Any ideas on whether it's better to attend a smaller high school vs a larger high school in terms of exposure to colleges? We're in Illinois and 7th grade.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Scouts and college coaches are drawn to talent, not schools! Having said that I also know the larger the school, the larger the talent pool, so the odds are better for finding talent at the larger schools. One would assume the larger schools will get more coach and scout exposure. Personally I wouldn’t depend on the high school setting to provide much in the way of exposure that is necessary to get to the next level. Be proactive and make sure the player uses the proven methods for exposure which are showcases, summer teams, pro tryouts, and the college camp to target a particular college.
bigger...I'm in the Southwest suburbs of Chicago.
I say go to the biggest school that you can.
Let the competition begin.
They are now proposing more "classes" for the sports programs in Illinois.
Pretty soon we'll have 1,376 classes so that Suzi and Johnnie can get a trophy and say they were State Champion of Class 1248.
The sooner you start playing with the "big boys" the better off you will be. Get to start working on comparative skills because you see them in front of you.
Not to say that you can't have a great athlete or two in a "smallish" school, but the numbers game, in my opinion, will help.
I say go to the biggest school that you can.
Let the competition begin.
They are now proposing more "classes" for the sports programs in Illinois.
Pretty soon we'll have 1,376 classes so that Suzi and Johnnie can get a trophy and say they were State Champion of Class 1248.
The sooner you start playing with the "big boys" the better off you will be. Get to start working on comparative skills because you see them in front of you.
Not to say that you can't have a great athlete or two in a "smallish" school, but the numbers game, in my opinion, will help.
Talent is talent, and the scouts will find you.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both situations, and do not forget academics.
Were are you playing summer ball is just as important as to the HS you attend.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both situations, and do not forget academics.
Were are you playing summer ball is just as important as to the HS you attend.
The largest school in which you are sure he will play Varsity (preferably by his Junior year). The best program is always the one in which he will get to play.
Lemme just say this...
...play where you are going to be seen. Scouts would rather see you tearing it up at a D-1 school than a D-4 school, but if you are tearing it up in a smaller school, you'll catch some eyes. Granted, college scouts watch you in summer ball, it shouldn't really matter. Another thing to take into account is that there are a lot of politics in baseball. Just go somewhere that you have the best chance to succeed, and know what you're getting into.
...play where you are going to be seen. Scouts would rather see you tearing it up at a D-1 school than a D-4 school, but if you are tearing it up in a smaller school, you'll catch some eyes. Granted, college scouts watch you in summer ball, it shouldn't really matter. Another thing to take into account is that there are a lot of politics in baseball. Just go somewhere that you have the best chance to succeed, and know what you're getting into.
Back this way you dont have a choice unless you go to a private high school--but at the end of the day it really does not matter if you have talent and play for high profile summer and fall teams
quote:Originally posted by TRhit:
at the end of the day it really does not matter if you have talent
That (TALENT) is really the ONLY thing that matters. Size of high school does not matter. Summer team does not matter. Playing in the fall does not matter. Attending showcases does not matter. Using a recruiting service does not matter.
Son's High School has 200 kids total in the whole school, yet thwere are two players that will attract scouts to many games. Therefore, not only will these 2 boys be seen, but everyone else on the team and everyone on the opposing team. You never know who is watching you, or what opportunities may present themselves wherever you are. Enjoy your "Glory Days" of High School. That's the most important.
Grateful, Sorry I have to disagree. I will agree with you that if you are a bluechip player with LOTS of talent it really doesn't matter what you do. But most players aren’t fortunate to have the bluechip label. For those non-bluechippers, which happens to be the majority, they need to make sure they are where they will be seen.
Fungo, I expect that you and almost everyone else who posts on here would disagree with what I wrote, but even non blue chippers don't need showcases, high profile summer teams, scouting services.
There are thousands of current college players currently playing at all levels across the country who did not play on high profile travel teams, use scouting services, or attend showcases.
