That thread Highschool politics did not need to be closed. I was in the middle of a reply to Thrit and boom you close it. It wasnt being productive, we were figuring things out.That is not good decision to close a thread like that.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
fan
I am with you-- we were debating
Perhaps now you see why posters get upset--discussion evolving and then SHUT OFF__)_and look by who!!!!
I am with you-- we were debating
Perhaps now you see why posters get upset--discussion evolving and then SHUT OFF__)_and look by who!!!!
I am dissapointed when I was in the middle of sending you a reply.Thrit, Ill send you a PM.
That was a poor decision, I was actively in a good discussion with posters,I said my piece, they responded,nothing bad was being said, open criticism that if worked out , I think we could of come to a amicable agreement, or a peaceful by gones be by gones. Please dont close thread when they arent out of line.Just becasue you dont think its productive I felt like it was getting to a point where it could of been.
That was a poor decision, I was actively in a good discussion with posters,I said my piece, they responded,nothing bad was being said, open criticism that if worked out , I think we could of come to a amicable agreement, or a peaceful by gones be by gones. Please dont close thread when they arent out of line.Just becasue you dont think its productive I felt like it was getting to a point where it could of been.
I am still curious about this situation. I would like your opinion as to whether my thinking is out "in left field" 
It does seem like there would be some loyalty to players already on the team. That doesn't mean that laziness should be acceptable, but that if they are solid players, they should be selected over an incoming freshman. In my son's case, even if he tries out next year, his junior year, those freshmen coming in are in large part on the coach's travel team, so if they get put into the only 2 or 3 Varsity spots left open by outgoing seniors, my son is out of luck (He can't play on JV then so why do they not have some loyalty to older players?) In every other arena, you must climb to the top by way of hard work and earning your position. I disagree that a whole team of freshmen should just skip over JV instead of earning those positions.
In football, a dad (happens to be the same dad of boy who got onto baseball team as a freshman) got the coach to put his son onto JV as an 8th grader (over a group of 9th grade boys who had played 2 years of "C" team and were earning their rights to the JV positions). This boy never played a day of "C" team. I can assure you that there were MANY much bigger "C-team" players who could have outplayed him.
Please don't jump me for this, but I don't think that it should be ALL about winning! Unless a player is just outstanding over all the rest (and these do come along sometimes), loyalty to the team as a whole should be considered above (not instead of) chemistry, etc. (which sounds a little like justification to me) Who's to say chemistry couldn't be produced by an all new team. I have certainly seen this happen!
It does seem like there would be some loyalty to players already on the team. That doesn't mean that laziness should be acceptable, but that if they are solid players, they should be selected over an incoming freshman. In my son's case, even if he tries out next year, his junior year, those freshmen coming in are in large part on the coach's travel team, so if they get put into the only 2 or 3 Varsity spots left open by outgoing seniors, my son is out of luck (He can't play on JV then so why do they not have some loyalty to older players?) In every other arena, you must climb to the top by way of hard work and earning your position. I disagree that a whole team of freshmen should just skip over JV instead of earning those positions.
In football, a dad (happens to be the same dad of boy who got onto baseball team as a freshman) got the coach to put his son onto JV as an 8th grader (over a group of 9th grade boys who had played 2 years of "C" team and were earning their rights to the JV positions). This boy never played a day of "C" team. I can assure you that there were MANY much bigger "C-team" players who could have outplayed him.
Please don't jump me for this, but I don't think that it should be ALL about winning! Unless a player is just outstanding over all the rest (and these do come along sometimes), loyalty to the team as a whole should be considered above (not instead of) chemistry, etc. (which sounds a little like justification to me) Who's to say chemistry couldn't be produced by an all new team. I have certainly seen this happen!
mom1211,
First, I agree there should be loyalty to the seniors. Especially if they have worked hard and been committied to the program.
My advice to you, move past the politics or whatever is happening. Focus on your son. Have him go to coach and ask why he was cut(if he hasnt already done that)Focus on what is in your control ,leave the rest alone.Have somebody give you an honest eval. of your son.Good or bad, take the weaknessess and make them his strenghts.
