nuts if Allen or Southlake Carroll or whomever tried to field a second varsity and enter it into 3A or something. Many publics up here have a varsity, JV and Freshman team. Most won't cut anyone from JV but the majority end up cutting themselves, not many seniors, regardless of love of the game, want to be on JV, playing with a bunch of younger kids and none of their friends. Privates here may also have a 3rds team either in place of (usually) or in addition to the frosh team. 3rds vs 3rds games would typically be expected to be competitive, if not of high quality. I understand how in an area where only a few towns take the sport very seriously it would be hard for those towns' JVs to find competitive games but entering a varsity squad in Div 1 and Div 2 seems to be trading one problem for a worse one.
I feel that many of the coaches here in Texas are completely in line with your thinking. I use the football example you gave all of the time when having this discussion.

For the 2020 season only 6 programs in the state will be doing this, including 1 High-Powered Private Program, which is the most we've ever had, and the first time a private has done it.

When we get into the discussion/argument over this down here, people come out of the woodwork to defend this. Some have called in it innovative, or cited The Hill Academy, IMG, and Culver as examples for us to follow (which is ridiculous in my opinion). They will tell me that it's all bout getting more kids better quality games, and it's not about winning championships, however when I bring up the idea, of allowing this, but not allowing those D2 teams to compete in Playoffs they scoff at it.

I am trying to lead an effort to organize our league and state in a better way, with the end goal of having lacrosse become a school-sanctioned sport. That's why I'm posing this question to those of you from other states.

I feel like allowing this, and particularly allowing private schools to do this, could have long-term consequences, especially if more and more D1 programs start doing this.

I have compiled some statistics since we started allowing this in Texas, and only one team has really shown that they could use it to their advantage. I contend that it is one way ( along with great coaching, great talent, etc.) they have been able to build such a powerhouse of a D1 program in Texas, especially for a public school. They started having two varsities in 2007, and since have won 4 D2 State Championships, 3 times winning both D1 & D2 in the same season.

I contend that we should just end the practice now, but it's a struggle convincing others of this.
TXLaxCO_OP
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:25 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by TXLaxCO_OP »

Laxxal22 wrote: Wed Nov 20, 2019 3:02 pm As long as you have two distinct teams from the school, and not having the bottom half of the A roster dropping down to win games for the B team, then I don't have a problem with it in a state where the game is relatively small.

I believe Brunswick has a Varsity B that plays varsity teams but not NE West 1 competition. Neither of the Wick teams are competing in any sort of playoff though. I believe IMG and Culver both have "prep" teams that are who we think of when talking about those schools and then "varsity" which plays against Florida and Indiana high schools respectively.
We will allow D2 players to move up to the D1 Roster, but then are not permitted to move back down. Once you play D1 you have to stay there.

Some have sighted the Prep School as an example to emulate, but those are private schools who can recruit from all over North America. Doesn't seem like something we should be comparing ourselves to as a league. The private schools maybe, but the public schools can't replicate what IMG, The Hill, and Culver do.
Laxxal22
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:58 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by Laxxal22 »

Don’t know what private schools are like in TX, but if they’re heading down the same path that NE privates have walked as of late (pretty blatant recruiting, very high reclass rate) then I don’t think they should compete for same titles as public schools. One-off games are fine, but not even playing fields for championships.

As to a public fielding varsity A & B, if you have the numbers and talent then I’m for as many kids as possible getting to play competitive lacrosse. Also, while it sucks losing to them, those programs set the high water mark for everyone else to reach. Maybe that’s a long run benefit for Texas lacrosse?
Surfs_Up
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:53 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by Surfs_Up »

I really don't see what's wrong with the current model? Our school had a D2 program and D1 program one year when we had enough kids. It was very helpful for the really good JV kids to play higher quality team in a D2 Varsity. The JV kids that stayed on JV got more reps and were adequately aligned to the other teams for the most part.

