Extra year granted

[njfanlax]

8meterPA,

I hear what you are saying. But I can't help worry, since I have a Class 2022 HS girl looking to get recruited.
Like her college peers, her varsity lacrosse season has been suspended, and I doubt it will restart. Her school has also been closed.
In general, I anticipate that both athletic and academic performance for her grade will probably drop relative to previous years.
Who knows what will happen during the summertime when colleges traditionally focus on their next wave of recruits?
Will there even be a summer HS lacrosse season? There is too much uncertainty, and it mainly falls on the Class of 2022 because they are the next group trying to get in. The 2021s are already largely through the door.
If D1 college coaches can't accurately predict this summer/fall how many players they will need in 3 years, do you expect them to give out their usual # of offers to her grade?

[Can Opener]

This is a fun discussion topic and good math exercise, but the extra year will have very little impact on rosters and recruiting. There is no brass ring in lacrosse. If you are an SEC football player, it makes sense to play a fifth year — probably tuition-free. How many parents or players want to pay an extra $60,000 to play one extra year of college lacrosse? If you are truly remarkable, options to play at a high level post-college exist. If you are not remarkable, what is the point of putting life on hold and shelling out big bucks to continue playing? For every Kenzie Kent, there are 100 other accomplished young women who are anxious to start their first job and experience life in the big city. Good for the NCAA to keep the door open, but I just don’t see many women walking through it.

[njfanlax]

This is a fun discussion topic and good math exercise, but the extra year will have very little impact on rosters and recruiting. There is no brass ring in lacrosse. If you are an SEC football player, it makes sense to play a fifth year — probably tuition-free. How many parents or players want to pay an extra $60,000 to play one extra year of college lacrosse? If you are truly remarkable, options to play at a high level post-college exist. If you are not remarkable, what is the point of putting life on hold and shelling out big bucks to continue playing? For every Kenzie Kent, there are 100 other accomplished young women who are anxious to start their first job and experience life in the big city. Good for the NCAA to keep the door open, but I just don’t see many women walking through it.

You are right. Life goes on if you don't get recruited to play lacrosse in college. Yes, it's not that big of a deal compared to the other things we are facing in life. But I disagree that it is a foregone conclusion that very few players will stay for their 5th year.

If you were a HC for a college program, wouldn't it be in your best interest to help your team win as well as maintain your own job security-

To try everything to convince the current top 2-4 seniors on your team to play another year (every year for the next 4 years that the extra year exists)? Especially when you expect others schools are doing the same exact thing to get a competitive advantage?

It is quite possible that while the extra year is in effect, many coaches will consider it more important to "recruit" their best seniors to play an extra year than recruit their next HS class. They know full well how much of a difference their best seniors will make next year. The HS recruits are an unknown. Even if it pans out, there will probably be a 4-5 year delay for that class to even begin to help the team compete.

My only purpose to post on this forum is to correct what I think is a misconception that granting an extra year to college players for the loss of this season is definitely a fair and and sensible approach. I think that if you analyze it more carefully, there could be some significant losers as a result of this change. Some people are defending the 5th year exception because they feel it is unlikely that many college players will stay the extra year. They have very good reasons why they may be right, but I think there are legitimate reasons why they could be wrong.

We’ll see.

[wlaxnut]

https://youtu.be/NVa8citnWhY

[wlaxnut]

(...just did that for comic relief)

[RedFromMI]

This is a fun discussion topic and good math exercise, but the extra year will have very little impact on rosters and recruiting. There is no brass ring in lacrosse. If you are an SEC football player, it makes sense to play a fifth year — probably tuition-free. How many parents or players want to pay an extra $60,000 to play one extra year of college lacrosse? If you are truly remarkable, options to play at a high level post-college exist. If you are not remarkable, what is the point of putting life on hold and shelling out big bucks to continue playing? For every Kenzie Kent, there are 100 other accomplished young women who are anxious to start their first job and experience life in the big city. Good for the NCAA to keep the door open, but I just don’t see many women walking through it.

You are right. Life goes on if you don't get recruited to play lacrosse in college. Yes, it's not that big of a deal compared to the other things we are facing in life. But I disagree that it is a foregone conclusion that very few players will stay for their 5th year.

