Is Lacrosse an "Aristocrat Sport?"

[coda]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

[Typical Lax Dad]

Football seems like one sport that could stay non-aristocratic for awhile, but I'm just basing that on it being a school sponsored sport, so most kids have roughly equal access to football training hours. A quality Football culture can be established at poor High Schools. I don't know the college football camp landscape, but my impression is that college programs want the best players possible at their camps, and those kids paying for the camp is less important than their ability.

It seems like soccer culture is bigger among immigrants to the US than it is among the rich. I don't know the youth soccer system that the best immigrant players are in to say if it's changing like lacrosse is.

Many of the best youth soccer clubs are in affluent communities. USSF has been making a big push to try to expand its reach without a lot of success. California and Texas may do a good job of attracting players from immigrant families. Immigration status of parents / grandparents may have been one impediment and time/travel commitment is another. Soccer pretty much needs to appeal to stay at home moms as someone has to drive the player to and from practice or watch the siblings while the player is shuttled around. We were knee deep into soccer. Somethings I liked much better than lacrosse….more of a meritocracy and getting better was more important than getting recruited.

Isn't soccer a winter sport in Texas HSs, though I'm sure there are year round travel teams.

I am referring primarily to club teams. In some States, Soccer is a Spring sport.

[1766]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

Certainly a great counterpoint to that argument. Throughout Canada I would also think it's less of a sport played by Summers' classification.

[Typical Lax Dad]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

There are exceptions.

[jhu06]

luce puts lacrosse in the same class as sailing and rowing. I'm not sure it is and the rowers at Hopkins when I was there were a lot of kids from public schools or less elite regional private schools that had the sport. A few of them were in the band in mid aughts pictures you see from time to time. When I was at Hopkins I never thought the mens lacrosse group was any different socio economic wise from the rest of the student body and I never heard of any issues with them on that front. Racially yes, but Hopkins has different demographics than most schools because of the engineering and medical focuses. Watson, Schwartzman, Harrison, they carried themselves like great people who also happened to be lacrosse stars. The women's lacrosse group I thought worked to set themselves apart. Unlike the other womens teams they weren't in sororities, they weren't in a lot of student organizations, basically invisible except at Pjs the lacrosse bar now gone.

[palaxoff]

I find it ironic that the former head of Harvard is talking about Aristocracy between the millions Harvard makes off its endowments, the high tuition barrier, and the pristine campus in Boston, it is a nice little kingdom. I am not sure how 50 kids out of 8000 are the issue.

On my short time on this planet, it seems that animals are always going to get the resources to help the next generation along, for example migration its called life. I don't understand the stigma being attached to having the resources to help the next generation of humans.

In terms of legacy the admin sure doesn't seem to mind collecting those big donations checks.

[44WeWantMore]

The main point about the non-racist admissions policies is how much the academic standards are relaxed for athletes, legacies, and donors.

Athletes: As we saw in the lies Stanford told (and the media spread) a couple of years ago, most (all?) of the sports targeted for elimination were precisely those where the the median numbers were certainly in the 25-75 percentile (and probably above 50). Until somebody starts talking about eliminating Football and Basketball, any purported concern about academics should be greeted with laughter.

Legacies: While I am willing to believe that Legacies at the Ivies might be below the 50 percentile, I saw a broader statistic indicating that legacies were above the 50 percentile when a larger sample is used. A Philadelphia story that might illustrate a dynamic. Father is the first in his family to go to college at St. Joe's. Makes good, and his son wants to go to Villanova, but dad says, "You don't need to hang with those main-liners; go to St. Joe's like I did". So a few over-qualified balance a few under-qualified. Obviously that kind of story does not apply to the Ivies, which is presumably Larry Summers's focus

Donors: There cannot be that many of them that are unqualified. I know a wealthy guy, maybe like FFG's father-in-law. Son is applying to a highly-competitive (but not Ivy) school. He was given to understand that seven figures would get his son a second look if his academic numbers are over the 50 percentile and his extracurriculars were typical for that school. My understanding was that it would take 8 figures for something approaching a guarantee for a well-qualified student, or for a second look had the son been under the 50 percentile. Again, Larry Summers's focus is on the Ivies, so for donors, I would take my seven figures for a second look for a well-qualified applicant and make it eight. Maybe nine for a guarantee, or for a second look for an applicant under the 50 percentile.

[coda]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

There are exceptions.

Its a native American game and heavily played in Canada. Go to a Junior B game and see how aristocratic the fans are. While people tend to associate it with schools on LI and private schools in Maryland, there are plenty of middle class schools in playing Lacrosse in upstate NY and Maryland also. I certainly would not put it on par with rowing.

