Feel bad for the kids who get cut in high school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have kids in elementary and high school. I am watching kids get cut in sports and activities they love and have played all their lives. Hate how competitive this world is.

I just saw my child’s friends get cut from a sport they have played together since elementary school. I feel like kids should all be able to play. Let there be two freshmen teams or have a practice squad or club team that doesn’t go against other schools.

What happens to the below average kids?

varsity sports should be removed from public education.

that is my opinion, I also watched from a distance as great kids get cut.

i agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do y’all weep for the kids that want to be in the advanced classes but don’t qualify?

No because they still get to go to a class. This is about an all or nothing scenario.

Hypocrite. It’s not all or nothing. There are literally thousands of clubs and rec leagues available. You just feel entitled.

We are talking about playing FOR YOUR SCHOOL! OP was lamenting that more kids cant enjoy a sport with their school. Its a special community activity and kids are proud to represent their school. Its not a question of playing elsewhere.

OP is bad at math. I wonder if she minds that not EVERY kid gets to take all the advanced classes offered at their SCHOOL. Resources are limited all around, but it’s only a problem for DCUM when little Timmy gets cut from the team.

Everyone gets a math class tho.

And everyone can have a sport. Just maybe not the one they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused by everyone arguing the moral righteousness of the different options

To me, is it not a logistics problem?

You can only have 11 players on the field at a time, who do you handle that if you are not limiting the number of players on the team? Regardless of selection criteria or ability

Even if this was a random blind lottery, what do you do if 60 kids want to play a specific sport?

If 60 kids at a school want to play a sport that has 11 players on the field at a time then I would create 4 teams of 15 kids, 11 starters and 4 reserves.

You could have a mini intramural tournament that way. The winning team could be the official Varsity/ JV team, depending on the ages , who go on to represent the school outside.

Fields don’t evaporate after school hours. Create a schedule of practices that include weekends, early mornings, evenings and the holidays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused by everyone arguing the moral righteousness of the different options

To me, is it not a logistics problem?

You can only have 11 players on the field at a time, who do you handle that if you are not limiting the number of players on the team? Regardless of selection criteria or ability

Even if this was a random blind lottery, what do you do if 60 kids want to play a specific sport?

If 60 kids at a school want to play a sport that has 11 players on the field at a time then I would create 4 teams of 15 kids, 11 starters and 4 reserves.

You could have a mini intramural tournament that way. The winning team could be the official Varsity/ JV team, depending on the ages , who go on to represent the school outside.

Fields don’t evaporate after school hours. Create a schedule of practices that include weekends, early mornings, evenings and the holidays.

This could preclude some rec and travel play then. Schools often allow non-school teams to use their fields. Is that a trade-off we are willing to do? More kids play for their school but fewer or no rec kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No travel player wants to play rec. Rec is for the kids who couldn’t make travel. The kids they teased and mocked and refused to play with in ES and MS.

But now that it’s their turn, it’s a horrible problem the rest of the world should fix for them.

You know that many kids under the age of 12 that feel superior because their moms drive them to travel around as opposed to kids who play for fun? And the won’t play with kids who don’t travel? What a great place to raise your kids!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused by everyone arguing the moral righteousness of the different options

To me, is it not a logistics problem?

You can only have 11 players on the field at a time, who do you handle that if you are not limiting the number of players on the team? Regardless of selection criteria or ability

Even if this was a random blind lottery, what do you do if 60 kids want to play a specific sport?

If 60 kids at a school want to play a sport that has 11 players on the field at a time then I would create 4 teams of 15 kids, 11 starters and 4 reserves.

You could have a mini intramural tournament that way. The winning team could be the official Varsity/ JV team, depending on the ages , who go on to represent the school outside.

Fields don’t evaporate after school hours. Create a schedule of practices that include weekends, early mornings, evenings and the holidays.

This could preclude some rec and travel play then. Schools often allow non-school teams to use their fields. Is that a trade-off we are willing to do? More kids play for their school but fewer or no rec kids?

Hell year- Kids at a school should get first priority of the buildings of that school.

Non - school members are not entitled to the use of school buildings! WTF! How is this even a consideration?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused by everyone arguing the moral righteousness of the different options

To me, is it not a logistics problem?

You can only have 11 players on the field at a time, who do you handle that if you are not limiting the number of players on the team? Regardless of selection criteria or ability

Even if this was a random blind lottery, what do you do if 60 kids want to play a specific sport?

If 60 kids at a school want to play a sport that has 11 players on the field at a time then I would create 4 teams of 15 kids, 11 starters and 4 reserves.

You could have a mini intramural tournament that way. The winning team could be the official Varsity/ JV team, depending on the ages , who go on to represent the school outside.

Fields don’t evaporate after school hours. Create a schedule of practices that include weekends, early mornings, evenings and the holidays.

LOL. I’d love to see you volunteer to create this magical schedule and get back to us about this solution.