If you were a HC for a college program, wouldn't it be in your best interest to help your team win as well as maintain your own job security-

To try everything to convince the current top 2-4 seniors on your team to play another year (every year for the next 4 years that the extra year exists)? Especially when you expect others schools are doing the same exact thing to get a competitive advantage?

It is quite possible that while the extra year is in effect, many coaches will consider it more important to "recruit" their best seniors to play an extra year than recruit their next HS class. They know full well how much of a difference their best seniors will make next year. The HS recruits are an unknown. Even if it pans out, there will probably be a 4-5 year delay for that class to even begin to help the team compete.

My only purpose to post on this forum is to correct what I think is a misconception that granting an extra year to college players for the loss of this season is definitely a fair and and sensible approach. I think that if you analyze it more carefully, there could be some significant losers as a result of this change. Some people are defending the 5th year exception because they feel it is unlikely that many college players will stay the extra year. They have very good reasons why they may be right, but I think there are legitimate reasons why they could be wrong.

We’ll see.

But will some of the players use the extra year to gain part of a graduate degree, or even transfer to a new program for a fifth year?

[Bart]

This is a fun discussion topic and good math exercise, but the extra year will have very little impact on rosters and recruiting. There is no brass ring in lacrosse. If you are an SEC football player, it makes sense to play a fifth year — probably tuition-free. How many parents or players want to pay an extra $60,000 to play one extra year of college lacrosse? If you are truly remarkable, options to play at a high level post-college exist. If you are not remarkable, what is the point of putting life on hold and shelling out big bucks to continue playing? For every Kenzie Kent, there are 100 other accomplished young women who are anxious to start their first job and experience life in the big city. Good for the NCAA to keep the door open, but I just don’t see many women walking through it.

You are right. Life goes on if you don't get recruited to play lacrosse in college. Yes, it's not that big of a deal compared to the other things we are facing in life. But I disagree that it is a foregone conclusion that very few players will stay for their 5th year.

If you were a HC for a college program, wouldn't it be in your best interest to help your team win as well as maintain your own job security-

To try everything to convince the current top 2-4 seniors on your team to play another year (every year for the next 4 years that the extra year exists)? Especially when you expect others schools are doing the same exact thing to get a competitive advantage?

It is quite possible that while the extra year is in effect, many coaches will consider it more important to "recruit" their best seniors to play an extra year than recruit their next HS class. They know full well how much of a difference their best seniors will make next year. The HS recruits are an unknown. Even if it pans out, there will probably be a 4-5 year delay for that class to even begin to help the team compete.

My only purpose to post on this forum is to correct what I think is a misconception that granting an extra year to college players for the loss of this season is definitely a fair and and sensible approach. I think that if you analyze it more carefully, there could be some significant losers as a result of this change. Some people are defending the 5th year exception because they feel it is unlikely that many college players will stay the extra year. They have very good reasons why they may be right, but I think there are legitimate reasons why they could be wrong.

We’ll see.

But will some of the players use the extra year to gain part of a graduate degree, or even transfer to a new program for a fifth year?

I suspect they will. I also suspect this will have an impact on the D2 ranks as these students transfer to D2 schools to take advantage of any funds there. There is at least 1 D2 school that take 5th year players on a regular basis and I would suspect adding back a year for everyone would increase the number of schools that do this.

[westcoastlax]

Most freshman classes are now 8-10 players of which only 50% typically become significant contributors. As a coach would you prefer a college player with 4 years experience that has been vetted to be a team player who can help your program or an unknown freshman.

As a player you might be able to leverage that last year of eligibility to gain acceptance into graduate school program. Similar to college, you might be able to use lacrosse to get into a better program.

[smoova]

There is no brass ring in lacrosse.

College lacrosse is the brass ring of lacrosse. Current college juniors, sophomores and freshmen have time to plan for their new 5th year. HS players in the 2022 and 2023 classes (who have also just lost a year of playing) will foot the bill for the NCAA's largess. I pray the NCAA comes to its senses.

[laxfan22]

There is no brass ring in lacrosse.

College lacrosse is the brass ring of lacrosse. Current college juniors, sophomores and freshmen have time to plan for their new 5th year. HS players in the 2022 and 2023 classes (who have also just lost a year of playing) will foot the bill for the NCAA's largess. I pray the NCAA comes to its senses.