There are also players who were 'marketed' (showcased, etc.) and found spots on college rosters due to that marketing.......who are now sitting on the bench, perhaps feeling disillusioned.
I will repeat what I wrote: Talent is really the only thing that matters.
There are thousands of current college players currently playing at all levels across the country who did not play on high profile travel teams, use scouting services, or attend showcases.
There are also players who were 'marketed' (showcased, etc.) and found spots on college rosters due to that marketing.......who are now sitting on the bench, perhaps feeling disillusioned.
I will repeat what I wrote: Talent is really the only thing that matters.
What about if the baseball program and team itself is not very good? Supposedly in our small town the team is not good at all and will play teams that are not good. Suppose your son is good and has possibilities to go far with baseball. Wouldn't it make more sense to send him to a bigger school? It is too early for us, but at some point rather soon we will need to make a decision (move or private school). The coach in our town told a friend that if the player is really that could that he should try to play somewhere else. 
Well, if he's on a smaller school that isn't very good...he would stand out to be the only good player, I would think. Then again, it's also good to stand out playing against good competition and on a good team. One thing to keep in mind is that colleges do more recruiting of the summer teams than school teams.
"There are also players who were 'marketed' (showcased, etc.) and found spots on college rosters due to that marketing.......who are now sitting on the bench, perhaps feeling disillusioned."
Grateful,
Can u explain?
Grateful,
Can u explain?
Put it to you this way--he's good enough to make the varsity team and he's only 12. As a matter of fact several of his travel team would be good enough so it really isn't good. Yes, he would definately stand out but what about the competition? I always felt you play up to what you are playing with.
These are all great comments. Please make no mistake, my main question now is will a college coach come to see my son if he's hitting .600 against average or below-average competition? Is .600 more impressive against big strong programs? I might have an easier answer if he was a pitcher throwin in the 90s. But what about a position player?
biggerpapi
Keep in mind a few things. A coach is not going to look at a players batting average in the same way he looks at a 90 mph fastball.
One is a clock reading, not much you can do to alter that. The other is very much situational.
Coaches are smart enough to know that a kid hitting .600 against average to below-average competition wouldn't be hitting .600 against big strong programs. Which is precisely why they don't put too much stock in a kids BA.
Way too many variables.
There are a lot of pros and cons in both situations. Playing on a weak team can hold back your development, but then so can sitting on the bench on a strong team.
Playing on a small hs will not limit your son if he is talented. There are summer and fall teams that can get your son the competitive challenge he needs. There are showcases etc. to get him the exposure he needs.
I would look at all the issues involved, including classroom issues before making the big move.
Keep in mind a few things. A coach is not going to look at a players batting average in the same way he looks at a 90 mph fastball.
One is a clock reading, not much you can do to alter that. The other is very much situational.
Coaches are smart enough to know that a kid hitting .600 against average to below-average competition wouldn't be hitting .600 against big strong programs. Which is precisely why they don't put too much stock in a kids BA.
Way too many variables.
There are a lot of pros and cons in both situations. Playing on a weak team can hold back your development, but then so can sitting on the bench on a strong team.
Playing on a small hs will not limit your son if he is talented. There are summer and fall teams that can get your son the competitive challenge he needs. There are showcases etc. to get him the exposure he needs.
I would look at all the issues involved, including classroom issues before making the big move.
quote:Originally posted by Tiger Paw Mom:
"There are also players who were 'marketed' (showcased, etc.) and found spots on college rosters due to that marketing.......who are now sitting on the bench, perhaps feeling disillusioned."
Grateful,
Can u explain?
Yes, ma'am, I can explain what I mean. In today's new age of increased marketing of players.......by marketing I mean the added avenues of 'exposure' that did not exist fifteen years ago.........the things that many of us discuss in these forums......showcasing repeatedly, playing on high visibility teams, using 'recruiting' services, etc......