[Farfromgeneva]

The main point about the non-racist admissions policies is how much the academic standards are relaxed for athletes, legacies, and donors.

Athletes: As we saw in the lies Stanford told (and the media spread) a couple of years ago, most (all?) of the sports targeted for elimination were precisely those where the the median numbers were certainly in the 25-75 percentile (and probably above 50). Until somebody starts talking about eliminating Football and Basketball, any purported concern about academics should be greeted with laughter.

Legacies: While I am willing to believe that Legacies at the Ivies might be below the 50 percentile, I saw a broader statistic indicating that legacies were above the 50 percentile when a larger sample is used. A Philadelphia story that might illustrate a dynamic. Father is the first in his family to go to college at St. Joe's. Makes good, and his son wants to go to Villanova, but dad says, "You don't need to hang with those main-liners; go to St. Joe's like I did". So a few over-qualified balance a few under-qualified. Obviously that kind of story does not apply to the Ivies, which is presumably Larry Summers's focus

Donors: There cannot be that many of them that are unqualified. I know a wealthy guy, maybe like FFG's father-in-law. Son is applying to a highly-competitive (but not Ivy) school. He was given to understand that seven figures would get his son a second look if his academic numbers are over the 50 percentile and his extracurriculars were typical for that school. My understanding was that it would take 8 figures for something approaching a guarantee for a well-qualified student, or for a second look had the son been under the 50 percentile. Again, Larry Summers's focus is on the Ivies, so for donors, I would take my seven figures for a second look for a well-qualified applicant and make it eight. Maybe nine for a guarantee, or for a second look for an applicant under the 50 percentile.

But if it’s not donors, legacies or athletes who’s the 25-50th percentile then?

[JaxsonGrey68]

Edward Luce in the Financial Times today lists lacrosse as one of three sports only available to people of privilege. There certainly seems to be an image problem. Mr Luce receives much of his oped input from sources in Washington DC.
[I am pretty sure Mr Luce would not know the difference between a middie and an attackman, but he is absolutely correct. And for anyone to say he isn't is kidding themselves.

If you take the averages and say your child starts playing in grade school and then progresses to where in middle school they start to play town travel and then club ball you are probably talking about 7 years at anywhere from 4-8k per year. Then add in all the travel, hotels, showcases, prospect days and by the time their junior year is over you are close to $40-50k. Been there done that! And if like many of us you have multiple kids, cmon, how can you not say that Lacrosse is an upper class/1% sport.

[Wheels]

Edward Luce in the Financial Times today lists lacrosse as one of three sports only available to people of privilege. There certainly seems to be an image problem. Mr Luce receives much of his oped input from sources in Washington DC.
[I am pretty sure Mr Luce would not know the difference between a middie and an attackman, but he is absolutely correct. And for anyone to say he isn't is kidding themselves.

If you take the averages and say your child starts playing in grade school and then progresses to where in middle school they start to play town travel and then club ball you are probably talking about 7 years at anywhere from 4-8k per year. Then add in all the travel, hotels, showcases, prospect days and by the time their junior year is over you are close to $40-50k. Been there done that! And if like many of us you have multiple kids, cmon, how can you not say that Lacrosse is an upper class/1% sport.

Outside of football, where schools and programs provide the equipment for its players, in what sport does the same thing not happen? Even with some parts of football - like 7-on-7 passing leagues - have upfront costs and massive travel costs. Literally, nearly every sport in America has a pay to play aspect.

Field hockey, which men don't play in the US but do everywhere else in world, would fit the $40-50K number referenced above over the same time period. AAU basketball teams often charge a pretty penny for its players despite many of those programs still receiving sponsorship money. The travel costs for AAU basketball are really high. I serve on a local youth athletic board for the town where I live. The town sponsors several rec-level sports that carry $120-150 "fees" per player. The town, though, also sponsors travel teams for soccer and baseball. The fees for those teams run $2,500 per player, which is a bargain compared to other travel teams.

Aristocratic, at least to me, denotes something more than just costs. The youth sports industry in the US is a massive business. That's what happens in a capitalist society. Aristocracy means that things get passed down as part of a legacy. How many pro football players have their children play in college? Henry Hasslebeck just committed to play football at Michigan State after verbally committing to Maryland for lacrosse. At 6-2, 165 pounds, his name and his father's (and uncle's) legacy certainly added some weight to his slender frame. For both sports.