A million times this. There is no NBA contract for girls lacrosse players, we all know that - the goal is getting into a great college or university and we may very well see the opportunity significantly reduced for girls in 2022 and 2023 classes which is simply not right.

[8meterPA]

There is no brass ring in lacrosse.

College lacrosse is the brass ring of lacrosse. Current college juniors, sophomores and freshmen have time to plan for their new 5th year. HS players in the 2022 and 2023 classes (who have also just lost a year of playing) will foot the bill for the NCAA's largess. I pray the NCAA comes to its senses.

A million times this. There is no NBA contract for girls lacrosse players, we all know that - the goal is getting into a great college or university and we may very well see the opportunity significantly reduced for girls in 2022 and 2023 classes which is simply not right.

If the goal is getting into a "great college or university" academics will do that for you, not necessarily lacrosse. Not sure if you are a 2022 or younger parent, but a lot of kids, a lot, end up at colleges that they wouldn't consider otherwise because of they look to lacrosse first, academics 2nd.

[laxfan22]

There is no brass ring in lacrosse.

College lacrosse is the brass ring of lacrosse. Current college juniors, sophomores and freshmen have time to plan for their new 5th year. HS players in the 2022 and 2023 classes (who have also just lost a year of playing) will foot the bill for the NCAA's largess. I pray the NCAA comes to its senses.

A million times this. There is no NBA contract for girls lacrosse players, we all know that - the goal is getting into a great college or university and we may very well see the opportunity significantly reduced for girls in 2022 and 2023 classes which is simply not right.

If the goal is getting into a "great college or university" academics will do that for you, not necessarily lacrosse. Not sure if you are a 2022 or younger parent, but a lot of kids, a lot, end up at colleges that they wouldn't consider otherwise because of they look to lacrosse first, academics 2nd.

I couldn't disagree with you more. You think the IVY league and Stanford/Duke/etc. - all of which rejects valedictorians,perfect ACT/SAT/GPA kids every year are putting out rosters where kids are all valedictorians with 1580's ? Of course not, they are making major academic concessions to get athletes into school. But that's another issue for another day, perhaps.

[laxagainsthumanity]

We on this forum all understand that for as much passion goes into a season, it comes at a huge physical and emotional cost. And meanwhile, real life is calling these educated, confident 22-year-olds. Most of these young women are ready to be done with college lacrosse by the time their four years come to an end. Although we often hear about the big names taking their fifth years, the overall rate of athletes in women's lacrosse who actually choose to take their fifth year is really not that high. There are TONS of kids who tear their ACLs who you never hear about, who quietly graduate with their class and move on. I think you'll see the top 1-3 kids in each class take their extra year, probably fewer from teams ranked ~30 and below. Yes, that's still a big influx when you look at it from the perspective of a 2022 parent. I absolutely recognize that, and as someone who has worked with high school athletes quite a bit and wants so so badly to see them reach their goals, I feel you, laxfan22. You definitely have a valid point, and the NCAA should take it into account when sorting out the details of how this will all work. Could we potentially see a cap on how many COVID 5th years a program is allowed to take each year?

Recruiting HS 2022s will require weighing their class size against the current sophomores, who will be 5th years when the 2022s arrive as freshmen (if I did that math right). Sure, incoming freshmen are an unknown, but so are your current kids who are still two years away from making the decision of whether to take their redshirt. Suzie Superstar can tear her ACL at any moment and may never be the same. Or she may decide she wants to go off to grad school, or go live in New York City with her friends, or follow her longtime boyfriend across the country, or be nearby an ailing family member. You can generally count on a kid staying in one place for four years of college, but you can't predict life. There are a million possible reasons to leave once a kid has her diploma. If I were a HC, I wouldn't make recruiting decisions banking on my 20-year-olds knowing what they're going to want after they graduate two years from now. If I do, I'm going to get burned.

So assume you keep 1-3 kids per class—and again, you'll probably only see that many in the top couple tiers. Roster sizes easily fluctuate by 1-3 kids year to year. Programs are always prepared for big-name transfers—BC took three this year, MD took Erica Evans last year with little notice, etc. The NCAA should grant 1-2 more scholarships IMO, and probably stipulate that they are restricted to COVID redshirts only. But even if they don't, I think most schools will be able to figure out how to absorb those costs, because they've shown an ability to do so in the past. I suppose smaller schools will likely have a harder time with that.