Sometimes what happens is that familiarity comes with this kind of exposure, names become familiar, coaches see desire in kids (which we all agree is a good thing), kids and their parents sometimes (I am not saying always) feel entitled to scholarships, guaranteed roster spots........and they get them (sometimes may be small scholarships)........then when they get on the field in some of these programs they don't get the playing time (or perhaps even the opportunity for playing time) that they thought they would get.......they perhaps think the coaches were misleading them in the recruiting process.......they sit the bench, become unhappy, transfer someplace else (this time without the 'benefit' of forced exposure) where they are good enough to get playing time.
Sometimes marketing is actually the kid (and parents) recruiting the school (or coaches).
I am not implying that student-athletes should not be proactive.....by all means, they need to be.
I'll have to add my two cents here and it may be worth only that. I've stated before that my son never attended a high profile showcase, he chose to stay and play with his HS teammates in the summer over higher profile summer teams. He lost many opportunities for exposure and was recruited by a very respectable number of schools. Was LSU, AZ among them? No - but he wanted to play first and foremost, so those schools wouldn't have been a fit for him anyway.
I don't think exposure is a bad thing. I think it can help a great number of kids. My concern in these debates is always for the kids that don't have it - doesn't mean you won't receive offers. Delicate balance between recruiting and being recruited, I suppose is the way I see it.
I don't think exposure is a bad thing. I think it can help a great number of kids. My concern in these debates is always for the kids that don't have it - doesn't mean you won't receive offers. Delicate balance between recruiting and being recruited, I suppose is the way I see it.
quote:Put it to you this way--he's good enough to make the varsity team and he's only 12
Which high school in Northern California permits 12 year olds to enter?
That's a 6th grader around here.
Lafmom, I agree with you as far as showcasing. My son was invited to many Perfect Game and other showcases but was playing on a competitive legion team. We felt he had committed to those teams so wouldn't be right to leave them during state tournament time. He was recruited by many schools even though he did not showcase, even ASU. He was then invited during the fall when he played football. Also he was injured between his sophmore and junior year and out for eight weeks so wasn't in tip top shape. I do wish he could have showcased but everything has fallen into place.
Grateful
Am I mistaken in thinking college coaches don't control who they sign?; that college coaches are pressured by parents into signing kids they don't want or need? Granted there might be some boosters nephew collecting bench time here or there.
If a tree fall in the forest does anyone hear it?
How can a high school player play after high school without outwordly expressing that desire?
You obviously don't mean to be contradictory in the last two sentences, but they leave me a little confused.
Am I mistaken in thinking college coaches don't control who they sign?; that college coaches are pressured by parents into signing kids they don't want or need? Granted there might be some boosters nephew collecting bench time here or there.
If a tree fall in the forest does anyone hear it?
How can a high school player play after high school without outwordly expressing that desire?
quote:Size of high school does not matter. Summer team does not matter. Playing in the fall does not matter. Attending showcases does not matter. Using a recruiting service does not matter.
quote:Sometimes marketing is actually the kid (and parents) recruiting the school (or coaches).
I am not implying that student-athletes should not be proactive.....by all means, they need to be.
You obviously don't mean to be contradictory in the last two sentences, but they leave me a little confused.
Dad04....
Of course college coaches control who they sign.....and sometimes when parents/kids are persistent enough and just want something small a coach will throw out a small 10% scholarship or something like that, with the thinking that if the kid develops then he has a bargain.....and if the kid doesn't then it was only a small risk.....sometimes they only offer books......the kid and parents can say they got something, a partial, or whatver they want to say.......so the persistence and desire to attend that school and play in that program has paid off and led to a 'token' book scholarship or 10%........if the kid doesn't develop he won't see the field, gets disgruntled and either stops playing, transfers, or what have you........it can be worth the risk for the coach, but sometimes the family feels differently.
