College catchers

...and you have other programs that literally put "help wanted" signs up around campus because they haven't had a servicable catcher in 5 years yet won't recruit a local catcher with a great attitude, great backstop, great speed--because "they're not sure he can hit better pitching."

JT,

And he should be a left handed hitter!!

JT, I think many of the larger programs pass over the local talent. i have never understood that!!
Fungo

Our son's travel team catcher in HS was a real stud. He was a great receiver/blocker, hit for average and hit for power. He was drafted out of HS and could have gone to a D1 school out of HS...but instead chose to go the JC route.

Why? His dad told me that if he went to StateU that he would probably sit on the bench for 2 years before getting a real chance...at the JC he would play all the time and after 2 years be ready to step into a D1 program.

His plan has worked beautifully so far. As a freshman JC player, he was 'all-conference-1st-team' playing all the time and has committed to a top-40 D1 for next year.

Is this the right plan for everyone? No, but I think he and his father understood what Fungo has posted well before I did and the plan for them has worked very well.

Great story. Nice point about catchers, especially, having to apprentice a couple years. Kind-of puts things ina better perspective.

I remember a similar example. The kid was a great youth catcher. Didn't get as many looks from scouts as I thought he deserved. He is still active and thriving. I wish him well.

I too learned alot about D1 catchers this year. The way I see it, the first year or possibly two could be apprentice years. Many schools will bring in a transfer ready (as JBB points out in his post). Do your homework.

Coaching at the college level, any sport, requires lying.

Pressure to win means you better have more than one option.

So, they load up at any and all positions they can.

They could care less about the ones who don't play.

The goal is to win.

Absolutely, positively, NO player developement goals.

If my son were a DI athlete, he would go to a DII or DIII school for this very reason.

College coaches are not trustworthy when it comes to recruiting.

some good observations
just be careful with the apprentice mindset - don't count on a "loyalty factor", because
if a freshman can contribute more than an upperclassman, he'll likely get the job


JT/fungo, the thing about some programs overlooking local guys?

kinda like a fisherman standing on the log with a 5 lb bass lurking beneath, then trying to muscle his cast 100 ft offshore



linear - yikes & I thought they were TOO honest with opinions
anyways
what are DI coaches required to lie about??
when Birmingham Southern went DI, did coaches have to lie immediatly, or did they kinda ease into it?

you can consider it a rhetorical question if ya want

Sometimes it's an outright lie....."Yes, you'll play."

Sometimes it subtle....."you've got a great shot" (knowing there is no way he'll beat out the current player) But the coach gets him "for the future", or as a "quality backup" or "keeps him from the competition".

Brutal

If you're not looking over the ages of the current roster players and investigating their ability AND investigating the coaches track record on developing his underclassmen versus going to juco's, AND investigating the number of kids who transfer out, you're making a huge mistake.

Everyone on Dukes bench thought they'd be the next Christian Laettner. Many of them, I would say close to half of them, will not step foot on the court, in a meaningful game, their entire tenure.

Not all D1 coaches are liars...just as not all Midwesterners are cynics.

While it's absolutely true that the rosters are routinely large enough to allow players to assume roles such as the ones Fungo describes at the beginning of this thread, to suggest that D1 coaches as a group routinely lie and lack commitment to player development is as inaccurate as it is a gross generalization.

Linear

Perhaps you think that way because your subscribe to that theory.

College colleges who "lie" as you claim don't last very long. Not in todays world ?

WOW! Linear, while your statement is true in some instances, to make a blanket statement like you have shows a great deal of cynicism, and lack of familiarity with many very fine men who coach college baseball. To call college coaches all a bunch of liars takes major "huevos" and does a disservice to many who are anything but that.

I don't know that many college coaches, but of the few that I know a little bit, I can say they are honest and forthright; and I'd be honored if my son has the opportunity to play for any of those we've come to know. The ones I know DO care about their players, and their futures. Of the ones who are juco coaches (my son will likely play juco ball), their rate of players going on to 4-year programs is a pretty strong indicator of their commitment to these young men.

Linear, unfortunately you're right with your observations in some cases. Also unfortunately, I think some of these coaches have come to be the way they are due to pressures from parents and their expectations. Which came first, the problem parent, or the disingenuous coach?

quote:

Originally posted by Prepster:
Not all D1 coaches are liars...just as not all Midwesterners are cynics.

While it's absolutely true that the rosters are routinely large enough to allow players to assume roles such as the ones Fungo describes at the beginning of this thread, to suggest that D1 coaches as a group routinely lie and lack commitment to player development is as inaccurate as it is a gross generalization.

Really?

So, will the coach play the backup catcher next year, (you know, the guy who is now a junior, paid his dues, has been backing up the starter for 2-3 years, working his *** off, being good, waiting for an opportunity) after the current one graduates or will he go juco to improve the team?

That will explain the difference between "player development" and "we better win".

quote:

Originally posted by 06catcherdad:

Linear, unfortunately you're right with your observations in some cases...

You say "some" cases. Well, take the teams that are perennial top 10-20 teams. They do it. They have to do it OR they wouldn't be perennial top 20. How else can you have the best or near best talent every year? You don't do it by letting players develop. Players who "need" time to develop, versus those who "want" time to develop, don't get it on perennial winning teams.

I know you don't like the word lie. But, call it want YOU want. It's my shorthand term for what goes on in every top program.

You can't win without it.

quote:

Originally posted by Linear
Coaching at the college level, any sport, requires lying.

Linear, with that comment, you just tarred and feathered thousands of college coaches in several thousand sports programs at over a thousand colleges and universities. While the pressure to win is present at all levels, it doesn't require a person who lacks character in every program to steer the ship. Many coaches still cling to the nostalgic view that one of their responsibilities to to build character in their players, among other duties.

I guess you and I will just see this issue differently, and for that I am glad.

At major programs, players and their families are not routinely told that a "seniority system" governs playing time. Even at programs that bring in few transfers, recruited players are typically told that they'll "have a shot" and that the best players will see the most playing time, regardless of their standing in terms of longevity.

As a result, there is constant competition among players; competition that requires that they develop into the best players they can become. The players understand this and recognize that it's a process that makes them better as a team.

"Competitive?" Yes. "Deceptive?" No.

Does every recruited player have the responsibility of knowing as best they can the sort of environment they're choosing? Absolutely.

But, to suggest that because coaches don't systematically promote players because of their longevity in the program they are liars is a gross misrepresentation of what takes place.

quote:

coaches don't systematically promote players because of their longevity in the program

They play the best players and if you are relying on the longevity system, you are in trouble.

That's they way it is.

Deal with it.

I have no problem playing the best players.

I have a problem with what is told a player to get him to go to the coaches school versus what happens after he got there.

And if you don't think they are deceptive then go ahead, trust em. Don't do your homework.

But by so doing you're leaving an awful lot to chance.

It's a very hard assessment to make for position players. Much easier read for pitchers.

If mine was a pitcher and threw 90+ he would not be allowed in a DI program.

BTW, did you read what Rod Dedeaux said to bbscout?????????? Read between the lines. That is what all parents and prospects need to know.