A lot can happen in a year if he works hard and gets stronger.As far as it being about winning,sorry to say but a lot of it is about playing to win for most coaches.
When you get to HS baseball and beyond, its not about making everyone feel good.The best players play.There are bad situations, fortunatley we did not come across them.
The best thing for your son is to be able to accept whatever his weaknesses are about the game and start working on them.My son was told many negative things when he was young, he was to small, he had a weak arm, he didnt have power, he wasnt fast, the list goes on. But he had something people overlooked, heart and a will to work harder and more than anyone else on his teams.Now he is in Junior college and its a different kid altogether. I would never had ever figured he would be playing the way he is. Determination and love of the game, skill and knowledge of game, great work ethic, never give up.Those things will take you farther than you think. Then as his body finally turns into a man, look out baseball fans LOL
First, I agree there should be loyalty to the seniors. Especially if they have worked hard and been committied to the program.
My advice to you, move past the politics or whatever is happening. Focus on your son. Have him go to coach and ask why he was cut(if he hasnt already done that)Focus on what is in your control ,leave the rest alone.Have somebody give you an honest eval. of your son.Good or bad, take the weaknessess and make them his strenghts.
A lot can happen in a year if he works hard and gets stronger.As far as it being about winning,sorry to say but a lot of it is about playing to win for most coaches.
When you get to HS baseball and beyond, its not about making everyone feel good.The best players play.There are bad situations, fortunatley we did not come across them.
The best thing for your son is to be able to accept whatever his weaknesses are about the game and start working on them.My son was told many negative things when he was young, he was to small, he had a weak arm, he didnt have power, he wasnt fast, the list goes on. But he had something people overlooked, heart and a will to work harder and more than anyone else on his teams.Now he is in Junior college and its a different kid altogether. I would never had ever figured he would be playing the way he is. Determination and love of the game, skill and knowledge of game, great work ethic, never give up.Those things will take you farther than you think. Then as his body finally turns into a man, look out baseball fans LOL
Awesome response! That is the direction we're heading!
quote:Originally posted by Mom1211:
I don't think that it should be ALL about winning!
I mostly disagree with that. I think that high schools should set up a selection process for their varsity and sub-varsity teams that maximizes their chances of winning in this and subsequent years. Talent, developed skill, chemistry, player size, projection, etc. should all factor into selection, and the balance between these should be chosen to give the best odds of winning.
What about loyalty, for example? It should only come into play if a lack of loyalty to the player will affect chemistry enough to impact the chances of winning. (Very few programs will cut a senior, but a senior may find that his playing time is greatly reduced from previous years.)
Or should a team prefer a skilled junior to a more talented but less developed sophomore? I think it depends on the situation, but the general principle should be to maximize for this and subsequent years. That might mean leaving a sophomore on JV to get more playing time, or it might mean bringing him up to take advantage of his rapid learning curve.
High school sports are competitive. There are plenty of non-baseball lessons to be learned from success or failure. In my opinion, loyalty for the sake of loyalty, as opposed to loyalty to avoid a loss of morale in the remaining players, really has little value.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mom1211:
I am still curious about this situation. I would like your opinion as to whether my thinking is out "in left field"
It does seem like there would be some loyalty to players already on the team. That doesn't mean that laziness should be acceptable, but that if they are solid players, they should be selected over an incoming freshman. In my son's case, even if he tries out next year, his junior year, those freshmen coming in are in large part on the coach's travel team,
It's a by product of the current playing up mind set.
I recall going to 17u tournaments and seeing young kids 14 & 15 trying to compete. Yes a few could hang but for the most part they would get whacked.
The same will happen with this hybrid tbhs team.
Yes they will get better over time. But for now if the team loses, Your going to hear alot of "What did you expect your playing a bunch of freshman". It's a no win for the opposing team.