D1 seems to be just fine. I am not sure what the issue is here , why change it?
User avatar
HooDat
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by HooDat »

There is a balancing act between letting kids have the chance to play their best lacrosse and coaches wanting to control talent. The public school "club" programs in Texas are allowed to draw from multiple schools. I see no reason why a club program that draws from more than one high school should be allowed to field two varsity teams. If you have that much talent" you should be allocating it to specific high schools.

I definitely agree with posters who say that once you stand on the sideline for a D1 game, you should become ineligible for D2.

Also - if they are indeed unique teams, then there should be no joint practices or any overlap in coaching or sharing of practice plans etc....

Put those reasonable rules in place and then we will see how much it is about the kids rather than winning or the coaches controlling a bigger pool of talent within their program.
STILL somewhere back in the day....

...and waiting/hoping for a tinfoil hat emoji......
ABClaxfan
Posts: 99
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:30 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by ABClaxfan »

HooDat wrote: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:29 pm There is a balancing act between letting kids have the chance to play their best lacrosse and coaches wanting to control talent. The public school "club" programs in Texas are allowed to draw from multiple schools. I see no reason why a club program that draws from more than one high school should be allowed to field two varsity teams. If you have that much talent" you should be allocating it to specific high schools.

I definitely agree with posters who say that once you stand on the sideline for a D1 game, you should become ineligible for D2.

Also - if they are indeed unique teams, then there should be no joint practices or any overlap in coaching or sharing of practice plans etc....

Put those reasonable rules in place and then we will see how much it is about the kids rather than winning or the coaches controlling a bigger pool of talent within their program.
I agree with what you are saying but the teams should be allowed to have joint practices. Especially if the D2 team is really the JV team and the ultimate goal should be to make the D1 (Varsity) team why shouldn't the players have the opportunity to practice with the varsity and learn the terminology. A lot of programs have JV and Varsity practice together a few times a week. It is also a great way to avoid complacency among players, the varsity guys always know that they have someone below them fighting for their spot.
User avatar
3rdPersonPlural
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 11:09 pm
Location: Rust Belt
Contact:

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by 3rdPersonPlural »

Surfs_Up wrote: Thu Nov 21, 2019 12:11 am I really don't see what's wrong with the current model? Our school had a D2 program and D1 program one year when we had enough kids. It was very helpful for the really good JV kids to play higher quality team in a D2 Varsity. The JV kids that stayed on JV got more reps and were adequately aligned to the other teams for the most part.

D1 seems to be just fine. I am not sure what the issue is here , why change it?
Exactly. The goal is to have competitive games for kids at all developmental levels between teams at all competition levels involving programs at all maturity levels.

If you have a Multiple division state like Texas. The best 25 play on the D1 team. If you have enough depth, the next 25 play on the D2 team.

If the D2 kids get clobbered, run them in a JV league. Maybe allow a D2 team where there is a D1 team if they go .500 or better. This will keep crappy JV teams from cluttering up the D2 landscape.

The only problem I have with the Texas system is that they have a D2 championship that ranks beside the D1 State Championship. For years (back at LP) I saw D2 parents bemoan that a team that rules in D2 should move to D1, and parents of that dominant team counter that their kids won a State championship, so stop kvetching, losers.

The easiest solution is to end the State D2 championship. If you want some brass, go D1 and play the big boys. Otherwise, yes, your 10-2 record was super. Go D1 and take this seriously.
LaxLurker
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 11:22 am

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by LaxLurker »

How bout this idea. Get rid of D2 championship (b/c are they really champs if they don't compete at the top??? Answer - No) and institute a double elimination D1 tourney and expand the # of teams. Give everyone at least 2 games. I'm a big fan of the college world series in baseball and one of the cool things is seeing a team come out of the loser bracket and really compete....just spitballing ideas
TXLaxCO_OP
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:25 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by TXLaxCO_OP »

You guys suggesting that we end the D2 championship are assuming that everyone is on a level playing field. Some high schools are much bigger than others, and our league is allowing some programs to pull from up to 10 high schools. Frisco ISD has 20,000 HS students. Compare that to a program that draws from a single 5A school of 2000. Allen HS and the Plano Programs all have like 6000 High school kids to pull from.

