What's the benefits/risks with keeping a player back a school year?

Benefits (athletic): player is better than he otherwise would be in that grade. That seems self-evident.

Risks (athletic): although the player is better than he otherwise would be in that grade, he's still not good enough to earn a scholly.

Here's an article from a few years ago. BTW, Mr Gerhart held all his kids back:

www.sandiegouniontribune.com/s...may10-htmlstory.html

An excerpt:

"Sociologists call it the relative age effect, or RAE.

It is a fancy way of saying that whenever children are grouped in one-year increments, those born immediately after the birthday cutoff can have mental and physical advantages compared to those born immediately before it. That the kid who is 11 years, 11 months old usually is a better pitcher in the under-12 league than the kid who just had his 11th birthday.

The older kid also gets the most playing time and often is selected to all-star or elite teams, where he is exposed to better coaching and a higher level of competition – which, of course, just makes him better. At a certain point, researchers suggest, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Most RAE research has been conducted in Europe. One of the most extensive studies, published in 2005 in the Journal of Sports Science, compiled birth dates of 2,175 players (mostly boys) from youth national soccer teams of 10 European countries. The findings: 43.4 percent were born in the first three months after the Jan. 1 cutoff date, and only 9.3 percent in the year's final three months.

The RAE, the British and Belgian researchers wrote, “may result in significant differences in performance.” Numerous studies in the U.S. and elsewhere have reached similar conclusions.

And that's just for children who are six to 12 months older. Imagine the benefits of being 18 months older, or a full two years older.

Fifteen members of USC's 108-man football roster from last season, or 14 percent, are at least a year older than their natural class. At USA Basketball's Youth Development Festival in 2007, which gathered 30 of the nation's top boys high school players, 19 were a year (and in some cases two years) older than their typical classmates."

A small sample and extremely anecdotal, but, the vast majority of kids from my son's "age group" in LL who are now Sophomores (my kid is a Freshman) are extremely mediocre players now.  They benefited from being bigger at ages 10-12 and seemingly bought into being told how good they were.  

Keep in mind we aren't in a Baseball hotbed and kids don't have to work hard to get spots on Varsity.  But being on the May through Summer side of the May 1st birthday cutoff definitely did not benefit most of the kids who in 6th Grade were competing against 5th graders.

3and2Fastball posted:

A small sample and extremely anecdotal, but, the vast majority of kids from my son's "age group" in LL who are now Sophomores (my kid is a Freshman) are extremely mediocre players now.  They benefited from being bigger at ages 10-12 and seemingly bought into being told how good they were.  

Keep in mind we aren't in a Baseball hotbed and kids don't have to work hard to get spots on Varsity.  But being on the May through Summer side of the May 1st birthday cutoff definitely did not benefit most of the kids who in 6th Grade were competing against 5th graders.

Right. But it sounds like they benefited from the relative age effect when they were on the older side (say, a May birthday in little league) but now they are suffering from the relative age effect because they are on the younger side (i.e., their parents didn't hold them back, so they are currently 15 in March of sophomore year). In other words, they would be less mediocre as freshmen than they are as sophomores.

2019Dad posted:
3and2Fastball posted:

A small sample and extremely anecdotal, but, the vast majority of kids from my son's "age group" in LL who are now Sophomores (my kid is a Freshman) are extremely mediocre players now.  They benefited from being bigger at ages 10-12 and seemingly bought into being told how good they were.  

Keep in mind we aren't in a Baseball hotbed and kids don't have to work hard to get spots on Varsity.  But being on the May through Summer side of the May 1st birthday cutoff definitely did not benefit most of the kids who in 6th Grade were competing against 5th graders.

Right. But it sounds like they benefited from the relative age effect when they were on the older side (say, a May birthday in little league) but now they are suffering from the relative age effect because they are on the younger side (i.e., their parents didn't hold them back, so they are currently 15 in March of sophomore year). In other words, they would be less mediocre as freshmen than they are as sophomores.

Perhaps.  They'd still be mediocre, but would have an extra year to make up for it.  Problem being that the work ethic might not be there.  They've gotten away with being physically bigger & stronger than their competition.   Would that continue if they were on the Freshman team?  To a degree, yes.   Which might not help them moving forwards.