I am still curious about this situation. I would like your opinion as to whether my thinking is out "in left field"
It does seem like there would be some loyalty to players already on the team. That doesn't mean that laziness should be acceptable, but that if they are solid players, they should be selected over an incoming freshman. In my son's case, even if he tries out next year, his junior year, those freshmen coming in are in large part on the coach's travel team,
It's a by product of the current playing up mind set.
I recall going to 17u tournaments and seeing young kids 14 & 15 trying to compete. Yes a few could hang but for the most part they would get whacked.
The same will happen with this hybrid tbhs team.
Yes they will get better over time. But for now if the team loses, Your going to hear alot of "What did you expect your playing a bunch of freshman". It's a no win for the opposing team.
I agree FOG... sometimes it's best to let the debate continue, even if the thread takes a different direction than was originally intended. It's like a conversation - sometimes where you start and where you end are at two different places, but lots of good stuff happens in between. People were disagreeing, but I didn't see anyone being disagreeable.
Did a little internet sleuthing on the team in question - it appears there are 8 soph-junior-senior players and FIFTEEN freshmen on the roster. Hmmmm... The starters are listed as 4 upperclassmen, one sophomore and four freshmen. I would definitely question the wisdom of putting any underclassman on a team where he (or she) was not good enough to be a starter and apparently, at least in the early go, eleven of these fifteen are not.
I would also say this in regard to players standing on their own two feet with team issues - I agree that kids need to learn to fight their own fights, but when the disagreement is between an adult (coach or teacher) and a young person (player or student) I believe it's my right as a parent to make sure that it is at least a fair fight. There are some situations where the sides are so out of balance that it takes some pressure from someone on equal ground to get things worked out.
I don't know the details of this particular situation, but I know that if my senior son was cut from a team so that a coach could bring in an entire team of freshmen WHO ARE NOT ALL STARTERS - and that happened to be a group of boys that he has coached for years - I would consider that an appropriate time for another adult to ask some questions.
And I agree that a coach owes some loyalty to his junior and senior players - why are those boys still in the program if they weren't varsity quality? Was he just using them as warm bodies to fill spots until his freshmen players finally got to high school? That's wrong, in my opinion.
Did a little internet sleuthing on the team in question - it appears there are 8 soph-junior-senior players and FIFTEEN freshmen on the roster. Hmmmm... The starters are listed as 4 upperclassmen, one sophomore and four freshmen. I would definitely question the wisdom of putting any underclassman on a team where he (or she) was not good enough to be a starter and apparently, at least in the early go, eleven of these fifteen are not.
I would also say this in regard to players standing on their own two feet with team issues - I agree that kids need to learn to fight their own fights, but when the disagreement is between an adult (coach or teacher) and a young person (player or student) I believe it's my right as a parent to make sure that it is at least a fair fight. There are some situations where the sides are so out of balance that it takes some pressure from someone on equal ground to get things worked out.
I don't know the details of this particular situation, but I know that if my senior son was cut from a team so that a coach could bring in an entire team of freshmen WHO ARE NOT ALL STARTERS - and that happened to be a group of boys that he has coached for years - I would consider that an appropriate time for another adult to ask some questions.
And I agree that a coach owes some loyalty to his junior and senior players - why are those boys still in the program if they weren't varsity quality? Was he just using them as warm bodies to fill spots until his freshmen players finally got to high school? That's wrong, in my opinion.
quote:if my senior son was cut from a team so that a coach could bring in an entire team of freshmen WHO ARE NOT ALL STARTERS - and that happened to be a group of boys that he has coached for years - I would consider that an appropriate time for another adult to ask some questions.
And I agree that a coach owes some loyalty to his junior and senior players - why are those boys still in the program if they weren't varsity quality? Was he just using them as warm bodies to fill spots until his freshmen players finally got to high school? That's wrong, in my opinion.
Thank you for this explanation. This sounds fair to me.
quote:First, I agree there should be loyalty to the seniors. ....
My advice to you, move past the politics or whatever is happening.