How can we assume programs who draw from 2000 kids should compete with programs who draw from 3 to 10 times as many kids? It's okay to have multiple championships as long as everyone grouped with like-sized schools. Nobody is going to assume that a 4A football team should compete with a 6A football team. No one looks down on the 5A state championships.
User avatar
3rdPersonPlural
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2018 11:09 pm
Location: Rust Belt
Contact:

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by 3rdPersonPlural »

TXLaxCO_OP wrote: Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:01 pm You guys suggesting that we end the D2 championship are assuming that everyone is on a level playing field. Some high schools are much bigger than others, and our league is allowing some programs to pull from up to 10 high schools. Frisco ISD has 20,000 HS students. Compare that to a program that draws from a single 5A school of 2000. Allen HS and the Plano Programs all have like 6000 High school kids to pull from.

How can we assume programs who draw from 2000 kids should compete with programs who draw from 3 to 10 times as many kids? It's okay to have multiple championships as long as everyone grouped with like-sized schools. Nobody is going to assume that a 4A football team should compete with a 6A football team. No one looks down on the 5A state championships.
I see your point, but more kids in a district does not equate to more quality lacrosse players. The Southern Section of Californias CIF oversees 1.9 million kids. Long Island New York has 476,000. No one is surprised that there are more elite players from Long Island than from greater LA.

Shoreham Wading River is Class C in NYSPHAA, which means less than 589 students. Yes, their lacrosse team would beat a team drawn from Friscos 10,000 candidates. The difference is the lacrosse culture which starts at the youth rec level and bubbles up from there. The success of the local HS team is merely a conclusion of the Programs success.

Over the years, I've seen Texas Lax supporters complaining on these and the predecessor boards about teams sandbagging their way into D2 and then running the table. I think that the simple solution is that, if you make the D2 finals, you've demonstrated the success of your Program - from youth through HS Varsity - and you now qualify for a D1 schedule the next year. If your team ends up in the bottom decile of D1, for 2 seasons running, you get demoted to D2. This means that winning your Semi in D2 has earned you a ticket to the big leagues. This clarifies that D2 is the developmental league, and D1 is the meaningful league as far as championships go.

Reasonable minds can differ, of course. :D
washedupobserver
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue May 14, 2019 3:46 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by washedupobserver »

So I take it Jesuit is adding a D2 team...good for them.
pcowlax
Posts: 1638
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 9:16 am

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by pcowlax »

3rdPersonPlural wrote: Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:00 am
TXLaxCO_OP wrote: Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:01 pm You guys suggesting that we end the D2 championship are assuming that everyone is on a level playing field. Some high schools are much bigger than others, and our league is allowing some programs to pull from up to 10 high schools. Frisco ISD has 20,000 HS students. Compare that to a program that draws from a single 5A school of 2000. Allen HS and the Plano Programs all have like 6000 High school kids to pull from.

How can we assume programs who draw from 2000 kids should compete with programs who draw from 3 to 10 times as many kids? It's okay to have multiple championships as long as everyone grouped with like-sized schools. Nobody is going to assume that a 4A football team should compete with a 6A football team. No one looks down on the 5A state championships.
I see your point, but more kids in a district does not equate to more quality lacrosse players. The Southern Section of Californias CIF oversees 1.9 million kids. Long Island New York has 476,000. No one is surprised that there are more elite players from Long Island than from greater LA.

Shoreham Wading River is Class C in NYSPHAA, which means less than 589 students. Yes, their lacrosse team would beat a team drawn from Friscos 10,000 candidates. The difference is the lacrosse culture which starts at the youth rec level and bubbles up from there. The success of the local HS team is merely a conclusion of the Programs success.

