Bringing in "Ringers"

PG Staff.....I don't see anybody who is saying if you pay your player must be on the field all the time.

The point here is, if coach picks a team (think tryout), takes money all season long from parents, establishes an expected amount of play time based upon actions and allows a kid to sacrifice to attend then how on earth is it okay to pick up some miscellaneous guy whose team is over/lost and throw your regulars to the wolves?  What message are you sending to the rest of your team and the parents who pay your bills? Pro Ball has nothing to do with this thread, in Pro Ball the players are GETTING PAID, not paying so if they lose their job it really is real world.  This is youth sports and adults are expected to teach right and wrong.  

 

Not sure how any of that translates to purchasing playing time.  I think it translates to paying to join a team, be coached and the reasonable expectation that you will play in games or sit for another team member to play in games.  It does not however translate to watching NON TEAM members play.  Very different then purchasing play time or being afraid to compete, it's expecting to compete with a defined group of kids rather then an ever expanding one.  It's just expecting to get what you paid for rather then watch others not on the team get what you pay for!  

CalSportsFan,

 

Not sure I ever even mentioned Professional baseball at any point.  However, if being on a baseball team turned into getting what you paid for, it will be a sad day with many disagreements.

 

However, if you are paying to be on a team that has promised to not pick up any players, then that is the way it should be. 

 

I can say with all certainty that certain pick up players have been at least partially responsible for getting other players on the team opportunities that wouldn't have existed without the pick up player.  So does it make any difference that the pick up player actually might be helping all but the one player he replaces.  And most, not all, teams that do these things still figure out how to play everyone.

 

There's just two different ways to look at things. I'm not smart enough to say one way is better than the other.  I just know that a lot goes on in baseball that parents disagree with. Sometimes things that are much less important than this topic.

Cali,

OK, so then assuming the coach/organization has not specifically spelled out how much game playing time to expect, exactly how much playing time should your player get since you paid?

Any others who are in the "don't bring in the ringer" camp please share your thoughts on this as well.

Since you brought this up, I was wondering, if my son is a pitcher only should he pay less because he spends less time on the field or is he paying for the privilege to be a member of the team?

 

BTW, I didn't see where the OP said that the "ringers" didnt pay anything to join the team. Am I missing something?

"When Bryce Harper, Justin Upton, Delmon Young, were 13 years old their odds were much better than most kids that age."

 

I had to laugh when I read that particular given the subject of "ringers."My one memorable "ringer" experience came many years ago -my son's 14U team was playing in a local tournament and there was a new kid in the lineup for the day - the coach had flown him in from Las Vegas. He was a 13-year old catcher, big and strong - Bryce Harper. He didn't do much of note but I will never forget how bizarre I thought it was. 

The "ringers" did not pay anything to "join" the team for the last few weeks/tournaments of the season.  The tournament expenses had already been paid by the team.

 

And yes, in my son's organization and many others in this area, pitcher only's pay less.  This is based on several factors.  They generally won't take any hitting, fielding, etc. instruction (just pitching) and they'll only get in a certain percentage of games based on the expected rotation. 

Thats interesting as son always was on teams where the fee was the same for everyone.
Thanks for the answer. Was your friends son one of the players affected by lack of playtime?

It isn't specifically about paying.  At the beginning of the year (right after tryouts), their are certain team expenses which are budgeted for -- everything from ball, to uniforms, to tournaments.  The money is collected from the players who made the team and 90% is spent during the offseason before the first game is played.  Unless you have a sponsor that foots the bill, I don't know how else you would do it.  The expectation I have as a player is that I will get practice/training time, a uniform, and a fair shot at playing time during the games.  I don't expect equal playing time.  Nor do I expect to play short and bat 3rd. 

 

It is really about the team concept, commitment and loyalty.  It's about winning and loosing with my teammates.  The guys I sweat with.  The guys I vent to.  The guys who pick me up after a bad at bat or an error.  The guys I pick up when they make a mistake.  The guys I play for.  We've worked together since November.  Played 50+ games over three and 1/2 months. 