Every athlete at some point or some level reaches that "light bulb" moment of realizing they need to work much much harder.  Once you are in high school, time is really slipping away when it comes to opportunities to advance.  Delaying that "light bulb" moment might not help.

 

 

BishopLeftiesDad posted:
gunner34 posted:

in Texas you have to do it 7th grade year,  UIL calendar starts in 8th grade,  you have 5 yrs to compete.   you might be able to do it and switch to a private school possibly.     I had a few friends who stayed back when I was growing up and it worked out for one of them,  Heisman trophy winner,  14 yr career in the NFL.  

Gunner,

I have an honest question and I am not trying to be snide. Do you think that having the extra year helped the player become a Heisman trophy winner? Would he have missed that opportunity if he was not held back. I understand we will never truly know, just looking for your educated guess. 

I'm sure he would have been fine,   he was a great player but small,  he started off at same high school as me also and the coaches were big how much do you lift,  how fast do you run types and that was not him still.    He went to play for his father at a smaller school and turned into quite the prolific passer who set many high school records and his younger brother broke those.   He was never a physical specimen. 

3and2Fastball posted:
2019Dad posted:
3and2Fastball posted:

A small sample and extremely anecdotal, but, the vast majority of kids from my son's "age group" in LL who are now Sophomores (my kid is a Freshman) are extremely mediocre players now.  They benefited from being bigger at ages 10-12 and seemingly bought into being told how good they were.  

Keep in mind we aren't in a Baseball hotbed and kids don't have to work hard to get spots on Varsity.  But being on the May through Summer side of the May 1st birthday cutoff definitely did not benefit most of the kids who in 6th Grade were competing against 5th graders.

Right. But it sounds like they benefited from the relative age effect when they were on the older side (say, a May birthday in little league) but now they are suffering from the relative age effect because they are on the younger side (i.e., their parents didn't hold them back, so they are currently 15 in March of sophomore year). In other words, they would be less mediocre as freshmen than they are as sophomores.

Perhaps.  They'd still be mediocre, but would have an extra year to make up for it.  Problem being that the work ethic might not be there.  They've gotten away with being physically bigger & stronger than their competition.   Would that continue if they were on the Freshman team?  To a degree, yes.   Which might not help them moving forwards.

Every athlete at some point or some level reaches that "light bulb" moment of realizing they need to work much much harder.  Once you are in high school, time is really slipping away when it comes to opportunities to advance.  Delaying that "light bulb" moment might not help.

 

 

But if you look at Nebase's hypothetical situation, you can see the difference... (Sorry don't know how to quote older posts)

From Nebase

Player 1: Late August/September birthday. Not held back 

Fresh 14 yo: 5'6 140 lbs,  78 mph 

Soph 15 yo: 5'8 150 lbs,  82 mph

Junior: 16 yo: 5'11 165 lbs,  88 mph 

Senior: 17 yo: 6'0 17 170lbs,  ???

 

Player 2: Same Birthday. Same player, just held back 

Fresh 15 yo: 5'8 150 lbs 82 mph 

Soph 16 yo: 5'11 160 lbs 88 mph 

Junior 17 yo: 6'1 170 lbs 91 mph

Senior 18 yo: 6'2 180 lbs 93 mph

 

Player 1 is a solid player but D1 schools didn't come running. He missed the P5 train and most likely a good amount of mid majors. His options would probably be lower D1/D2/D3/Juco. Will always be the youngest in his grade, kids from the grade below could even be older. He will be 16 when he starts his senior year of hs and 17 when he heads off to college unable to sign any paperwork if he ever gets sick or injured. 

Player 2 is a top player in his state. Committed to a P5/quality mid major in between his sophomore/junior year. Most likely a draft prospect of some sort. Would have been invited to Area Code, ECP, and will play with one of the better summer teams (potentially for less $). Will be the first in his class to drive, first to turn 21, etc.

I'm not pro redshirt, nor do I have many problems with it. But we all know it's for sport specific purposes 95% of the time. Compare player 1 to 2 and tell me it can't make a big difference? 