Bronny James by all accounts is a good basketball player, but every scouting report on him suggests his name got him high-major offers because his athletic ability is mid-major.

Many Ivy League schools have been running de facto affirmative action programs for white males for several years now due to the fact the white males are entering college at lower rates and dropping out at higher rates compared to other demographic groups. If you're committed to diversity, then white men have a place in that diversity. Perhaps Larry is really alluding to many of those white men being admitted as "legacy" admits for sports because either they don't meet normal admission requirements OR because some schools are really struggling at recruiting and retaining white men.

[44WeWantMore]

The main point about the non-racist admissions policies is how much the academic standards are relaxed for athletes, legacies, and donors.

Athletes: As we saw in the lies Stanford told (and the media spread) a couple of years ago, most (all?) of the sports targeted for elimination were precisely those where the the median numbers were certainly in the 25-75 percentile (and probably above 50). Until somebody starts talking about eliminating Football and Basketball, any purported concern about academics should be greeted with laughter.

Legacies: While I am willing to believe that Legacies at the Ivies might be below the 50 percentile, I saw a broader statistic indicating that legacies were above the 50 percentile when a larger sample is used. A Philadelphia story that might illustrate a dynamic. Father is the first in his family to go to college at St. Joe's. Makes good, and his son wants to go to Villanova, but dad says, "You don't need to hang with those main-liners; go to St. Joe's like I did". So a few over-qualified balance a few under-qualified. Obviously that kind of story does not apply to the Ivies, which is presumably Larry Summers's focus

Donors: There cannot be that many of them that are unqualified. I know a wealthy guy, maybe like FFG's father-in-law. Son is applying to a highly-competitive (but not Ivy) school. He was given to understand that seven figures would get his son a second look if his academic numbers are over the 50 percentile and his extracurriculars were typical for that school. My understanding was that it would take 8 figures for something approaching a guarantee for a well-qualified student, or for a second look had the son been under the 50 percentile. Again, Larry Summers's focus is on the Ivies, so for donors, I would take my seven figures for a second look for a well-qualified applicant and make it eight. Maybe nine for a guarantee, or for a second look for an applicant under the 50 percentile.

But if it’s not donors, legacies or athletes who’s the 25-50th percentile then?

Donors: You can ask your Father-in-Law: For seven figures, could he guarantee admission for a 25-50 percentile? Or just a promise to take a second look?
Legacies: Again, on average, outside the Ivies (for my purposes I am including Stanford), the data shows that the average legacies are better qualified than the average student. Since I cannot find the article, I assume average meant median.
Athletes: You know Georgia Tech. Is it the Women's Squash Team, the Men's Fencing Team, or the Football and Basketball teams?

[Typical Lax Dad]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

There are exceptions.

Its a native American game and heavily played in Canada. Go to a Junior B game and see how aristocratic the fans are. While people tend to associate it with schools on LI and private schools in Maryland, there are plenty of middle class schools in playing Lacrosse in upstate NY and Maryland also. I certainly would not put it on par with rowing.

Those are exceptions. Maryland and LI have a Long history of lacrosse. PAL ran lacrosse on LI in the old days. I have worked in the past with a program in a tough urban market. Those are exceptions. Friend’s son is playing Ontario Junior A this summer, BTW. Another friend’s son played BC Junior A last summer…..

[coda]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

There are exceptions.

Its a native American game and heavily played in Canada. Go to a Junior B game and see how aristocratic the fans are. While people tend to associate it with schools on LI and private schools in Maryland, there are plenty of middle class schools in playing Lacrosse in upstate NY and Maryland also. I certainly would not put it on par with rowing.

Those are exceptions. Maryland and LI have a Long history of lacrosse. PAL ran lacrosse on LI in the old days. I have worked in the past with a program in a tough urban market. Those are exceptions. Friend’s son is playing Ontario Junior A this summer, BTW. Another friend’s son played BC Junior A last summer…..

So the areas that represent the largest population of lacrosse players are the exception (like the entire state of NY)? I have no issue saying it is generally an upper middle class sport, but lets not confuse lacrosse with country club sports.

[ohmilax34]

Edward Luce in the Financial Times today lists lacrosse as one of three sports only available to people of privilege. There certainly seems to be an image problem. Mr Luce receives much of his oped input from sources in Washington DC.

[I am pretty sure Mr Luce would not know the difference between a middie and an attackman, but he is absolutely correct. And for anyone to say he isn't is kidding themselves.