 

Now with a few weeks left, some "new" kids show up.  Suddenly, they are batting 1,2, & 3.  Playing full time.  One of "my guys" is sitting.  Maybe we win a game, maybe we don't.   But my "team" has been broken.  Does it happen in pro ball.  Yes.  But that is the business side.  Should it happen in youth/pre HS ball (or even HS ball)?  I don't think so.       

 

Yes.  Him and a few others had to make room for the "ringers."  So their time in the field and at bats where reduced. 

TPM, yes on the team we chose to play for pitchers only did play less as well.  It was fair and nobody complained  because the type of people who chose to play in this organization for this excellent coach/man all bought into the concept of team and the fact that our boys were going to learn positive life lessons as well as improve their baseball skills.  This coach told all the boys and the parents that in fact we will lose games because I am not going to sub out a player to win a game because I owe all the players the opportunity to succeed or fail on the field so that they too can improve for being in those important situations.  He then invited anyone who wasn't going to be okay with that to leave. 

 

This team did not get equal amounts of play time or anything like that but the coach told every parent and kid prior to taking their money what his commitment to them was and he honored it.  If you out performed the guy ahead of you, you became the starter and competition reigned on this team but the concept of team was most significant. He also told the parents if they thought their kid should play all the time to find another team.  Part of what he taught is how to be a team mate and that teams are strong when everyone is prepared as you never know when someone will be out with an injury/sick and on a team nobody is irreplaceable.  He did not however bring in guys from outside to take play time on the team.  If someone wasn't up to it, he counseled them out for the next year but he lived up to his commitment to every kid and family that dedicated themselves to the team. 

 

It's just not that hard to run something fairly and provide the service for which people are paying you.  Yes, people are paying for a service....coaching, games, tournaments etc.  The way ringers seem to work in my neck of the woods is that they show up, play most of the time and don't pay.  That's just how the teams I have been exposed to use them.  Could be different in other places but that is what I am directing my comments to.  

 

If you play in a good organization, there are plenty of guys who attract coaches/scouts and you don't need a "ringer" to draw them to your game, you draw them yourselves.  As I said, like 80% of the team went off to play D1 ball but I attribute that to not only talent but great coaching and plenty of opportunity to succeed and improve over the years.

 

Golfman, we are on the same page here. 

calisportsfan,

 

Sounds like you had a great experience with a good coach.  For the record, we see many, most, of the top summer organizations.  Truth is most operate similar to the team you are talking about.  The so called "ringers" are actually on the team from the start and stay with that team.  We have seen times when a team will fly in someone, but usually it is someone that is on the roster to begin with.  I think this sometimes looks like the team is picking up a ringer. Almost always this would be a pitcher.

 

As a parent I wouldn't like picking up players at the expense of someone else.  However in my line of work, I just want to see the most talented players. In that capacity I don't care if they are on the team to begin with or if they are "Ringers".

Golfman25, 

 

I am curious if you keep going back to your "friend" for amplifying information or if he gave you the entire set of facts up front and you only dribble out additional information as needed to stoke the fires of resentment against the coach  (such as the confidential business information that shouldn't be known either to your friend or yourself that the ringers didn't pay anything.  How exactly do you know that to be true?).  

 

From my point of view, the rightness of the coach's action still hinges on what, if any, promises he made about roster size and playing time at the time the original parents signed up.  

 

When I first raised this question, you said the parents relied on what is  "generally understood" about how teams in your area are run, which is another way of saying they failed to verify the accuracy of their optimistic assumptions.  

 

Now, four pages of controversy later, despite all the loaded assumptions made by sympathetic readers about how the benched players were hard working ball players with good attitudes who were unjustly benched by a trophy-crazed coach, I still haven't seen any information to overturn the impression formed by your initial explanation:  namely, that the parents were careless consumers who hoped for the best and are now disappointed that their boys got benched for the last quarter of the season.

 

On another note, I must commend you for being one of the most loyal and patient friends I have ever observed.  It is quite a testament to your loyalty that you have advocated so vigorously for your "friend's" case even though you have no personal interest in the matter.  Perhaps it is time for your "friend" to join the discussion, fill in the missing information, and maybe upload a redacted version of the agreement so we can see what promises were made.

