HS age classifications

I say none of this UX or XU stuff. (I still don't know what's what) Just go by birth year- period. No arbitrary cutoff dates. If you were born in 2000, Jan 01 or Dec 31, you are a 2000 for life. That's it.

Same thing for beginning school- everyone born in 2012 goes to kindergarten in 2017.

But if we went by grad year vs. xxU how would we know who was "red shirted" by their parents?

bballdad2016, If we used my method, 'red shirts' would not be eligible as seniors.

.

"...everyone born in 2012 goes to kindergarten in 2017."

"Us? The four of us? What year were we born? 2012. We're here to re-up for kindergarten. Any problems?"



.

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

is that One Direction?

quote:

Originally posted by AntzDad:
bballdad2016, If we used my method, 'red shirts' would not be eligible as seniors.

So as an example - my 2016 was born in 1998. Are you proposing to use 1998 rather than 2016 or 14U? That seems like it could get confusing. Would grad years still go on rosters or just birth years? Many ways to skin this cat. I am sure there is a reason why the industry has stuck with xxU. Maybe PG Staff can provide some insight or logic and reasoning for it.

.

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
"is that One Direction?"

No. It's the top of Jughead's cap...






.

Once in HS, the goal for most if not all summer travel ball is to develop and have opportunities at the next level. So why not help the scouts by grouping players in teams and leagues by the dates they will be available.

Who cares how old the players are they're competing against for scholarships or the first year draft if their graduating year is the same, that's what sets the timeline.

The xU is fine when competing for that really cool plastic trophy.

quote:

Originally posted by mcmmccm:
Once in HS, the goal for most if not all summer travel ball is to develop and have opportunities at the next level. So why not help the scouts by grouping players in teams and leagues by the dates they will be available.

Ill buy that to an extent. So would you group them by grad year, or class. IE: 2015 or FROSH? So would teams and players then compete in a 2012/2013 WWBA? What if some of the 2012's (this year) are really young. Can they compete with the 2013's? What about the 2013 that failed the 3rd grade, should he compete with the 2012's or just dominate the 2013's?

What if, like HS ball you grouped them on talent level rather than age? That way the freshman stud is competing against the best kids rather than the best 14 yr-olds.

Why hold kids back? They play against the other teams best regardless of age in the spring, why not in the summer, too?

quote:

Originally posted by bballdad2016:

quote:

Originally posted by AntzDad:
bballdad2016, If we used my method, 'red shirts' would not be eligible as seniors.

So as an example - my 2016 was born in 1998. Would grad years still go on rosters or just birth years?

We'll just call him a 98. Birth year, grad year will be the same. But, if a 98 is a junior in 2016, he is ineligible in 2017. Free to play at jc or community college (with kids his own age) and his 4 year clock starts.

Our WWBA or BCS tournaments use both age and/or grad year.

So you could be a 17 year old this year but only a sophomore (2014 grad) and you would be eligible to play in the 17u (2013 GRADS) and you would also be eligible to play in the 16U (2014 grads) because you are a 2014 grad. Of course a player has no limitations when it comes to playing up.

We do this because many of the events are heavily scouted by MLB and colleges. They are most interested in grad year. The actual age information is available to all the scouts. So they would know if a player is an older 2012 or a young 2012. But most important is he is a 2012 for recruiting and draft purposes.

I can't think of any problems that we've experienced using this method.

At the high school level of travel, Legion, etc. where it's more about ability than age is something broken that needs fixing?

I see all kinds of valid arguments for kiddie ball. When the date was pushed back it added additional thirteen year olds to the LL field.

I don't know how high school could be standardized unless the federal government stepped in and told every state to have the same age standard. Is everyone happy with what the federal government has done to public school education so far?

What I liked about the LL and CR cut off date before it was changed is the most kids in the same grade played together. For what it's worth hockey uses birth year.

You guys (should) know by now how I feel about it. Just go to school when everyone else does.

quote:

by PGStaff
I can't think of any problems that we've experienced using this method.

I have coached in many PG tournaments. You are correct, there are no problems. In fact its pretty easy.

quote:

Originally posted by bballdad2016:


Ill buy that to an extent. So would you group them by grad year, or class. IE: 2015 or FROSH? So would teams and players then compete in a 2012/2013 WWBA? What if some of the 2012's (this year) are really young. Can they compete with the 2013's? What about the 2013 that failed the 3rd grade, should he compete with the 2012's or just dominate the 2013's?

Grad year preferably. Then all scouts would be able to look out at the field and know when these players will be eligible to 1. Talk to. 2. Sign. 3 show up on campus/camp to contribute.

I don't really have a problem if players want to spend the extra time and money to play up if they want but I would say let them dominate their graduating class because those are the ones he will be competing with to sign come November of his senior year.

quote:

Grad year preferably. Then all scouts would be able to look out at the field and know when these players will be eligible to 1. Talk to. 2. Sign. 3 show up on campus/camp to contribute.