If you take the averages and say your child starts playing in grade school and then progresses to where in middle school they start to play town travel and then club ball you are probably talking about 7 years at anywhere from 4-8k per year. Then add in all the travel, hotels, showcases, prospect days and by the time their junior year is over you are close to $40-50k. Been there done that! And if like many of us you have multiple kids, cmon, how can you not say that Lacrosse is an upper class/1% sport.

Outside of football, where schools and programs provide the equipment for its players, in what sport does the same thing not happen? Even with some parts of football - like 7-on-7 passing leagues - have upfront costs and massive travel costs. Literally, nearly every sport in America has a pay to play aspect.

Field hockey, which men don't play in the US but do everywhere else in world, would fit the $40-50K number referenced above over the same time period. AAU basketball teams often charge a pretty penny for its players despite many of those programs still receiving sponsorship money. The travel costs for AAU basketball are really high. I serve on a local youth athletic board for the town where I live. The town sponsors several rec-level sports that carry $120-150 "fees" per player. The town, though, also sponsors travel teams for soccer and baseball. The fees for those teams run $2,500 per player, which is a bargain compared to other travel teams.

Aristocratic, at least to me, denotes something more than just costs. The youth sports industry in the US is a massive business. That's what happens in a capitalist society. Aristocracy means that things get passed down as part of a legacy. How many pro football players have their children play in college? Henry Hasslebeck just committed to play football at Michigan State after verbally committing to Maryland for lacrosse. At 6-2, 165 pounds, his name and his father's (and uncle's) legacy certainly added some weight to his slender frame. For both sports.

Bronny James by all accounts is a good basketball player, but every scouting report on him suggests his name got him high-major offers because his athletic ability is mid-major.

Many Ivy League schools have been running de facto affirmative action programs for white males for several years now due to the fact the white males are entering college at lower rates and dropping out at higher rates compared to other demographic groups. If you're committed to diversity, then white men have a place in that diversity. Perhaps Larry is really alluding to many of those white men being admitted as "legacy" admits for sports because either they don't meet normal admission requirements OR because some schools are really struggling at recruiting and retaining white men.

I think I fixed the quoting, but you can correct me if I'm wrong.

There are at least some sports where you don't have to spend a lot of money to get really good/get recruited. Lacrosse is one of them. Look at the Haudenosaunee. Soccer is obviously another. Look at the rest of the world. Do you (not necessarily you, Wheels) think kids growing up in Brazil are getting good because they travel to play the best competition and pay for the best coaches? Basketball is another. There are plenty of poor kids getting good at basketball by playing for free on an outdoor court or a school or YMCA court and playing High School basketball and getting recruited. Football is another.

But people want to make money so they create programs that are pay to play and probably don't take the best interest of the kid and family into much account. Sure, the kids might get better, but they didn't NEED the program to get better. Parents want their kid playing for the "best" club team playing "travel" soccer at 8 years old. It's not necessary. I don't think we should pretend like families have to take on huge costs to get better and get recruited, at least not in the sports I mentioned, because it's possible to not have to pay much and still get better and recruited.

Maybe aristocratic means (and maybe we need to ignore that term) that there is NO WAY to even participate in the sport unless you pay a lot of money. Polo would be one. Curling is probably another.

[Typical Lax Dad]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

There are exceptions.

Its a native American game and heavily played in Canada. Go to a Junior B game and see how aristocratic the fans are. While people tend to associate it with schools on LI and private schools in Maryland, there are plenty of middle class schools in playing Lacrosse in upstate NY and Maryland also. I certainly would not put it on par with rowing.

Those are exceptions. Maryland and LI have a Long history of lacrosse. PAL ran lacrosse on LI in the old days. I have worked in the past with a program in a tough urban market. Those are exceptions. Friend’s son is playing Ontario Junior A this summer, BTW. Another friend’s son played BC Junior A last summer…..

So the areas that represent the largest population of lacrosse players are the exception (like the entire state of NY)? I have no issue saying it is generally an upper middle class sport, but lets not confuse lacrosse with country club sports.

So are saying that across NYS and Maryland, lacrosse is played primarily in working class communities? Not sure anyone said lacrosse is a country club sport such as tennis, golf, polo or possibly squash.

[ohmilax34]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

There are exceptions.

Its a native American game and heavily played in Canada. Go to a Junior B game and see how aristocratic the fans are. While people tend to associate it with schools on LI and private schools in Maryland, there are plenty of middle class schools in playing Lacrosse in upstate NY and Maryland also. I certainly would not put it on par with rowing.

Those are exceptions. Maryland and LI have a Long history of lacrosse. PAL ran lacrosse on LI in the old days. I have worked in the past with a program in a tough urban market. Those are exceptions. Friend’s son is playing Ontario Junior A this summer, BTW. Another friend’s son played BC Junior A last summer…..