 

 

3and2Fastball posted:
2019Dad posted:
3and2Fastball posted:

A small sample and extremely anecdotal, but, the vast majority of kids from my son's "age group" in LL who are now Sophomores (my kid is a Freshman) are extremely mediocre players now.  They benefited from being bigger at ages 10-12 and seemingly bought into being told how good they were.  

Keep in mind we aren't in a Baseball hotbed and kids don't have to work hard to get spots on Varsity.  But being on the May through Summer side of the May 1st birthday cutoff definitely did not benefit most of the kids who in 6th Grade were competing against 5th graders.

Right. But it sounds like they benefited from the relative age effect when they were on the older side (say, a May birthday in little league) but now they are suffering from the relative age effect because they are on the younger side (i.e., their parents didn't hold them back, so they are currently 15 in March of sophomore year). In other words, they would be less mediocre as freshmen than they are as sophomores.

Perhaps.  They'd still be mediocre, but would have an extra year to make up for it.  Problem being that the work ethic might not be there.  They've gotten away with being physically bigger & stronger than their competition.   Would that continue if they were on the Freshman team?  To a degree, yes.   Which might not help them moving forwards.

Every athlete at some point or some level reaches that "light bulb" moment of realizing they need to work much much harder.  Once you are in high school, time is really slipping away when it comes to opportunities to advance.  Delaying that "light bulb" moment might not help.

 

 

No one is saying that a mediocre athlete becomes great by being held back a year. But it's crazy to think that the kids held back aren't better for their grade than they otherwise would be. That's the key: "than they otherwise would be, for their grade." The relative age effect isn't a made up thing.

Here's a real world example for you. Here's my son's data for pitching velo:

8th grade Spring: topped at 76 (weighted 125-130 lbs)

9th grade Spring: topped at 81 (weighed 145-150)

10th grade Spring: topped at 86 (weighed 165-ish)

11th grade Spring: topped at 90 (weighs 177)

If he were held back a year, he would still be eligible to play all four years under California rules. If he had been held back it would be:

8th grade Spring: topped at 81

9th grade Spring: topped at 86

10th grade Spring: topped at 90

We never thought of holding him back. It wasn't and isn't the right thing for him or us as a family. It doesn't make sense for him academically.

But it's crazy to think there's not an athletic advantage to doing so. The pitching velo thing is easy to see, but I could show the same thing for exit velo, running speed, or any athletic endeavor, really. Ages 14-19 are prime years for growing stronger, getting faster, etc. The idea that the vast majority of athletes who are working at their sports aren't better at 15 than they were at 14, or better at 16 than they were at 15, is nonsense. Sure, there is a risk that the kid who is held back still isn't good enough, or that he doesn't work hard, or there is an anecdote about a kid who stopped growing early and never got any better, yadda, yadda, yadda . . . the bottom line is that the relative age effect is a real thing. I have no problem with people who follow the state rules, and as long as the rules are being followed it's fair to my mind . . . but I think it's fantastical to pretend there is not an athletic advantage. Heck, that's why people do it.

 My son, with a May birthday was recruited by a couple of private high schools. They wanted him to repeat 9th grade. He was 5’11” 135 freshman year. Skills and recruiting wise for college his metrics may have been better for his grade being one year older. But maybe he doesn’t start until junior year due to the team has a roster full of these kids of kids. He stayed at his high school and started varsity soph year. Academically the gifted program at his highly regarded high school was better than the standard academics at the academic privates. College ball worked out better than he could have hoped anyway.

Facts:

  1. There is more academic money available than athletic for college scholarships. 
  2. Holding a gifted athlete back will create more collegiate athletic opportunities come his/her Sr year.
  3. For draft potential prospects holding back could mean a huge difference in a signing bonus and getting started in an athletic career earlier.
  4. The chances of making a living playing professional baseball are so small that it should not be taken into account except for a handful of players. 

This decision is so personal and there are so many variables that each family should consider them carefully.

My personal preference would be for academically gifted players; keep them on track as there will be both academic and baseball opportunities if they have the athletic skills. For immature and athletic kids, there are some real benefits to holding them back. For highly gifted athletic kids there are very tangible benefits to holding them back.  For the rest of the 80%, don't worry about it.  