The real effect I see this having is competition amongst 5th years for spots at certain schools as they apply to graduate programs. Some schools are going to be much more attractive than others due to the graduate programs they have and their ability to absorb the cost of additional student-athletes. But I think that will play out more as programs saying "we have resources for three 5th years and we'll pick among those who are interested," rather than planning two years down the line to take smaller recruiting classes. I think it will almost be like a second recruiting process. I don't really expect this to change the landscape of high school recruiting.

And I pray I'm right because I have an awful lot of 2022s I'm rooting for this summer/fall, and ultimately that's probably the most important thing. I've watched these kids work so hard for years and I've been excited for them to finally reach this summer and see their efforts pay off. In trying to make an unfair situation fair, the only thing you can really do is shift the burden elsewhere. I hope that burden falls across those who are best equipped to handle it, i.e. the NCAA and the universities, and not on the young kids who have been waiting their turn for years and may now just be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[njfanlax]

NCAA Spring Sports include: baseball, beach volleyball, men’s and women’s golf, men’s and women’s lacrosse, rowing, softball, men’s and women’s tennis, men’s and women’s outdoor track and field, men’s volleyball and women’s water polo. That's 14 teams.

If an average of 2 players/team stay for their 5th year, that equals an 28 additional players/year/school - the body count equivalent of fielding an additional team every year for 4 years. To me, that sounds like a money the schools will have to spend. I assume that all NCAA schools have to absorb the cost of potentially fielding expanded rosters for 2021 and 2022 because they have already received commits for the HS Classes of 2020 and 2021. Do you think that beginning with the recruiting HS Class of 2022, colleges will try to shrink their rosters across the board (to at least pre-coronavirus team sizes) to try to offset the increased costs associated with the 5th year exemption over the final 2 years the rule is in effect?

[laxfan22]

That's all fair points and i appreciate your measured response, but no one really knows - we do know that a sophomore who plays a third of the season and unfortunately has an injury doesn't get a fifth year. So, why would a current sophomore get a fifth year for these awful events? And, again, the class of 2022 is losing an entire HS year. I really do feel for the college girls, but in particular the seniors - this was no way to end their lacrosse career. But a sophomore still has two more years of college hopefully ahead of them. I just don't think the NCAA in their rush to "make things right" even considered the impact on current high school kids. Whenever we see a new school add lacrosse, we generally are excited to see the "additional opportunity" and "growth of the sport". If even 10% of the current sophomores take a fifth year option (and assuming no correlating roster sizes, and i suspect a lot of programs are going to look to cut costs), that's akin to closing more than 10 D1 programs and, what, 30-40 D3 programs? That's a massive, massive hit. If the number goes higher than 10%, the corresponding impact is obviously even greater.

[Brownlax]

There is no brass ring in lacrosse.

College lacrosse is the brass ring of lacrosse. Current college juniors, sophomores and freshmen have time to plan for their new 5th year. HS players in the 2022 and 2023 classes (who have also just lost a year of playing) will foot the bill for the NCAA's largess. I pray the NCAA comes to its senses.

A million times this. There is no NBA contract for girls lacrosse players, we all know that - the goal is getting into a great college or university and we may very well see the opportunity significantly reduced for girls in 2022 and 2023 classes which is simply not right.

If the goal is getting into a "great college or university" academics will do that for you, not necessarily lacrosse. Not sure if you are a 2022 or younger parent, but a lot of kids, a lot, end up at colleges that they wouldn't consider otherwise because of they look to lacrosse first, academics 2nd.

I couldn't disagree with you more. You think the IVY league and Stanford/Duke/etc. - all of which rejects valedictorians,perfect ACT/SAT/GPA kids every year are putting out rosters where kids are all valedictorians with 1580's ? Of course not, they are making major academic concessions to get athletes into school. But that's another issue for another day, perhaps.

The Ivy's have something called the Academic Index which each recruiting class (as a whole) must meet in order to get admittance.

[laxagainsthumanity]

There is no brass ring in lacrosse.

College lacrosse is the brass ring of lacrosse. Current college juniors, sophomores and freshmen have time to plan for their new 5th year. HS players in the 2022 and 2023 classes (who have also just lost a year of playing) will foot the bill for the NCAA's largess. I pray the NCAA comes to its senses.

