Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:There should be no publics in any lacrosse rankings. Even the top ones aren’t even close to the middle of the pack privates.
Oh so true. It’s a transparent ploy to try and be egalitarian no matter the utter ignorance of accuracy. Can’t have the public school parents upset after all, even at the expense of reality. Yorktown would be unlikely to even place in the AA tier of the ISL and would rank at the bottom of the WCAC.
Sounds like it's the clueless private school parents who are upset that a public had the temerity to be mentioned in the same local poll. And through no fault of coach Kim, Yorktown would be the best team in the DMV if the strongest players in her school district didn't decamp to the privates.
And people who actually follow the sport look to USA Lacrosse, Inside lacrosse, or other sources for more accurate polling; no one cares about the WaPo polls except for the aged out mean girls on this site. .
None of those polls do DC-area lists so that doesn’t make any sense.
Neither does your point about how Yorktown would be a top DMV team if players were forced to live in some dystopian school system where kids are required to attend a designated school … Yikes. (For kicks, without naming names, please share what privates these elite impact Yorktown-districted players have ”defected.”)
You’ve offered no argument to contest the point that Yorktown shouldn’t be ranked. It sorta sounds like you actually agree.
Currently there are girls from the Yorktown district playing for Visi, SSSA, Potomac, SR, and I think SJC. Take those girls from the privates and those teams would be weakened while Yorktown is strengthened. Despite annually losing talent to the privates, Yorktown has been crushing the public opposition this year.
And it seems petty for people to be upset that the WaPo has them ranked...so what if a team having a good year gets a shout out?