Lots of these girls….

D1 Womens Lacrosse
Post Reply
ProudPapa
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:57 am

Lots of these girls….

Post by ProudPapa »

…Have celebrated 3 Senior Days. Hope we get back to 4 years and done normalcy.
Hello
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2024 9:20 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by Hello »

Just look at all the grad students on the IWLCA AA list...
spidey44
Posts: 420
Joined: Mon Sep 25, 2023 7:44 am

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by spidey44 »

We'll be back to normal 5th year redshirts after this year. No more covid eligibility...
ProudPapa
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2019 7:57 am

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by ProudPapa »

It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
Madlax59
Posts: 550
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2022 2:54 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by Madlax59 »

ProudPapa wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:13 am It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
Some of these record holders only played 4 years plus 7 games .
LaxDadMax
Posts: 628
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2023 9:52 am

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by LaxDadMax »

Madlax59 wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:20 am
ProudPapa wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:13 am It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
Some of these record holders only played 4 years plus 7 games .
They should still have an asterisk then. Unfair comparison for future players.
njbill
Posts: 7016
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:35 am

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by njbill »

ProudPapa wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:13 am It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
I assume you are talking about Izzy. She played four full seasons plus 7 games in 2020.

I certainly agree that in retrospect, granting the extra Covid year was a mistake, but that is water under the bridge at this point. And after this year, we are basically done with the Covid players, except for a few stragglers (injuries plus D3 to D1 (not many of those)).
hsllax
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 5:56 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by hsllax »

Look at Scane’s number of games played. Totally in line with a 4 year player on a team that makes deep conference and NCAA runs. You can make an argument for 2 more years to understand the game but I also think a lot of you underestimate the physical toll of being an elite D1 attacker. It’s pretty brutal on you body vs. a fresh 18 year old with out 5 more years of pounding.
wlaxphan20
Posts: 1781
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:23 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by wlaxphan20 »

ProudPapa wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:13 am It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
LaxDadMax wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:22 am They should still have an asterisk then. Unfair comparison for future players.

This topic was discussed a season or so ago. The idea that the extra COVID year is giving players an advantage in record-breaking is a fantasy. If you look at the total number of games played, they are well within the normal range for other athletes in the record books that had standard 4-year careers. Scane will play in 84 career games. Megan Whittle played in 90, TC played in 92, and Kayla Treanor played in 94. Additionally, the past several years we have seen players who have now played their entire careers in the shot-clock era. More possessions, draws, and changes of possessions = more stats all around.
hsllax
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu May 02, 2019 5:56 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by hsllax »

Look at Scane’s number of games played. Totally in line with a 4 year player on a team that makes deep conference and NCAA runs. You can make an argument for 2 more years to understand the game but I also think a lot of you underestimate the physical toll of being an elite D1 attacker. It’s pretty brutal on you body vs. a fresh 18 year old with out 5 more years of pounding. I think there’s less of an advantage to 6 years (and again 4 seasons playing plus 1 major lower body injury).
ultravisitor
Posts: 308
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2022 2:18 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by ultravisitor »

LaxDadMax wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:22 am
Madlax59 wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:20 am
ProudPapa wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:13 am It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
Some of these record holders only played 4 years plus 7 games .
They should still have an asterisk then. Unfair comparison for future players.
Right. Everyone needs to be aware that Izzy Scane really wasn’t that good.
Womenslaxxfan
Posts: 443
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2023 5:34 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by Womenslaxxfan »

ultravisitor wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 1:03 pm
LaxDadMax wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:22 am
Madlax59 wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:20 am
ProudPapa wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:13 am It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
Some of these record holders only played 4 years plus 7 games .
They should still have an asterisk then. Unfair comparison for future players.
Right. Everyone needs to be aware that Izzy Scane really wasn’t that good.
The cat is out of the bag. Move on. No asterisks will be given. I’m so glad that starting next year we won’t have to hear from club coaches and parents who didn’t like the Covid year decision.
ultravisitor
Posts: 308
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2022 2:18 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by ultravisitor »

Womenslaxxfan wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 1:08 pm
ultravisitor wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 1:03 pm
LaxDadMax wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:22 am
Madlax59 wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:20 am
ProudPapa wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:13 am It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
Some of these record holders only played 4 years plus 7 games .
They should still have an asterisk then. Unfair comparison for future players.
Right. Everyone needs to be aware that Izzy Scane really wasn’t that good.
The cat is out of the bag. Move on. No asterisks will be given. I’m so glad that starting next year we won’t have to hear from club coaches and parents who didn’t like the Covid year decision.
I hope you realize that I was joking. Izzy Scane really is that good.

I don't even see the point about complaining about the COVID year. If someone is mad that their daughter isn't playing enough because of the older team members, I mean...their daughter still might not be playing much even if the COVID year wasn't given.
Womenslaxxfan
Posts: 443
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2023 5:34 pm

Re: Lots of these girls….

Post by Womenslaxxfan »

ultravisitor wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 1:18 pm
Womenslaxxfan wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 1:08 pm
ultravisitor wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 1:03 pm
LaxDadMax wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:22 am
Madlax59 wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:20 am
ProudPapa wrote: Sat May 25, 2024 9:13 am It’s too bad that so many career records (NCAA and individual schools) will be held by girls that played 6 years
Some of these record holders only played 4 years plus 7 games .
They should still have an asterisk then. Unfair comparison for future players.
Right. Everyone needs to be aware that Izzy Scane really wasn’t that good.
The cat is out of the bag. Move on. No asterisks will be given. I’m so glad that starting next year we won’t have to hear from club coaches and parents who didn’t like the Covid year decision.
I hope you realize that I was joking. Izzy Scane really is that good.

I don't even see the point about complaining about the COVID year. If someone is mad that their daughter isn't playing enough because of the older team members, I mean...their daughter still might not be playing much even if the COVID year wasn't given.
I was agreeing with your sentiment!!
Post Reply

Return to “D1 WOMENS LACROSSE”