Of course college coaches control who they sign.....and sometimes when parents/kids are persistent enough and just want something small a coach will throw out a small 10% scholarship or something like that, with the thinking that if the kid develops then he has a bargain.....and if the kid doesn't then it was only a small risk.....sometimes they only offer books......the kid and parents can say they got something, a partial, or whatver they want to say.......so the persistence and desire to attend that school and play in that program has paid off and led to a 'token' book scholarship or 10%........if the kid doesn't develop he won't see the field, gets disgruntled and either stops playing, transfers, or what have you........it can be worth the risk for the coach, but sometimes the family feels differently.
quote:.if the kid doesn't develop he won't see the field, gets disgruntled and either stops playing, transfers, or what have you........it can be worth the risk for the coach, but sometimes the family feels differently.
Isn't that college baseball? Isn't that life? There are risk takers and those that play safe.
Is every player supposed to be guarranteed a roster spot and playing time when they sign? How do you find out who "wants it", who can compete under pressure for PT. Is there not supposed to be attrition?
I thought putting together a baseball team was identifying the best on the field and the rest that can contribute, and helping the remaining into other more productive activities. Not everyone is supposed to make the team or play.....unless it's called little league.
Pros and cons to both-more likley to get seen at a larger school, but more likely to play earlier at a smaller school. Both of our sons were put on varsity as freshmen; the older son it didn't help as he played little his freshman year, but the younger has started every game since he was a freshman and that experience certainly helped develop his talent. There aren't too many pressure situations that he hasn't seen by now-winning run on third in a state playoff game, tying run on base in District title game, squeeze bunts in regionals, etc., and all of those helped develop his God-given abilities. I think the value of playing earlier outweighed the larger school potential greater visibility. Summer ball and showcases tend to minimize that visibility stuff anyway.
grateful
I somehow find it very difficult to believe that a college coach would give out even a "token" baseball scholarship to a player simply because he and his parents have been persistent in their recruiting, or because they have become a "familiar face".
He has 11.5 scholarships to give out TOTAL for his entire team.
If he is going to give out ANY scholarship money it is because he thinks the player can contribute !!!!!
I somehow find it very difficult to believe that a college coach would give out even a "token" baseball scholarship to a player simply because he and his parents have been persistent in their recruiting, or because they have become a "familiar face".
He has 11.5 scholarships to give out TOTAL for his entire team.
If he is going to give out ANY scholarship money it is because he thinks the player can contribute !!!!!
Here's my two cents...and I expect change back as well!
There may be valid arguments for not showcasing and if a player can play HS ball and HS summer ball and get recruited Great!
The only thing I would say is if you have the opportunity to play on a well run travel/showcase team in front of college coaches and or attend showcases I think that it is to your advantage to do so. You might as well give your son every advantage possible...
...Grateful, I understand what u are saying about kids being marketed but using ur premise I think it shows why it can be important to be seen. If the player is from Michigan does it make sense to showcase out East or South when there is little chance of being recruited by a SEC school or a Florida school or LSU, or a Texas etc..? Thats a family decision.
Can you spend a fortune without results absolutely!!!!!
IMO to cut out showcasing or travel ball (or any proactive marketing/recruiting) and rely strictly on talent is going to limit your choices for the average player.
In regards to the original question, High School ball here really does has minimal effect on being recruited as far as I can tell in my area.
I would look at all options and make a decision based on what fit my family. If schools are of similar quality and there is a stronger athletic program in one it might sway u just be careful the grass isn't always greener.
Also as good as a 7th grader may be a lot of things can happen that may slow your son's development while others take off. Pick a school (just like college) where he would be happy even if he didn't play.
There may be valid arguments for not showcasing and if a player can play HS ball and HS summer ball and get recruited Great!
The only thing I would say is if you have the opportunity to play on a well run travel/showcase team in front of college coaches and or attend showcases I think that it is to your advantage to do so. You might as well give your son every advantage possible...
...Grateful, I understand what u are saying about kids being marketed but using ur premise I think it shows why it can be important to be seen. If the player is from Michigan does it make sense to showcase out East or South when there is little chance of being recruited by a SEC school or a Florida school or LSU, or a Texas etc..? Thats a family decision.