 

Until credible information is presented, none of us know what the heck really went on with this travel team and it would be prudent to refrain from condemning the coach.

Unquestioning support of the coach, though, that's different.

How about if we have a discussion that allows different people with different experiences to express their opinions. I mean, I realize that's a radical idea, but I hear it sometimes leads to productive sharing of information.

Ok, not sure why you didn't say that in the first place (I agree with swampboy on that one).

I understand why your friend is so upset. I probably would be too. But you never stated that your friends son was better than the ones brought, just he was made because he paid a fee to play and he was not and he was under the "understanding" that something like this wouldn't happen. Did he ever go back to speak to the coach about it?

BTW, how did the team do?

 

 

PG, can you be on more then one roster? I guess for different organizations you can have different rosters and I would agree you aren't a ringer if you are added to roster when the team is formed in the spring.  I just don't advocate for the style of jumping around playing on whatever the best team that will take you to the best tournaments....I might describe that as a mercenary player rather then a ringer!

 

Yes we were very lucky but we did take the time to educate ourselves on the available programs in the area and find a coach/program that complimented the values I wanted illustrated through sports to my son.  I advise everyone to do the same.  But as you can see here, it gets sticky.  People assume if you want to know what you are paying for you expect to be buying play time when in fact you are just being educated consumers....this is to the questions posed by Swampboy. It's like as a parent you are just supposed to pay the bills and be quiet but I am a business person and feel it's necessary to know what is being committed to me/my son in exchange for my financial support.  In that way I don't get surprised/disappointed by things as I know what I am agreeing to.  Lots of baseball coaches find any questions intrusive because many don't want commit to their teams and limit themselves and by asking about commitment, policies etc you get off on the wrong foot with the coach so the majority of people won't ask. 

 

Swampboy, for precisely the reasons above, I would expect that if I joined a team which had a set roster for the majority of the season it would have been the coaches responsibility to tell people up front that he retained the right to add people for specific tournaments if he chose.  If you haven't seen it happen, you might not even know to ask!

I think that we did that and all pretty fairly, you were the one who got bent out of shape. I do admit it was pretty frustrating not getting all of the facts.

I saw this on facebook today.

       6+3=9 but so does 5+4

The way YOU do things is not always the only way to do them.

       Respect other people way of thinking.

 

      

 

Respectfully, that is a load of BS.  I gave you the basic facts of the situation.  I responded as asked to issues people felt were relevant, such as payment (FYI, there is no confidential business information -- budgets are made available to every team member).  You brought up a legitimate issue concerning what "promises" where made about rosters, etc.  I answered it.  You don't like the answer.  That's fine.  There are no written contracts to post.  And no coach in their right mind says, come with us, pay $xxxx, but beware I'll bring in ringers and your kid should expect to sit. 

 

Look, you have your point of view that in certain circumstances, ie; full disclosure, bringing in ringers is ok.  I, and others, have the point of view that it isn't.  I also don't think you will truly get "full disclosure" of such intent.  It is not really about condemning a specific coach (as names have been withheld).  It is about having a general discussion of the practice of bringing in ringers and some good points have been made, yours included about what was promised.   

 

 

Partly, because is doesn't matter if my friend's kid was negatively affected or not.  If he wasn't, it doesn't make it right?  Also, this is still playing out as they continue to play. 

 

I put out the facts that I think are relevant to the discussion.  If people need clarifying information, they ask and I respond. 

 

Calisportsfan,

I understand everything that you are saying.  You guys were very lucky that you had a coach that did not feel the need to bring in other players at anytime and you werte happy with that.  I do beleive though, that there are teams that offer development and there are teams that play for winning. At some point you have to decide what is best for your player. 

 

Anyway, in middle school my son began playing for a league that added whoever they wanted during tournaments.  It was a bit sticky, I agree.  That philosophy taught him that you have got to work hard to be in the lineup, not just because mom or dad wrote a check, very early on. We never joined a travel/showcase team after that throughout HS, that was not in it to win every game or tournament we played. 

 

To each his own but as always buyer beware!

 

I appreciate you answering but I have to say that some of us did ask a few times for clarification.  