Honestly, I have never run into a college coach who had trouble with this when watching my players play in the summer or fall. They usually are there to watch a specific player in most cases which would result in knowing who they are watching and what year they are graduating. The coach attending usually has contact with me about the player prior to arrival. They know something as simple as grad year. If they are there scouting blindly they always ask me for a roster with that info on it.

It's not that complicated.

To me graduation year is the way to go. Once you set it by grad year it doesn't matter how young or old they are for their grade. Like someone said they are competing against other same grade players for opportunities at the next level.

quote:

AntzDad

quote:

AntzDad

AntzDad...your post refers to kids that start late, do transition kidergarten or redshirt but what about kids that fail for real reasons? Some of those kids aren't bad students but have real learning issues. Should those kids not be allowed to participate in PG tourneys and others? Just a thought since you seem to have a slight vendetta against those that opt to start late, redshirt or go the Transitional Kindergarten route.

quote:

Originally posted by fillsfan:
Like someone said they are competing against other same grade players for opportunities at the next level.

While there always will be guidelines, the idea is to have the best playing against the best. In HS freshman play against seniors in many cases if they are good enough. Why change it in the summer. I see the age rules as more important pre high school. Once they are of HS age and looking to be recruited, it really doesn’t matter to the top player or the recruiter what ages or graduating class they are playing against. How many times do we hear on this board,"Why is my freshamn not on varsity". Last summer on my 18u team I had a 2010 (Jr college freshman) whose age fit and played with us and received at least 8 D-1 offers and is now signed for his last 2 years. Conversely we had a 2013 that was good enough to play 18u and benefited in the recruiting process and playing in the 18u level and will soon be signed. A Big Ten team that came out to see the 2010 grad also really liked the 2013. Sure the bulk of the players were 2012 grads with some 2011’s, but to the college coaches coming out to recruit my players it did not matter and does not matter one bit. They were all playing against great competition.

In fact, most if not all of the college coaches liked the variety I did have on the team. It worked for them in the recruiting of several different graduating classes. Most of the tournaments are 17/18u anyway so even in that regard you have different grad classes playing against each other.

I guess from my perspective, what is the problem with the way it is now. If it’s not a problem for the coaches recruiting, and its not a problem for those playing, why is it a problem at all?

quote:

Originally posted by BK_Razorback:
you seem to have a slight vendetta against those that opt to start late, redshirt or go the Transitional Kindergarten route.

It's more than slight, BK.

It's not starting late if complying with the law. The Pennsylvania law is a child may start kindergarten if age five by September 1st. They must start first grade if seven by September 1st. Kindergarten is not a requirement in the state. Most kids are six when they start first grade.

I never said it's illegal. Hey, if you're holding a kid back to gain some type of advantage over his/her classmates, just say it. But, remember- if everyone did it, there wouldn't be much of an advantage. Would there?

With a spring birthday my son was eighteen months younger than half the freshman basketball team. Imagine how it looked with a kid not yet fifteen standing next to kids who are already sixteen.

If you don't think birthday date's matter much, read the book Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell. A very interesting perspective.

quote:

Originally posted by gap2gap:
If you don't think birthday date's matter much, read the book Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell. A very interesting perspective.

Let's save everyone from having to read it. Part of the book talks about the following concept:

The book begins with Gladwell's research on why a disproportionate number of elite Canadian hockey players are born in the first few months of the calendar year. The answer, he points out, is that since youth hockey leagues determine eligibility by calendar year, children born on January 1 play in the same league as those born on December 31 in the same year. Because children born earlier in the year are bigger and more mature than their younger competitors, and they are often identified as better athletes, this leads to to extra coaching and a higher likelihood of being selected for elite hockey leagues. Outliers asserts that success depends on the idiosyncrasies of the selection process used to identify talent just as much as it does on the athletes' natural abilities.

This is getting more-and-more off topic but the fact of the matter is that every parent has the choice to start a child late, place them in transitional kindergarten or red-shirt. It's the parents option. You should opt for one of these if you truly think 6-8 months of age is all that junior needs to be successful. Its hard to complain about it when you have the same option as the parents that opt for one of these choices. I've never understood why parents complain about this "advantage" when they can do the very same thing in most cases.

I thought the topic was "what's with all these arbitrary cutoff dates in amateur sports?"

I don't know.

Just do it (life) like hockey and don't worry about it. It all gets straightened out, eventually.

No matter when the cutoff date is there are going to be younger players and older players within an age group. I personally feel it really doesn't matter that much. If a player has the talent it will show no matter who he/she is playing with.

I know kids held back and kids not held back (all at kindergarten time) and I don't feel it mattered one bit regarding athletics. It means more for personal maturity than for sports IMO.