We did the opposite.  We put our son a year ahead academically back in 3rd grade (when he transitioned from home school to private school) since he can handle the academics, he's mature enough, and we wanted him to be challenged academically.  We did not even think about athletics nor was it even a factor.  He is already one of the smaller kid in his age group, so he is definitely the smallest in his grade (which is a year older).  But he fits in academically and socially so we are not worried about it.  As far as athletics is concerned, we figure he will be challenged to keep up which will make him work harder and work on fundamentals more, so that when his growth spurt finally hit, he will be ahead of his peers.  As far as getting athletic scholarship is concerned, that is the farthest from our mind right now.  It blew our mind when we found out that some families were holding their kids back a year on purpose.  But we're Asian so that may be why we think differently...

I don't like it. It creates this bizarre oddity socially and academically for the kid. It's also sort of cheating or gaming the system in some low level way.

It's recruiting posturing on Steroids. Speaking of Steroids , if were gonna hold our kids back in school for better college athletic recruiting opportunities , why don't we just take them to Dr. Balco and have him shoot'em up with 10cc's of anabolic steroids every week before the PG tourney and really watch them light the gun up .

There is more to life than baseball

Orlando2022Dad posted:

Have heard few families decide to keep their player back a year. Talking 8th graders here. One even decided to do virtual home school. Why would someone do this?

"Redshirting" K-12 kids has been going on for some time now, as well as relocating kids to a better district athletically or academically.  Parents are trying to help their kids get an advantage.   They may be good intentions but not sure if this is the answer to everybody's problem.

Whether or not the parents are truly helping their son or daughter is the real question in my mind.  I would defer to someone who is significantly more qualified for advice (psychologist or specialist) rather than running off willy-nilly to keep them back a grade because they didn't make the middle school baseball team or struggling with grades.  This is a significant decision in a child's life.  

gunner34 posted:
BishopLeftiesDad posted:
gunner34 posted:

in Texas you have to do it 7th grade year,  UIL calendar starts in 8th grade,  you have 5 yrs to compete.   you might be able to do it and switch to a private school possibly.     I had a few friends who stayed back when I was growing up and it worked out for one of them,  Heisman trophy winner,  14 yr career in the NFL.  

Gunner,

I have an honest question and I am not trying to be snide. Do you think that having the extra year helped the player become a Heisman trophy winner? Would he have missed that opportunity if he was not held back. I understand we will never truly know, just looking for your educated guess. 

I'm sure he would have been fine,   he was a great player but small,  he started off at same high school as me also and the coaches were big how much do you lift,  how fast do you run types and that was not him still.    He went to play for his father at a smaller school and turned into quite the prolific passer who set many high school records and his younger brother broke those.   He was never a physical specimen. 

He was also all-state in like 3 sports and the Tx High School Athlete of the year (or some award like that) with a younger brother who also played in the NFL, so he would have been ok either way I think.

In our district the only way that a child can be held back, with permission of the school. They involve the school psychologist, Teachers advisers and principals. 

In my  oldest sons third grade year, They wanted to hold him back and repeat the third grade. He had already been held back once, which I thought was justified. However I was against this second time. My oldest has severe ADHD. it effects him still today. If he was held back yet again it would have put him in the same class as his youngest brother. I believe that would have been harmful for both of them. My wife and I had no idea this was coming. We were called into a meeting, initiated by his teacher. After we heard that she was suggesting holding him back, we asked for a meeting with the principal. He brought in the school psychologist, after discussing our concerns, the psychologist talked to our son and to the teacher. She reviewed our sons EIP. She was very upset. The teacher had not been following his EIP, and had other reasons, she would not share to believe why the teacher wanted to hold our son back. 

The Psychologist, suggested against holding him back and prescribed a teachers aid to assist and verify that his EIP was being followed. I would like to say he blossomed and did very well in school the rest of the way. Unfortunately school was always a struggle for him. However I believe if he was held back things would have been much worse for both my children. 