I now understand your point.

 

Do I agree this was wrong, no, if the coach said he would never do such a thing or the rules forbid it than yes. If your friend just assumed this would not happen, he needs to take it up with the coach.

 

Question..if your friends son was not affected, would he still go out looking for another team? Would he have left if it were other players this was happening to?

 

Probably not.

 

 

I think the phrasing would be more along the lines of something like:

 

"This is a high-level organization that competes with other elite teams from (insert geographic area of competition here). The competition not only occurs between teams, but occurs internally within the organization as well. You are guaranteed nothing other than an opportunity to compete within this organization, and we will give you every opportunity to excel within the realms of our capabilities and the capabilities you show both on and off the field."

 

I don't know anyone that wouldn't want that.

 

Good post.

It's not that I don't like the answer.  I don't care what the answer is, other than in so far as my opinion of the situation depends on the answer. The problem is your opinion of the situation doesn't depend on the answer.  Even though it's pretty clear the coach didn't make explicit promises, you and your "friend" are still nurturing a grievance.

 

In fact, there are plenty of travel coaches out there in there right minds who make it very clear that signing on with their program brings no guarantees of when or how much a particular player will see the field or even which squad within their program the player will be assigned to.  

 

There are teams located at all points along the spectrum that runs from "friendly development" at one end to "extreme competition" at the other end.  It's not a matter of right and wrong: it's a matter of different strokes for different folks and different coaches trying to serve different niches.

 

If you guess wrong, even by a little bit, about where the coach thinks his team fits along that spectrum, you may have an unhappy experience.  

 

That's why a general understanding of how you think teams in your area do things is not a substitute for asking direct questions in advance to find out exactly what you are buying.

 

That didn't happen here.   

 

Caveat emptor.

Nothing in that phrasing specifically indicates that additional players will be brought in from outside the organization 3/4 through the season.  Sure it could be implied. But, if I join a team of 12 players, my expectation at this level is that I will compete against those 12 players for playing time. At the end of the season when new tryouts are held, then all bets are off. 

JH's example states that they are guaranteed nothing other than an opportunity to compete. I dont see this as being unusual.
What you want is a guarantee in writing that the team will remain intact and everyone plays?
You didnt get that because you stated it was an "understanding" that in your area players will remain on the team and not be replaced. You wanted the coach to live up to an "understanding" and assuming that he would live up to what you felt should be the "norm", meaning, no pick up players.  

 

They had an obligation, IMO, to do what was best for the majority of the team and appears that they did just that. If your friends son was performing he would not have been replaced. He would not have cared, he would have been glad it was someone else kid and not his and we would not be having this conversation.

If they are still playing it might just be that he made a good choice.

 

You are angry because the coach didnt do what you and your friend felt he should, yet there was no written and no verbal guarantee.You asked what people thought, and apparently you are not satisfied that everyone would see it your way.

Your players are entering HS?  I suggest you prepare them and yourselves for whats ahead.
Advice given here might be very helpful and useful for your friend.

 

You are a good guy Golfman, I understand this is a friend and his son you are sticking up for, I commend you for that!

I guess, you and I just have a different view of team sports.  I believe that once your team is picked, you dance with those guys.  You have 12 specific players you picked, to fill 9 positions at a time.  Those 12 compete against each other to fill those 9 spots during games.  We win as a team and loose as a team. If a coach wants to make changes because he picked the wrong players, then the time to do it is during tryouts for the following season. 

 

And the results are in.  No plastic trophies for them.  They didn't win any of there last few tournaments. 

I haven't read all the posts, b/c frankly the back and forth is a little boring.

 

But, some org's spend a lot of their time recruiting and bringing in the best players they can, other orgs spend time developing, b/c that's what they do best.  I've seen both be successful (by the number of kids that get scholarships or draft picks).  I've seen this at younger ages than showcase ball.

 

My point is that what you do as an org is part of your reputation, and buyer beware.

 

Take this org http://www.banditosbaseballclub.com/category/alumni/  if you are really good, they will hunt you down.  Vice versa you will be benched in a heart beat if they get someone better.  Or take the alumni from this one http://columbiaangels.com/ who have put a team together through tryouts and stay with that team for the season.