Can you spend a fortune without results absolutely!!!!!
IMO to cut out showcasing or travel ball (or any proactive marketing/recruiting) and rely strictly on talent is going to limit your choices for the average player.
In regards to the original question, High School ball here really does has minimal effect on being recruited as far as I can tell in my area.
I would look at all options and make a decision based on what fit my family. If schools are of similar quality and there is a stronger athletic program in one it might sway u just be careful the grass isn't always greener.
Also as good as a 7th grader may be a lot of things can happen that may slow your son's development while others take off. Pick a school (just like college) where he would be happy even if he didn't play.
Big vs. Small is not really acurate sometimes. Ex: My son lives with his mother by his choice during school year. He goes to a VERY small school, is a JR this year, and has been a starter since his FR year. They were a good team then, and he is a good player, but he wouldn't have started as a FR at a better larger school. He is at that school for two reasons; he likes the school and he got to play early. Translation - Experience - playing up to better competition. He would have been JV early, and may not have gotten much playing time as a SO at a large school. However, he led the team in hits as a SO and was 2nd in batting average. He has two more years to draw exposure at the school, but camps and non-HS is where he will draw the attention that will get recruiters/scouts to the school.
I, on the other hand, live fairly near to, but not in the district of, one of the better HS programs in the country. He would not have gotten the playing time there the last 2 years, had I lived in that district. He could live with me if he wanted to. But the district where I live is in the same size classification, but is NOT a good team. In fact, they are pretty bad, and I wouldn't want him going to school there, much less playing there.
He can relax and play at a school where he wants to be, and his "exposure" will be from summer and fall and camps. That is what works for us. What his future will be after HS is unknown, but that is what we decided.
IMHO, it's a personal decision that you must make with your son after weighing all options.
I, on the other hand, live fairly near to, but not in the district of, one of the better HS programs in the country. He would not have gotten the playing time there the last 2 years, had I lived in that district. He could live with me if he wanted to. But the district where I live is in the same size classification, but is NOT a good team. In fact, they are pretty bad, and I wouldn't want him going to school there, much less playing there.
He can relax and play at a school where he wants to be, and his "exposure" will be from summer and fall and camps. That is what works for us. What his future will be after HS is unknown, but that is what we decided.
IMHO, it's a personal decision that you must make with your son after weighing all options.
quote:Originally posted by Dad04:quote:.if the kid doesn't develop he won't see the field, gets disgruntled and either stops playing, transfers, or what have you........it can be worth the risk for the coach, but sometimes the family feels differently.
Isn't that college baseball? Isn't that life? There are risk takers and those that play safe.
Is every player supposed to be guarranteed a roster spot and playing time when they sign? How do you find out who "wants it", who can compete under pressure for PT. Is there not supposed to be attrition?
I thought putting together a baseball team was identifying the best on the field and the rest that can contribute, and helping the remaining into other more productive activities. Not everyone is supposed to make the team or play.....unless it's called little league.
Dad04.....I agree with all you have said here.
quote:Originally posted by AParent:
grateful
I somehow find it very difficult to believe that a college coach would give out even a "token" baseball scholarship to a player simply because he and his parents have been persistent in their recruiting, or because they have become a "familiar face".
He has 11.5 scholarships to give out TOTAL for his entire team.
If he is going to give out ANY scholarship money it is because he thinks the player can contribute !!!!!
Actually, 11.7 scholarships are the max for D-I.
And, coaches sometimes "think the player can contribute", and other times hope the player can contribute. If there are 30 guys on a roster, how many are actually contributing to the team's success by playing in games?
There are many reasons why a coach might give a token scholarship to a kid......the two reasons listed above are only two of them......how about these reasons as possibilities: in response to criticism (from anybody or nobody in particular) for not having enough local or in-state players on the roster, a coach brings in a few more local guys with 10% offers.....they are borderline D-I guys.....maybe they pan out, maybe they don't.