If a child is well adjusted and doing well in school, our system will not allow the child to be held back once they have started school. In our area, parents delay sending there kid to kindergarten for a year. The Academics are well respected at our public HS. Few privates, which are mostly Catholic, hold transfers back a year. 

So in many area's it is not always and easy thing to hold a child back. Many schools will want to help the child adjust, or provide assistance. If you truly believe it is beneficial, I would suggest that it be done before they start school. If my boys have sons, we will probably discuss this with them. 

atlnon posted:

We did the opposite.  We put our son a year ahead academically back in 3rd grade (when he transitioned from home school to private school) since he can handle the academics, he's mature enough, and we wanted him to be challenged academically.  We did not even think about athletics nor was it even a factor.  H

This also can have ramifications, but in general I agree with you. A friend's daughter started college at 16 and at 20 was working for a major tech firm making over $100K/yr, so on the surface she is very successful, but she had social issues getting through college. Gifted kids, both athletic and academic situations are unique, but for the rest of us with "mean" kids we should keep them in the track they are in IMO.  

A lot of folks talking about the awkwardness or social stigma of being held back a year and yes, if your kid is in 7th Grade of your local K-12 public school system, and you are able to have him/her held back a year, for whatever reason, there will be an awkwardness.  It will be glaring.  Obviously, holding the kid back for Kindergarten if you are that forward thinking and the thought of spending $ on another year of day care is not a hindrance might be easy to do, but man that's a lot of forethought.  

Since it's March and Madness is in the air, click on any D1 basketball roster , and see how many players were recruited from private schools (especially rosters from schools say, east of the Mississippi River).  If you really study it you'll see many of the same prep schools popping up year after year on top contending teams.  Prep schools like Oak Hill, Brewster Academy,  Blue Ridge, Word of God, Northfield Mount Herman, Montrose Prep, Voyageur, New Hampton, IMG, etc.  I'd be willing to bet that 90% of those players attending these type of schools transferred there after their Jr. year of public HS, then repeated Jr. year again, thus dropping down a grade and "reclassing" as it is called.  

As has been mentioned here already, my understanding is that Florida has restrictions on this (reclassing), as in you can't do it in Florida preps like Montverde and Bolles.   And most Catholic HS across the nation don't allow it.  So your powerhouse Mater Dei (CA) and DeMatha (MD) basketball kids should be true to their year.

Probably more common in the basketball world as the body type is a completely different one than the baseball one.  We're talking probably a stereotypical 16yo college hoops prospect of 6-6 and 165, versus a 16yo baseball prospect of 6-0 and 185lbs .  You tell me, which body type would  benefit most from an 5th year of physical maturity and development in the HS years in order to physically compete with 22-23yo men?  

Click on the CWS rosters in June, and you will not see the northeastern prep schools on there.  You will almost exclusively see public HS, Catholic HS, and a few private day schools.  A much different HS journey than the D1 basketball player.  And much of it due to the quest for that 5th year of HS development.  Basketball prospects need it much more than baseball college prospects.  It's just the nature of the beast. 

The "reclassing" move is standard fair in the college basketball recruiting world.  Not even a thought.  Almost assumed.  Even encouraged.  Not seen as awkward, or embarrassing, or anything like that.  Now, in baseball?  No, not the norm.  That 90% quoted above turns to maybe 5%.  As a matter of fact, re: MLB draft, the trend of late is one of youth.  The 17yo SS stud is more coveted than the 19yo SS stud (all things being equal).  

So many variables, each kid and family, so different.  Just do your homework, and try to do what's best for your kid.  In regards to "gaming the system" in taking that extra year, I disagree.  In college basketball recruiting, it IS the system.  

 

I am from upstate NY. Christian Laettner’s dad had him repeat the 7th or 8th grade. It worked out for him. But now we live in Southern California, and I would say a majority of boys that show up for freshman baseball tryouts at private and catholic schools have been held back. That is just the reality. My 2021 goes to a public school, and he is big for his age, so it is not an issue for him. However, we have friends that are good ball players that have not made their freshman teams at catholic schools. The other boys are a year older and much bigger.

As for travel ball, my 2021 was the youngest and smallest on his team. I think it makes him a better player. I think he is the only player on his 2021 team that is young enough to play 14u this summer (May birthday).