 

At the end of the day, it's whatever situation gets the kid to be the best they can be.  And buyer beware.

I understand.
But that is very unrealistic and not how team sports are played...in general, amatuer and professional.
If you want that premise to continue why pay all that money. Sign up for rec ball and make sure that they do not change rosters.
What is your friend going to do if he makes the HS V team and they bench him and call up a jv guy to take his place?  Also there is no guarantees a HS bb roster remains the same all season.
I am just suggesting you all prepare yourselves for the next step.

15 years ago, I remember standing on the other side of this debate (and feeling certain of my stance).  Having since seen lots of every type of travel team, heard from hundreds of parents and coaches, coached teams from 10’s thru HS and college showcase, attended countless youth and HS tourneys, college camps and showcases, I now find myself with a different perspective.   

 

I think one of the benefits of belonging to a competitive club team include constant competition for playing time against a group of other skilled players.  I also think a benefit of being part of a club organization usually includes some schedule of practices, workouts and/or training.  This should be largely what you invest in - not the assumption that your player is guaranteed x amount of playing time in games.  Yes, the overall experience should certainly include a reasonable degree of game innings but not to the point where a parent is counting innings and doing comparisons.

 

I think it is nearly impossible to satisfy the expectations of every paying travel parent, regardless of how well things are communicated up front.  Just look at all the differing opinions here on this one topic by lots of good baseball people who have been through the process.

 

I think 13-14 is not too young to start learning about the competitive nature of sport at the next level, particularly for those who choose travel/club ball with aspirations to reach a rung or two higher.  If you think those kids should be coddled all the way up to HS and then expect them to just  be able to flip a switch and handle stiffer competition, tougher coaches and the prospect of not getting playing time right away, you are not doing them any favors.

 

I think the majority of travel coaches, including the good and upstanding, are open to improving their team/s by adding good players when the situation presents itself.   There are many good reasons why a team would do so, including the points PG made.  It is wrong to assume they are all trophy chasers, although there is certainly some benefit to creating a winning culture in the program.  Some are trying to build a program that can compete/be accepted at the bigger tourneys so their players can get more exposure.  Some are doing the same so they can provide better resources for their program by attracting more customers.  Some are trying to elevate the playing level so that it raises the level of the rest of the team.  Some are trying to make a business of their passion to help provide kids with a competitive platform to play more ball and pursue their dreams.  The opportunity they provide for your kids is more likely to perpetuate if the teams they put on the field are strong and kids who belong to the program succeed in reaching the next level.  Yes, of course that should occur in large part due to the improved development of the existing core group of players but in almost all cases, it also happens with the addition of more good players who can both help and benefit from the program.   Also, sometimes the caliber of the tourney may necessitate the need for a few better players to allow a team to compete.

 

So, at the end of the day, the lesson here should be that you get as much information up front as possible from a prospective club/travel team.  Look for a reasonable fit where your player is challenged -  he isn’t the most or least talented.  The quality and amount of practice/training outside of games should reasonably match your expectations.  There are limited options for most and you aren't going to find "perfect".  But don’t look at it as a bad thing if the program legally tries to better itself by adding better players when they have the opportunity.  Have your player prepared to earn, and subsequently fight to keep, a good portion of playing time by working hard and performing.  Help them understand that the benefits of belonging to the right program go far beyond number of innings played.

 

As always, the aspiring competitive athlete should have the "take on all comers" attitude.

 

PS - I also think PGStaff is quickly becoming the smartest "I'm not very smart" guy I know

 

What is your friend going to do if he makes the HS V team and they bench him and call up a jv guy to take his place?

 

A JV player is a player already in the program. I believe this debate is about bringing players in from outside the program. 

 

When major and minor league players are replaced they are in the business of baseball, not a developing youth player.

 

I understand bringing in extra players. But bringing in replacement players and throwing committed team players under the bus just isn't right. I wish coaches who do this all the worst luck in the world. If they can't recruit properly on the front end of the season they shouldn't be coaching.