Over the years, I've seen Texas Lax supporters complaining on these and the predecessor boards about teams sandbagging their way into D2 and then running the table. I think that the simple solution is that, if you make the D2 finals, you've demonstrated the success of your Program - from youth through HS Varsity - and you now qualify for a D1 schedule the next year. If your team ends up in the bottom decile of D1, for 2 seasons running, you get demoted to D2. This means that winning your Semi in D2 has earned you a ticket to the big leagues. This clarifies that D2 is the developmental league, and D1 is the meaningful league as far as championships go.

Reasonable minds can differ, of course. :D
I think his bigger complaint was of top schools entering teams in both divisions, not schools sandbagging themselves into D2. This promotion solution doesn't really address that. A team like Highland Park already has a dominant D1 team. What do you do if they then also field a D2 team and that team wins D2 (this sort of thing is the real situation that most Texas fans seem to be bothered by)? You can't "promote" the school to D1, it is already there! You could say none of the kids on the team that won D2 can play in D2 the next year but the vast majority wouldn't be anyway and there will be another wave coming in. I have yet to see any sane argument about why a school should be allowed to field two varsity teams in different divisions that can both compete for a state title, this simply isn't done in high school sports. Someone mentioned Brunswick up here in West-1. They indeed have a Brunswick II team which is between the JV and their varsity. As I understand it it is mostly upperclass kids, a number of whom actually go on to play in college (when your varsity has, literally, 20 D1 commits at a time on the roster you can be a pretty darn good, recruited even player and not sniff a varsity uni). This team plays a full varsity schedule, primarily against the varsity West-2 teams and finishes near, though not always at, the top of the league. HOWEVER, they are not competing against public schools and they are not competing in any sort of tournament or for a state title. This is the critical difference. If the few Texas powerhouses want to field a team of upperclassmen who will not make varsity and let them play other varsity teams to experience quality competition and maybe even attract attention for lower level college ball, have at it. In no way though should they be able to enter the post-season tournament. I expect SWR has a JV team that could beat many (though certainly not all) Class D varsity lax teams. I suspect everyone in NY would think it insane if they proposed entering a team in D composed of juniors and seniors who couldn't make varsity while also entering their varsity in C. That is the actual analogy here.
User avatar
HooDat
Posts: 2372
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:26 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by HooDat »

pcowlax wrote: Tue Nov 26, 2019 12:22 pm That is the actual analogy here.
maybe the best take on the situation in Texas re D2 I have seen. Well said.....
STILL somewhere back in the day....

...and waiting/hoping for a tinfoil hat emoji......
Laxxal22
Posts: 1213
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 4:58 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by Laxxal22 »

That does seem a very apt analogy the more I start to understand how it works down in TX.

I mentioned Brunswick just to point out that with a Varsity B some powerhouses have found a middle ground between a 50-man varsity roster and making some pretty good players play JV. While I stand by the notion that these schools should field two teams if they have the numbers (#GrowTheGame), limiting playoff eligibility to just the D1 team is smart.
TXLaxCO_OP
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:25 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by TXLaxCO_OP »

pcowlax wrote: Tue Nov 26, 2019 12:22 pm
3rdPersonPlural wrote: Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:00 am
TXLaxCO_OP wrote: Fri Nov 22, 2019 12:01 pm You guys suggesting that we end the D2 championship are assuming that everyone is on a level playing field. Some high schools are much bigger than others, and our league is allowing some programs to pull from up to 10 high schools. Frisco ISD has 20,000 HS students. Compare that to a program that draws from a single 5A school of 2000. Allen HS and the Plano Programs all have like 6000 High school kids to pull from.

How can we assume programs who draw from 2000 kids should compete with programs who draw from 3 to 10 times as many kids? It's okay to have multiple championships as long as everyone grouped with like-sized schools. Nobody is going to assume that a 4A football team should compete with a 6A football team. No one looks down on the 5A state championships.
I see your point, but more kids in a district does not equate to more quality lacrosse players. The Southern Section of Californias CIF oversees 1.9 million kids. Long Island New York has 476,000. No one is surprised that there are more elite players from Long Island than from greater LA.