Careful, you can't have it both ways. "Loyalty" is one of those outside-the-lines problems that creates politics. Loyalty is a really nice thing, but when you practice it, you start getting farther away from putting the "best 9" on the field.
However, I think the more important point is that THAT many Freshmen aren't better than THAT many Seniors. The second point is that the program won't continue to develop very well by leap-frogging so many Freshmen past JV. Thus leading all those posters to the correct conclusion that this coach is an idiot. With missing male parts.
For the record, I for one didn't even know TPM was a female until fanofgame started ranting about women not getting respect on this site. For that matter, I didn't know fanofgame was, either. All I knew was that FOG was a really bad speller.
quote:For the record, I for one didn't even know TPM was a female until fanofgame started ranting about women not getting respect on this site. For that matter, I didn't know fanofgame was, either. All I knew was that FOG was a really bad speller.
Posts: 64 | Location: Texas | Registered
Typical post that serves no purpose and is just a stupid comment.
Fan: it would have been funnier if you would have said:
"stoopid"
Just trying to lighten things a little!!
"stoopid"
Just trying to lighten things a little!!TPM:tiger pitcher mom helloooooo
quote:Originally posted by fanofgame:
TPM:tiger pitcher mom helloooooo
Ahem, that's Tiger Paw Mom. Son went to Clemson.
Now that is a good correction. I though it was Tiger Paw mom, anyway MOM is the main theme here LOL
Hop al mi words ar spellt corectlie sinse i am geting mi bachlorz in a semezter.
Hop al mi words ar spellt corectlie sinse i am geting mi bachlorz in a semezter.
My son's old high school coach always let senior players remain on the roster IF they were in the program from their Freshman year on. Many of which were not starters but were there because of their loyalty. Some choose not to play any more if they didn't start, others choose to be part of the team. He had some players who only got very little playing time but were part of the team.
On the other hand, I saw some of the lower classman moved up to Varsity and by the time of their Junior years, egos out weighed the ability and seperated themselves from the team because they came up early.
IMHO, chemistry and ability make a good team, ablilty and no chemistry creates a cancer.
"just when I figured out yesterday, along comes today"
On the other hand, I saw some of the lower classman moved up to Varsity and by the time of their Junior years, egos out weighed the ability and seperated themselves from the team because they came up early.
IMHO, chemistry and ability make a good team, ablilty and no chemistry creates a cancer.
"just when I figured out yesterday, along comes today"
quote:Originally posted by fanofgame:
Typical post that serves no purpose and is just a stupid comment.
I can be pretty typical at times. Congratulations on that bachelor's degree, Mom.
quote:chemistry and ability make a good team, ablilty and no chemistry creates a cancer.
Why could these players not have been put onto JV where their "chemistry" could mix for another year or two and be REALLY good when their size and strength caught up with their chemistry?
quote:IMHO, chemistry and ability make a good team, ablilty and no chemistry creates a cancer.
quote:Why could these players not have been put onto JV where their "chemistry" could mix for another year or two and be REALLY good when their size and strength caught up with their chemistry?
I agree! The only reason I could see for ever doing something like this is if your Freshman and J.V. Coaches can't teach.
Sorry Mom and others,
Shouldn't have posted. just fustrated with the current players on the team that my son and others worked hard to make a good winning team after many years until they graduated.
again, Sorry
Shouldn't have posted. just fustrated with the current players on the team that my son and others worked hard to make a good winning team after many years until they graduated.
again, Sorry
Why are you apologizing? 
Coaches generally play what they consider the line-up that gives their Team the best chance to win. Most coaches will give older players the opportunity to prove themselves but with that said Fairness is a 2 way street, the older player feels an entitlement and thinks the younger player should wait their turn but who does this help? What about the other juniors and seniors on the team that need the best players available to enable the TEAM to be the best it can be? I feel for the older players that feel passed over when a younger player plays or makes team but in most instances these players were not ever going to play anyway.High School Sports are not mean't to be intramural they are very very competitive and being Fair to the entire Team sometimes means giving younger players the opportunity to help the older players win.