 

I'd like to see this scenario played out by parents. Excuse me Mr. Youth Coach. We don't feel the team is winning as much as it should. Rather than toss players under the bus, we're tossing you under the bus. We've found a better coach. You're out. Grab some bench.

I make the same distinction.  My kids future HS program had 67 players at all levels last year.  They are all part of the program, essentially competing against each other for those 9 varsity spots.  I don't have an issue there. 

 

However what happened here would be the equivalent of the HS coach going to the other area high schools and bringing in their players during the season.   

 

I was making an example.
How many times have parents complained that a jv player took their players spot. Or that a senior sat over a freshman or sophmore. MANY TIMES.
These are the same folks who complained when their players sat in LL.
My point for one last time. The earlier you teach your players to be competitive the more they will succeed at being successful in life at whatever they do.  Agree with cabbagedad 13/14U is not too early.
Now if your player needs more time to develop physically and emotionally than join a team for that purpose and once again make sure you understand what you are paying for by asking the right questions and not assuming...anything!
A lot of going back and forth but I hope those with younger players and reading get to take it all in for the future.

I see both sides of this debate.  I don't believe kids need to learn the lesson of competition at the younger ages.  That is what I believe high school ball is for.  You compete for a limited spot beginning at the ninth grade level and for your respective high school team.  I believe summertime is the time for development.  The only way to develop is to play.

 

People may think they know who the best players are at 14 but often times they are wrong - including the experts.  Many confuse physical maturity with talent.  The tortoise can beat the hare if given time to develop.  The ugly duckling can become the swan. 

 

In this country, we should be trying to develop as many kids as we can and providing as many playing opportunities for as many as we can without regard to who wins the tournament trophy.  Of course we train our kids to win but it is more important for them to develop.  They can learn about competition when they get to high school and college.   

I have followed this thread with interest, mostly because so many people whose opinions I respect greatly have come down on opposite sides of this issue, with many good reasons cited on both sides.  

 

My my family has been on both sides of this issue.  My son has been the "ringer" brought in, and we have seen teams (usually not his, with the exception of teams he's played on that were specifically put together to compete in PG tournaments, which is a far different circumstance and one I have NO problem with) bring in non-roster players for specific tournaments, causing bad feeling not only (and obviously) within those teams but among the coaches of opposing teams.  The ones most upset are coaches from the same league that team plays in, as they have a rule that rosters are set at the beginning of the year and are not to be added to during the season (nor is there to be tampering with ANY player from ANY league, not just theirs).  Even though tournament play is not league play, the general feeling and consensus among coaches here is that this should not be done.  Still, there are always a couple teams that will - even when the TOURNAMENT rules prohibit it - and they always rely on the other teams and tournament directors to look the other way.

 

Personally, though occasionally my son still gets asked to do this, this is not something we're really interested in doing anymore.  It just creates too many problems.  Parents of players already on the team will resent your presence (even when their sons don't), and from the perspective of "the ringer" and family, unless the team has paid for ALL of your costs associated with getting to the tournament, "the ringer's" family will resent going if their son does NOT play a significant amount of the time.  It is a situation rife with inherent conflict of interests, and makes for an experience that usually isn't as much fun or conducive to development for ANYONE as it should be or anyone imagines it was going to be at the outset.  It's just not worth it.  If you want to pursue this, pursue teams that are put together for specific tournaments (where I live, Team Northwest serves this purpose at PG and USA Baseball events, and has done quite well).

 

Having said that, I have to say I tend to align myself with those who say you have to expect and thrive against competition from all comers, whether you see them coming or not.  Control what you can control; coaches' decisions about such things generally are not things within your control.  It is the best to instill in your player this sense of competition and controlling things he can control (and forgetting about those he can't) as it is by far the best way to prepare him for competition and the "next level" - whatever that may be for him.

 

Bottom line - if this practice offends your sense of team sensibility, avoid the teams that engage in this practice.  It isn't that hard to ask around and figure out which teams in your area have this reputation.  

So you're saying there are circumstances where it's ok to throw 9U to 14U kids under the bus so they can learn there's competition out there waiting to take their place? Even though they've been committed to the team all season? I think it's a great way to turn baseball players into athletes in other sports.