He will be 17 when he is a senior, others will be 18 or 19, I don’t think that will be a problem. The only awkwardness comes when I refer to him as a true freshman.

 

 

 

 

 

 

#1 Assistant Coach posted:

A lot of folks talking about the awkwardness or social stigma of being held back a year and yes, if your kid is in 7th Grade of your local K-12 public school system, and you are able to have him/her held back a year, for whatever reason, there will be an awkwardness.  It will be glaring.  Obviously, holding the kid back for Kindergarten if you are that forward thinking and the thought of spending $ on another year of day care is not a hindrance might be easy to do, but man that's a lot of forethought.  

Since it's March and Madness is in the air, click on any D1 basketball roster , and see how many players were recruited from private schools (especially rosters from schools say, east of the Mississippi River).  If you really study it you'll see many of the same prep schools popping up year after year on top contending teams.  Prep schools like Oak Hill, Brewster Academy,  Blue Ridge, Word of God, Northfield Mount Herman, Montrose Prep, Voyageur, New Hampton, IMG, etc.  I'd be willing to bet that 90% of those players attending these type of schools transferred there after their Jr. year of public HS, then repeated Jr. year again, thus dropping down a grade and "reclassing" as it is called.  

As has been mentioned here already, my understanding is that Florida has restrictions on this (reclassing), as in you can't do it in Florida preps.  And most Catholic HS across the nation don't allow it.  So your powerhouse Mater Dei (CA) and DeMatha (MD) basketball kids should be true to their year.

Probably more common in the basketball world as the body type is a completely different one than the baseball one.  We're talking probably a stereotypical 16yo college hoops prospect of 6-6 and 165, versus a 16yo baseball prospect of 6-0 and 185lbs .  You tell me, which body type would  benefit most from an 5th year of physical maturity and development in the HS years in order to physically compete with 22-23yo men?  

Click on the CWS rosters in June, and you will not see the northeastern prep schools on there.  You will almost exclusively see public HS, Catholic HS, and a few private day schools.  A much different HS journey than the D1 basketball player.  And much of it due to the quest for that 5th year of HS development.  Basketball prospects need it much more than baseball college prospects.  It's just the nature of the beast. 

The "reclassing" move is standard fair in the college basketball recruiting world.  Not even a thought.  Almost assumed.  Even encouraged.  Not seen as awkward, or embarrassing, or anything like that.  Now, in baseball?  No, not the norm.  That 90% quoted above turns to maybe 5%.  As a matter of fact, re: MLB draft, the trend of late is one of youth.  The 17yo SS stud is more coveted than the 19yo SS stud (all things being equal).  

So many variables, each kid and family, so different.  Just do your homework, and try to do what's best for your kid.  In regards to "gaming the system" in taking that extra year, I disagree.  In college basketball recruiting, it IS the system.  

 

Reclassification with basketball players is mostly done with kids who have been identified as potential studs. This is different than the act of delusional parents. Although, at the MA sectional championships sitting with a tv sports director he called a lot of parents holding their kids back to reclassify with privates delusional. My response was if the kids are going to ISL schools at least they’re getting academically challenged. But do you hold a kid back so he can play D3 sports?

RJM posted:
#1 Assistant Coach posted:

A lot of folks talking about the awkwardness or social stigma of being held back a year and yes, if your kid is in 7th Grade of your local K-12 public school system, and you are able to have him/her held back a year, for whatever reason, there will be an awkwardness.  It will be glaring.  Obviously, holding the kid back for Kindergarten if you are that forward thinking and the thought of spending $ on another year of day care is not a hindrance might be easy to do, but man that's a lot of forethought.  

Since it's March and Madness is in the air, click on any D1 basketball roster , and see how many players were recruited from private schools (especially rosters from schools say, east of the Mississippi River).  If you really study it you'll see many of the same prep schools popping up year after year on top contending teams.  Prep schools like Oak Hill, Brewster Academy,  Blue Ridge, Word of God, Northfield Mount Herman, Montrose Prep, Voyageur, New Hampton, IMG, etc.  I'd be willing to bet that 90% of those players attending these type of schools transferred there after their Jr. year of public HS, then repeated Jr. year again, thus dropping down a grade and "reclassing" as it is called.  