Coaches may have a little scholarship money left, not enough for a blue chip kid.....so he gets a 'project' kid who seems to have heart, from a good family, the kid really wants to attend that school and be part of the program.
Want more scenarios? There are hundreds of different scenarios. People can read what I write and believe that it happens or they can think I'm full of it. Doesn't matter to me......but I have been in the industry for a long time.
Sometimes I think we no longer have people on this site who are here to learn; seems lately everybody has all the answers already. I contribute something from first hand experience and people don't believe me. It isn't going to hurt me, but why would I lie on here? I am not on here telling my life story; I'm trying to help paint the big picture.
AParent, I am not referring to you specifically, just commenting in general.
I only post something on here when I think something should be said about a subject. I don't waste my time or anybody else's by being redundant; I have read enough redundancy.
You can either believe me or not......but I'm not sure why some of you would think that I would be making anything up.
I haven't said that people should not have their kids attend showcases, and I haven't said that players should not play on highly select travel teams. I have not said that there is anything out there they should not do. All I said in my first post here is that those things do not matter as much as talent.
Talent gets kids playing time. Nothing else gets players playing time.
There are many schools that fill (or will add significantly) to their rosters with kids like Grateful speaks of. Some kids are just happy to have a chance and a guaranteed spot at their dream school. Works out for some and others it doesn't unfortunately!
I realized that earlier I spoke of being found and offers without obtaining a lot of exposure. I think exposure is a good thing and one thing my son did have going for him is attending a large HS in a highly visible area. Without a doubt, this added to his being "seen".
I realized that earlier I spoke of being found and offers without obtaining a lot of exposure. I think exposure is a good thing and one thing my son did have going for him is attending a large HS in a highly visible area. Without a doubt, this added to his being "seen".
Grateful
You are right about the 11.7 - if they are fully funded which many schools are not.
You are also right about talent - I agree 100% with the fact that talent is what gets a kid playing time.
As for the token scholarships - well - even books can buy some mighty fine talent when scholarhsip money is slim.
Giving scholarship money to someone who doesn't pan out to be the player you anticipate is not the same as wasting it on someone who has more marketing skills than talent. Big difference in those two scenarios.
You are right about the 11.7 - if they are fully funded which many schools are not.
You are also right about talent - I agree 100% with the fact that talent is what gets a kid playing time.
As for the token scholarships - well - even books can buy some mighty fine talent when scholarhsip money is slim.
Giving scholarship money to someone who doesn't pan out to be the player you anticipate is not the same as wasting it on someone who has more marketing skills than talent. Big difference in those two scenarios.
quote:Originally posted by AParent:
Giving scholarship money to someone who doesn't pan out to be the player you anticipate is not the same as wasting it on someone who has more marketing skills than talent. Big difference in those two scenarios.
Agreed....there is a difference in those two scenarios, but both happen. Either way, the coach often gets that scholarship $ back to use it next year, and in the second scenario it isn't usually a large amount of scholarship $.
Grateful
You are right - there is a lot to learn on this site. And that is why it is important to clarify things that simply don't make any logical sense (though they may indeed be accurate):
From your ealier post:
and then later:
Are you saying that the coach would offer money to this kid even when he has better prospects available to him?
Or does this only happen when the kid with the aggressive marketing skills happens upon the coach when he has no better options available to him?
In other words, when the more talented player for some reason did not make it onto the coaches radar screen.
I would think that whether a player plays on a high profile team, whether he showcases, or markets himself excessively, or whether he does nothing but get lucky enough to be on the coach's radar screen is irrelevant at the time he offers scholarships.
I would think that if the coach is aware of his choices, talent wins hands down.
(Now, giving in-state players token scholarship to balance your numbers probably does happen, but it is due to factors that have nothing to due with aggresive marketing by the player.)
