coachbwww,
Thanks for the suggestion pal, but this
is about kids. Very classy!
quote:Originally posted by thats-a-balk!:
coachbwww,
Thanks for the suggestion pal, but this
is about kids. Very classy!
OK, forget the beer, the kid is under 21, right?
But he can still play adult softball and have fun with their parents, right?
Dude, your not worth responding to.
It is a good thing that you were a youth
baseball coach and not an English teacher (I guess).
Have a nice day!
It is a good thing that you were a youth
baseball coach and not an English teacher (I guess).
Have a nice day!
quote:Originally posted by thats-a-balk!:
Dude, your not worth responding to.
Have a nice day!
Correction, It's "you are" not "your", Watch your language please!
you're 
What we have here are serious baseball folks communicating with rec baseball folks. Its like trying to mix oil and water. Its just not going to happen.
Is there a rule that seniors must play or must be on the team or play before underclassmen? I ask the question because there seems to be sentiment that if you get to senior year it is an automatic. when evaluating a kid you have to look a year ahead and a year behind. a kid is a junior who is behind him and what would likely be the scenario next season. Can he move to another position to help the team? Of course there are other things like somebody transfers in or out etc. If you deal with the questions before senior year you can avoid the messy stuff. Like many things a coach makes a decision. Making the tough decisions in senior year is one where a coach paints himself in the corner.
You take all this stuff out of the equation when you just play the best player regardless of what grade he is in. If the Freshman is better than the Senior then the Senior sits. If the Senior is the best option than he plays. Forget what grade kids are in. It does not matter. They are all on the team. They have all earned the right to be on the team. The player that gives you the best chance to win today is in the line up today.
Sometimes players are going to be close in what they bring to the table. Play both of them and rotate them until one gains an advantage over the other. Then the other guy still has the chance to overcome him down the road. You play the best players. If your a senior and you can not outplay the other guys then you sit. If you can you play. Whats so hard to understand about that?
Sometimes players are going to be close in what they bring to the table. Play both of them and rotate them until one gains an advantage over the other. Then the other guy still has the chance to overcome him down the road. You play the best players. If your a senior and you can not outplay the other guys then you sit. If you can you play. Whats so hard to understand about that?
quote:Originally posted by Coach May:
You take all this stuff out of the equation when you just play the best player regardless of what grade he is in. If the Freshman is better than the Senior then the Senior sits. If the Senior is the best option than he plays. Forget what grade kids are in. It does not matter. They are all on the team. They have all earned the right to be on the team. The player that gives you the best chance to win today is in the line up today.
Sometimes players are going to be close in what they bring to the table. Play both of them and rotate them until one gains an advantage over the other. Then the other guy still has the chance to overcome him down the road. You play the best players. If your a senior and you can not outplay the other guys then you sit. If you can you play. Whats so hard to understand about that?
I would like to have my seniors be the starters and I do give them the first chance but if they can't get the job done then they can't get the job done and they sit. Play the better player. Rotate until you find them. If they are equal move one to another position.
The last district championship my team won about halfway through the season I sat a senior down and started a freshman. To this day if I did not make that move we would not have won it.
I absolutely dispise the "You have to have fun" phrase. Mainly because it's taken so far out of context it gives kids the wrong ideas. I want my players to have fun BUT I can't instill that sense of fun into them. They either want to be out there because they enjoy the game or they don't enjoy it and shouldn't be out there. If a player waits for a coach to MAKE it fun he will be waiting a long time. A coach can make it not fun but the fun has to be internal. Maybe you can take a kid who has never played baseball (or any sport) and talk them into playing and they like it. A coach has introduced something fun to them but it's still the player having that fun come from inside.
Telling kids it has to be fun creates a situation where they think joking around, goofing off and not trying to accomplish a goal is fun. I wish I remember who said it on here about a year ago but the said - they teach their team about mature fun and immature fun. Each has it's place and the players must know the difference. I loved that because it summed up how everyone should approach the having fun situation.
Know when to be serious and have fun working towards a goal and accomplishing it as a team. Know when joking around and grabassing around is time to have fun.
The last district championship my team won about halfway through the season I sat a senior down and started a freshman. To this day if I did not make that move we would not have won it.
I absolutely dispise the "You have to have fun" phrase. Mainly because it's taken so far out of context it gives kids the wrong ideas. I want my players to have fun BUT I can't instill that sense of fun into them. They either want to be out there because they enjoy the game or they don't enjoy it and shouldn't be out there. If a player waits for a coach to MAKE it fun he will be waiting a long time. A coach can make it not fun but the fun has to be internal. Maybe you can take a kid who has never played baseball (or any sport) and talk them into playing and they like it. A coach has introduced something fun to them but it's still the player having that fun come from inside.
Telling kids it has to be fun creates a situation where they think joking around, goofing off and not trying to accomplish a goal is fun. I wish I remember who said it on here about a year ago but the said - they teach their team about mature fun and immature fun. Each has it's place and the players must know the difference. I loved that because it summed up how everyone should approach the having fun situation.
Know when to be serious and have fun working towards a goal and accomplishing it as a team. Know when joking around and grabassing around is time to have fun.
It is understood in athletics that the individual competes based upon his ability to deliver on a consistent basis, a better performance than anyone else for the position he is playing.
In sports I was told that your number on your jersey for outstanding plays and not your background, family connections, financial contributions, etc are what you are measured against, of course this is long before the current model of parental input that we all know influences decisions who starts at the LL level and it continues through college as far as I can tell.
JMO
In sports I was told that your number on your jersey for outstanding plays and not your background, family connections, financial contributions, etc are what you are measured against, of course this is long before the current model of parental input that we all know influences decisions who starts at the LL level and it continues through college as far as I can tell.
JMO
I am so glad that around here the coaches play the players that give them the best chance to win. I am very sorry that so many of you have to put up with coaches playing players based on politics. If you want your child to be in a program where their performance will dictate their playing time you can transfer to our hs. Just remember if they are not good enough they will not play. Does that mean we can still be friends?