I said nothing of the sort; you're putting words in my mouth.  I specifically said I dislike the practice, but believe this is something outside of the player's (or his family's) control, and that it is best for players to embrace competition in all forms as they move up the ladder.  I said nothing about age levels, but since you mentioned it, I think anything much under 12U "select" or "travel teams" is farcical, so no, I am not referring to those teams.  13U is iffy and depends on the circumstance, but 14U is a time when it's going to start happening at most major regional and national tournaments anyway (so nobody playing for the better teams in their area should be too surprised to start seeing it at that age), and 14 is a decent time to think about preparing kids for the experience at the high school levels and above, anyway.  

 

But I am NOT endorsing the practice.  In fact the opposite, and I said so.  If the practice offends you, it is easy to avoid if you ask around.  The teams with reputations for this are easy to discover.  They are often good teams, and often provide good opportunities for exposure.  If a player chooses one of those teams without doing his research, and complains about something he should have known at the outset, that is a problem as much of his making as the team's.  If he knew of the reputation and still complains, shame on him.  

I'll add this.  I stand by my previous post that I think this really should be more like college, that when the roster is set in the beginning of the year, it stays that way - barring injury or team members not being able to make a tournament.

 

However, after reading some of the recent posts, it has been mentioned that this 14 year old team only had a roster of 12.  Personally, I think this is way too small a roster for a team entering some of these end of the year tournaments.  Whether it be PG or Panama City or any tournament that lasts longer than a weekend.  I just don't think that you have enough pitching to last through tournaments like that with a 12 man roster.  Maybe the coach realized this and decided to bring in some extra people.  Even if they weren't all pitchers, maybe he wanted to give some of the original kids on the team a break so they would be more rested and prepared to pitch.

 

I don't know if this is the case or not, but a 14 yo team with only 12 players is putting themselves at a big disadvantage entering in some of the big year end tournaments.

Bballman, I too agree that 12 is too small a roster to enter tournament play....unless every kid pitches and plays in the field.

 

But the point I want to make here is that people keep saying pick a team where your son fits, not one over his head.  How do you do that when at the onset, after watching tryouts you determine this is the appropriate level of competition for him and outsiders are brought in late in the season?  That is effectively making it impossible for a parent to determine if his son belongs.  Coaches who think this style is alright ought to charge weekly rather then for a season, that way the risk is shared both ways not just on the kid/parent who pays. There is only one reason I can think of coaches don't do that, they aren't willing to take on the same risk they expect kids to.  And, we are back it it's not right.

calisportsfan, maybe the coach didn't realize the task he was facing before the season started.  If he had been coaching pre-teens for years, he might not have realized what it took to compete at the big tournaments.  The risk you run into is not only running out of pitching, but over using pitchers and risking their health.  

 

However, if this was the case, it should have been communicated to the team.  I'm just making the point that a roster of 12 is way too small for those kind of tournaments.  12 man roster for 9, 10, 11, 12 maybe even 13 you maybe can get by, but 14+ it is not good.  I don't know the situation, but like I said, maybe the coach came to this realization towards the end of the season and made the decision.  Maybe he didn't know when the season started.  Either way, every player needs to compete for play time.  If a player is good enough, he won't be the one to be replaced when that time comes.  

 

Generally, I agree with you about bringing in players at the end of the season.  I'm just saying a 12 man roster at 14 is too small and it may have caused issues that would not have come up with an appropriate sized roster.

If I’m paying to have my kid on a showcase/travel team, he damn well better play.  Playing time doesn’t have to be exactly equal with the other kids, but it better be close.  I didn’t pay for him to watch other kids play.  I paid for him to develop as a player.  You can’t do that sitting on the bench.  Our academy coach did not stress winning at all (although they did win 80+% of their games), only development, and playing time was fairly equal over a weekend.  If my player is not good enough to make the team the next year, so be it.  If our coach/academy brought in non-paying players, and sat paying players, that coach would have trouble fielding a team the next year.

It’s a whole different deal in HS and beyond.  I’m not paying for a service.  Of course the best 9 on the team should be on the field.