You are right - there is a lot to learn on this site. And that is why it is important to clarify things that simply don't make any logical sense (though they may indeed be accurate):
From your ealier post:
quote:Talent is the only thing that matters
and then later:
quote:and sometimes when parents/kids are persistent enough and just want something small a coach will throw out a small 10% scholarship or something like that, with the thinking that if the kid develops then he has a bargain... and if the kid doesn't then it was only a small risk.
Are you saying that the coach would offer money to this kid even when he has better prospects available to him?
Or does this only happen when the kid with the aggressive marketing skills happens upon the coach when he has no better options available to him?
In other words, when the more talented player for some reason did not make it onto the coaches radar screen.
I would think that whether a player plays on a high profile team, whether he showcases, or markets himself excessively, or whether he does nothing but get lucky enough to be on the coach's radar screen is irrelevant at the time he offers scholarships.
I would think that if the coach is aware of his choices, talent wins hands down.
(Now, giving in-state players token scholarship to balance your numbers probably does happen, but it is due to factors that have nothing to due with aggresive marketing by the player.)
quote:Originally posted by AParent:
I would think that if the coach is aware of his choices, talent wins hands down.
(Now, giving in-state players token scholarship to balance your numbers probably does happen, but it is due to factors that have nothing to due with aggresive marketing by the player.)
We are on the same page.......I don't know any coach who would prefer to have a less talented player if he has better options.
I can just about guarantee, though, that there will be at least one player (and parents.....more likely several) in this season who (happily) feel as though their 'marketing' was crucial in the player getting where he is today.......and at some point during the season and/or after the season will be unhappy that the playing time was not as much as expected, for reasons of talent.
It is my contention that many small private schools have great programs that are loaded wth talent, at least in my experience. Here in florida, we have 6A down to 1A. 6A are the largest public schools and usually very good. But, I know that the 1A, 2A and 3A state champs the past couple of years played 5A and 6A schools during the year and often won. Look at the program and talent in question, have players gone on to play ball in college or the pro's, then a decision will be easier.
All -
How about the kid moves from the small school to the larger school and now has no friends from middle/grade school and has to make new friends and finds lots of cliches and the only ones accepting him are the "strung out" ones. Do you think that this would help his baseball "career"?
Yes, I get "hyped" up about baseball too and have to "talk" to myself a lot of times to cool it. Please consider the more important things in your sons life. If he is doing well in the school system he's in and has good friends, I would leave him there. Challenges can be good, but they can also be overwhelming. My son wanted to play JV his first year of HS to be with his friends. As a sophmore he left them all behind at the start of the season and one came up later in the year. But he was ready for it then.
The main thing to me would be talking to him a lot about college not being 4 solid years of starting and playing and being "the man". It will (more than likely) entail bench warming, fighting for a spot, being happy with you did the best you could do, etc.
We have a few "poor" HS's in our area in regards to baseball. One small school produced a kid that threw 95 and he got a full ride to a D1 school in state. His HS team won states in his senior year too. The state championship probably would not have happened at a larger HS.
Tim Robertson
How about the kid moves from the small school to the larger school and now has no friends from middle/grade school and has to make new friends and finds lots of cliches and the only ones accepting him are the "strung out" ones. Do you think that this would help his baseball "career"?
Yes, I get "hyped" up about baseball too and have to "talk" to myself a lot of times to cool it. Please consider the more important things in your sons life. If he is doing well in the school system he's in and has good friends, I would leave him there. Challenges can be good, but they can also be overwhelming. My son wanted to play JV his first year of HS to be with his friends. As a sophmore he left them all behind at the start of the season and one came up later in the year. But he was ready for it then.
The main thing to me would be talking to him a lot about college not being 4 solid years of starting and playing and being "the man". It will (more than likely) entail bench warming, fighting for a spot, being happy with you did the best you could do, etc.
We have a few "poor" HS's in our area in regards to baseball. One small school produced a kid that threw 95 and he got a full ride to a D1 school in state. His HS team won states in his senior year too. The state championship probably would not have happened at a larger HS.
Tim Robertson