Shoreham Wading River is Class C in NYSPHAA, which means less than 589 students. Yes, their lacrosse team would beat a team drawn from Friscos 10,000 candidates. The difference is the lacrosse culture which starts at the youth rec level and bubbles up from there. The success of the local HS team is merely a conclusion of the Programs success.

Over the years, I've seen Texas Lax supporters complaining on these and the predecessor boards about teams sandbagging their way into D2 and then running the table. I think that the simple solution is that, if you make the D2 finals, you've demonstrated the success of your Program - from youth through HS Varsity - and you now qualify for a D1 schedule the next year. If your team ends up in the bottom decile of D1, for 2 seasons running, you get demoted to D2. This means that winning your Semi in D2 has earned you a ticket to the big leagues. This clarifies that D2 is the developmental league, and D1 is the meaningful league as far as championships go.

Reasonable minds can differ, of course. :D
I think his bigger complaint was of top schools entering teams in both divisions, not schools sandbagging themselves into D2. This promotion solution doesn't really address that. A team like Highland Park already has a dominant D1 team. What do you do if they then also field a D2 team and that team wins D2 (this sort of thing is the real situation that most Texas fans seem to be bothered by)? You can't "promote" the school to D1, it is already there! You could say none of the kids on the team that won D2 can play in D2 the next year but the vast majority wouldn't be anyway and there will be another wave coming in. I have yet to see any sane argument about why a school should be allowed to field two varsity teams in different divisions that can both compete for a state title, this simply isn't done in high school sports. Someone mentioned Brunswick up here in West-1. They indeed have a Brunswick II team which is between the JV and their varsity. As I understand it it is mostly upperclass kids, a number of whom actually go on to play in college (when your varsity has, literally, 20 D1 commits at a time on the roster you can be a pretty darn good, recruited even player and not sniff a varsity uni). This team plays a full varsity schedule, primarily against the varsity West-2 teams and finishes near, though not always at, the top of the league. HOWEVER, they are not competing against public schools and they are not competing in any sort of tournament or for a state title. This is the critical difference. If the few Texas powerhouses want to field a team of upperclassmen who will not make varsity and let them play other varsity teams to experience quality competition and maybe even attract attention for lower level college ball, have at it. In no way though should they be able to enter the post-season tournament. I expect SWR has a JV team that could beat many (though certainly not all) Class D varsity lax teams. I suspect everyone in NY would think it insane if they proposed entering a team in D composed of juniors and seniors who couldn't make varsity while also entering their varsity in C. That is the actual analogy here.
Completely on the same page with you on all of this, and your analogy is one I have been searching for within the lacrosse world, so thank you! I am a native down here, and every time I try to compare our situation to a sanctioned sport like football, I immediately get the rebuttal of "well we aren't football."
ghostofstblax
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:46 pm

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by ghostofstblax »

washedupobserver wrote: Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:52 am So I take it Jesuit is adding a D2 team...good for them.
Jesuit could have had a D2 team in prior years, but didn't. Also, although they are the only "Private" with a D2 team they play by and within the UIL with the publics and wouldn't risk their UIL status for Lax. They also don't have the PG model that the NE Privates do.
hooligan88
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 11:38 am

Re: Should 1 Program be Able to Compete in Multiple Divisions?

Post by hooligan88 »

I am glad teams can have multiple varsity teams, so maybe they do another classification for the 2nd varsity teams without playing the smaller schools. It is messed up. My kid played for a one school team. and we played Frisco (12 schools), and Mckinney (3 schools), Keller (3 schools). It seems some do not really want to grow the game but rather please the big programs. HP, ESD, Southlake and Jesuit run the DFW area. If they don't like it, it aint gonna happen.
Post Reply

Return to “HS BOYS LACROSSE”