A million times this. There is no NBA contract for girls lacrosse players, we all know that - the goal is getting into a great college or university and we may very well see the opportunity significantly reduced for girls in 2022 and 2023 classes which is simply not right.

If the goal is getting into a "great college or university" academics will do that for you, not necessarily lacrosse. Not sure if you are a 2022 or younger parent, but a lot of kids, a lot, end up at colleges that they wouldn't consider otherwise because of they look to lacrosse first, academics 2nd.

I couldn't disagree with you more. You think the IVY league and Stanford/Duke/etc. - all of which rejects valedictorians,perfect ACT/SAT/GPA kids every year are putting out rosters where kids are all valedictorians with 1580's ? Of course not, they are making major academic concessions to get athletes into school. But that's another issue for another day, perhaps.

I don't want to dig too far into that comment but... Duke and Stanford both routinely earn team GPAs north of a 3.5 average, I don't think they're dumb kids.

[laxfan22]

There is no brass ring in lacrosse.

College lacrosse is the brass ring of lacrosse. Current college juniors, sophomores and freshmen have time to plan for their new 5th year. HS players in the 2022 and 2023 classes (who have also just lost a year of playing) will foot the bill for the NCAA's largess. I pray the NCAA comes to its senses.

A million times this. There is no NBA contract for girls lacrosse players, we all know that - the goal is getting into a great college or university and we may very well see the opportunity significantly reduced for girls in 2022 and 2023 classes which is simply not right.

If the goal is getting into a "great college or university" academics will do that for you, not necessarily lacrosse. Not sure if you are a 2022 or younger parent, but a lot of kids, a lot, end up at colleges that they wouldn't consider otherwise because of they look to lacrosse first, academics 2nd.

I couldn't disagree with you more. You think the IVY league and Stanford/Duke/etc. - all of which rejects valedictorians,perfect ACT/SAT/GPA kids every year are putting out rosters where kids are all valedictorians with 1580's ? Of course not, they are making major academic concessions to get athletes into school. But that's another issue for another day, perhaps.

I don't want to dig too far into that comment but... Duke and Stanford both routinely earn team GPAs north of a 3.5 average, I don't think they're dumb kids.

Of course they have smart kids, but i was referring to admissions. it is virtually impossible for a "regular" student to get admitted to the elite schools in this country. We're talking valedictorians, perfect SAT/ACT scores getting rejected. The admissions are bent for athletes - and that's fine. But you can't pretend that all these kids would be getting in if not for something else they offer, in this case, elite athletic ability (which is fine and not denigrating anyone that gets in that way). The point is that lacrosse (or soccer, tennis, etc.) is often the difference between getting admitted to an elite school and going to a different school.

[Laxhead44]

You read it here first. (OK, second. Just posted on FB.)

North Carolina will win the 2021 NCAA Division I women's lacrosse title.

Heck, their JV could win it as well.

If the entire senior class was to return (Hoeg, Wakefield, DiVietro, etc.) combined with the talent coming into the side (Caitlyn Wurzburger, Shannon Smith, Reilly Casey, Alyssa Long, Alexa Gentile, etc.), Jenny Levy is going to have one problem: finding enough lacrosse balls when they are shot over the end line and get lost under the bleachers. They are going to be, I think, the greatest offensive force since Maryland's 2001 team when Jen Adams was a senior.

Offensively, don’t forget the Jr.s Growney and Mastroianni, and the 2 sophomores Hillman and Warehime both should return from injury, ...that’s a lot of firepower.

[Lax247]

You read it here first. (OK, second. Just posted on FB.)

North Carolina will win the 2021 NCAA Division I women's lacrosse title.

Heck, their JV could win it as well.

If the entire senior class was to return (Hoeg, Wakefield, DiVietro, etc.) combined with the talent coming into the side (Caitlyn Wurzburger, Shannon Smith, Reilly Casey, Alyssa Long, Alexa Gentile, etc.), Jenny Levy is going to have one problem: finding enough lacrosse balls when they are shot over the end line and get lost under the bleachers. They are going to be, I think, the greatest offensive force since Maryland's 2001 team when Jen Adams was a senior.

Offensively, don’t forget the Jr.s Growney and Mastroianni, and the 2 sophomores Hillman and Warehime both should return from injury, ...that’s a lot of firepower.

Speaking of juniors that Ortega kid isn’t bad either...