So the areas that represent the largest population of lacrosse players are the exception (like the entire state of NY)? I have no issue saying it is generally an upper middle class sport, but lets not confuse lacrosse with country club sports.

So are saying that across NYS and Maryland, lacrosse is played primarily in working class communities? Not sure anyone said lacrosse is a country club sport such as tennis, golf, polo or possibly squash.

He used the term "middle class" a few posts ago, which I bolded and underlined. These conversations might be aided by definitions of these things, or examples.

[Kismet]

Cannot remember the last time Larry Summers was right

BINGO!
His streak remains intact.

No idea why some treat him like some sort of icon. He is very ordinary IMHO

[Farfromgeneva]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

There are exceptions.

Its a native American game and heavily played in Canada. Go to a Junior B game and see how aristocratic the fans are. While people tend to associate it with schools on LI and private schools in Maryland, there are plenty of middle class schools in playing Lacrosse in upstate NY and Maryland also. I certainly would not put it on par with rowing.

Those are exceptions. Maryland and LI have a Long history of lacrosse. PAL ran lacrosse on LI in the old days. I have worked in the past with a program in a tough urban market. Those are exceptions. Friend’s son is playing Ontario Junior A this summer, BTW. Another friend’s son played BC Junior A last summer…..

So the areas that represent the largest population of lacrosse players are the exception (like the entire state of NY)? I have no issue saying it is generally an upper middle class sport, but lets not confuse lacrosse with country club sports.

So are saying that across NYS and Maryland, lacrosse is played primarily in working class communities? Not sure anyone said lacrosse is a country club sport such as tennis, golf, polo or possibly squash.

He used the term "middle class" a few posts ago, which I bolded and underlined. These conversations might be aided by definitions of these things, or examples.

Interestingly I think the decline in population and economic issues with CNY/WNY correlate to the general perceived decline of HS lacrosse in those areas. Cue someone pointing out a Victor or J-D/BVille, but section 4 is basically dead compared with the Elmira/Corning region 20-30yrs ago. Same with the browsers Syracuse and Roch areas. I see some green shoots in the Buffalo region economically but otherwise there’s a correlation there that’s fairly obvious to folks who know upstate NY beyond Middletown.

[coda]

This choice of words by former Harvard President Summers was troubling. More so in that it was tied to legacy admissions. Lacrosse certainly has an image of being an upper middle class sport, although there is plenty of evidence that this image is a debatable one.

Specifically to Harvard, they reported that 15 percent of their class was legacies. This is about 300 students in a class of approximately 2000. I understand that Cornell is approximately the same as a percentage.

There seem to be a lot of lacrosse athletes in the NCAA who were encouraged by their parents to take up lacrosse, and an attack on legacy admissions (which is already being materially phased out) could impact lacrosse recruiting if a legacy is part of the process.

As someone who has taken his kid to play at 6 nations, I am not sure it is accurate to call it aristocratic. I have to admit that I did not see Larry Summers there

There are exceptions.

Its a native American game and heavily played in Canada. Go to a Junior B game and see how aristocratic the fans are. While people tend to associate it with schools on LI and private schools in Maryland, there are plenty of middle class schools in playing Lacrosse in upstate NY and Maryland also. I certainly would not put it on par with rowing.

Those are exceptions. Maryland and LI have a Long history of lacrosse. PAL ran lacrosse on LI in the old days. I have worked in the past with a program in a tough urban market. Those are exceptions. Friend’s son is playing Ontario Junior A this summer, BTW. Another friend’s son played BC Junior A last summer…..

So the areas that represent the largest population of lacrosse players are the exception (like the entire state of NY)? I have no issue saying it is generally an upper middle class sport, but lets not confuse lacrosse with country club sports.

So are saying that across NYS and Maryland, lacrosse is played primarily in working class communities? Not sure anyone said lacrosse is a country club sport such as tennis, golf, polo or possibly squash.

aristocratic sport and country club sport are pretty much synonyms. I honestly do not know the socio-economic breakdown of participation in lacrosse across those states, I would bet neither does the author. That is kind of the point. The author and you are making a massive assumptions. They are 1509 registered lacrosse teams in Canada. While the highest level of lacrosse is found in private schools in NY, I would bet there are more teams in NY playing in middle class areas than wealthy. This is kind of a survivor bias situation. We are all aware of the successful programs, but there are tons of teams that dont make the polls or win state championships that people are not accounting for in this discussion.