As has been mentioned here already, my understanding is that Florida has restrictions on this (reclassing), as in you can't do it in Florida preps.  And most Catholic HS across the nation don't allow it.  So your powerhouse Mater Dei (CA) and DeMatha (MD) basketball kids should be true to their year.

Probably more common in the basketball world as the body type is a completely different one than the baseball one.  We're talking probably a stereotypical 16yo college hoops prospect of 6-6 and 165, versus a 16yo baseball prospect of 6-0 and 185lbs .  You tell me, which body type would  benefit most from an 5th year of physical maturity and development in the HS years in order to physically compete with 22-23yo men?  

Click on the CWS rosters in June, and you will not see the northeastern prep schools on there.  You will almost exclusively see public HS, Catholic HS, and a few private day schools.  A much different HS journey than the D1 basketball player.  And much of it due to the quest for that 5th year of HS development.  Basketball prospects need it much more than baseball college prospects.  It's just the nature of the beast. 

The "reclassing" move is standard fair in the college basketball recruiting world.  Not even a thought.  Almost assumed.  Even encouraged.  Not seen as awkward, or embarrassing, or anything like that.  Now, in baseball?  No, not the norm.  That 90% quoted above turns to maybe 5%.  As a matter of fact, re: MLB draft, the trend of late is one of youth.  The 17yo SS stud is more coveted than the 19yo SS stud (all things being equal).  

So many variables, each kid and family, so different.  Just do your homework, and try to do what's best for your kid.  In regards to "gaming the system" in taking that extra year, I disagree.  In college basketball recruiting, it IS the system.  

 

Reclassification with basketball players is mostly done with kids who have been identified as potential studs. This is different than the act of delusional parents. Although, at the MA sectional championships sitting with a tv sports director he called a lot of parents holding their kids back to reclassify with privates delusional. My response was if the kids are going to ISL schools at least they’re getting academically challenged. But do you hold a kid back so he can play D3 sports?

Transfering public to private and repeating Jr year??  No, only for D1. 

Post Grad year?  To a NESCAC, UChicago, Pomona, type D3, for hockey, basketball, lacrosse, football, and maybe baseball?  Sure.   

(And I think you’d agree w me on this RJM)

I don’t see anything wrong with reclassifying if playing a D3 sport is going to provide an academic advantage and potential professional (real world) advantage. Reclassifying for the purpose of playing D3 sports is silly. Reclassifying to use sports to get into a NESCAC or similar isn’t.

A friend’s brother reclassified to play D3 football at Keene State. That’s silliness. It was even sillier his parents thought he was college material. He was home in a year. Looking back it’s amusing a professional guidance counselor (the mother) couldn’t see what was best for her own kid. 

RJM posted:

I don’t see anything wrong with reclassifying if playing a D3 sport is going to provide an academic advantage and potential professional (real world) advantage. Reclassifying for the purpose of playing D3 sports is silly. Reclassifying to use sports to get into a NESCAC or similar isn’t.

A friend’s brother reclassified to play D3 football at Keene State. That’s silliness. It was even sillier his parents thought he was college material. He was home in a year. Looking back it’s amusing a professional guidance counselor (the mother) couldn’t see what was best for her own kid. 

Agreed.   

This thread has certainly pulled apart the myriad ways one can keep a kid back a year and more importantly the pros and cons of doing it.   

In today’s LA Times, there is an article about the California state hs basketball championships “Freshman leads View Park Prep”. I thought about this thread when later in the article, “Johnson, 16, scored 18 of his game high 22 points in the first half.”  So if he is 16 as a freshman, he will be at least 20 when he is a senior. I believe California has a rule that you can be no more than 20 as a senior. I don’t begrudge his family for holding him back 2 years as they are playing the system within the rules. But it makes for a somewhat unlevel playing field.

Most states have rules about losing eligibility if turning twenty during a school year, during a sports season or specific years and month age a student may be and allowed to participate. These rules typically do not apply to privates who are not part of the state association. 

Add Reply

Likes (0)
×
×
×
×