Don’t forget that for each sport, you’ll need multiple teams and an intramural tournament for varsity AND JV, boys AND girls. Let us know the schedule you work out for the single basketball court.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused by everyone arguing the moral righteousness of the different options

To me, is it not a logistics problem?

You can only have 11 players on the field at a time, who do you handle that if you are not limiting the number of players on the team? Regardless of selection criteria or ability

Even if this was a random blind lottery, what do you do if 60 kids want to play a specific sport?

If 60 kids at a school want to play a sport that has 11 players on the field at a time then I would create 4 teams of 15 kids, 11 starters and 4 reserves.

You could have a mini intramural tournament that way. The winning team could be the official Varsity/ JV team, depending on the ages , who go on to represent the school outside.

Fields don’t evaporate after school hours. Create a schedule of practices that include weekends, early mornings, evenings and the holidays.

LOL. I’d love to see you volunteer to create this magical schedule and get back to us about this solution.

Don’t forget that for each sport, you’ll need multiple teams and an intramural tournament for varsity AND JV, boys AND girls. Let us know the schedule you work out for the single basketball court.

Oh, and don’t forget the basketball court also needs to be used for volleyball…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have kids in elementary and high school. I am watching kids get cut in sports and activities they love and have played all their lives. Hate how competitive this world is.

I just saw my child’s friends get cut from a sport they have played together since elementary school. I feel like kids should all be able to play. Let there be two freshmen teams or have a practice squad or club team that doesn’t go against other schools.

What happens to the below average kids?

varsity sports should be removed from public education.

that is my opinion, I also watched from a distance as great kids get cut.

i agree

If you support cutting Varsity sports do you also support cutting all theatre, musical theatre, orchestra, select band and choral programs where everyone is not guaranteed a slot?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No travel player wants to play rec. Rec is for the kids who couldn’t make travel. The kids they teased and mocked and refused to play with in ES and MS.

But now that it’s their turn, it’s a horrible problem the rest of the world should fix for them.

You know that many kids under the age of 12 that feel superior because their moms drive them to travel around as opposed to kids who play for fun? And the won’t play with kids who don’t travel? What a great place to raise your kids!

Kids under 12 also feel a sense of superiority over things like Pokémon cards. It’s the adult who’s emotionally affected that’s really questionable.

[Anonymous]

You don’t need to only use the formal basketball court.

For PE we used hoops on wheels on the all purpose playgrounds and fields.

We are talking about casual rec level playing. kids play pick up games in parking lots all over the word. Use your imagination and creativity, it’s not rocket science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused by everyone arguing the moral righteousness of the different options

To me, is it not a logistics problem?

You can only have 11 players on the field at a time, who do you handle that if you are not limiting the number of players on the team? Regardless of selection criteria or ability

Even if this was a random blind lottery, what do you do if 60 kids want to play a specific sport?

If 60 kids at a school want to play a sport that has 11 players on the field at a time then I would create 4 teams of 15 kids, 11 starters and 4 reserves.

You could have a mini intramural tournament that way. The winning team could be the official Varsity/ JV team, depending on the ages , who go on to represent the school outside.

Fields don’t evaporate after school hours. Create a schedule of practices that include weekends, early mornings, evenings and the holidays.

This could preclude some rec and travel play then. Schools often allow non-school teams to use their fields. Is that a trade-off we are willing to do? More kids play for their school but fewer or no rec kids?

Hell year- Kids at a school should get first priority of the buildings of that school.

Non - school members are not entitled to the use of school buildings! WTF! How is this even a consideration?

I don't know how the counties decide which outside organizations get to use their facilities but there are a ton of travel and rec sports that do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused by everyone arguing the moral righteousness of the different options

To me, is it not a logistics problem?

You can only have 11 players on the field at a time, who do you handle that if you are not limiting the number of players on the team? Regardless of selection criteria or ability

Even if this was a random blind lottery, what do you do if 60 kids want to play a specific sport?

If 60 kids at a school want to play a sport that has 11 players on the field at a time then I would create 4 teams of 15 kids, 11 starters and 4 reserves.

You could have a mini intramural tournament that way. The winning team could be the official Varsity/ JV team, depending on the ages , who go on to represent the school outside.

Fields don’t evaporate after school hours. Create a schedule of practices that include weekends, early mornings, evenings and the holidays.

This could preclude some rec and travel play then. Schools often allow non-school teams to use their fields. Is that a trade-off we are willing to do? More kids play for their school but fewer or no rec kids?

Hell year- Kids at a school should get first priority of the buildings of that school.

Non - school members are not entitled to the use of school buildings! WTF! How is this even a consideration?

I don't know how the counties decide which outside organizations get to use their facilities but there are a ton of travel and rec sports that do.

And pay for the privilege. A big part of changing how sports work will be financial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm still confused by everyone arguing the moral righteousness of the different options

To me, is it not a logistics problem?

You can only have 11 players on the field at a time, who do you handle that if you are not limiting the number of players on the team? Regardless of selection criteria or ability

Even if this was a random blind lottery, what do you do if 60 kids want to play a specific sport?

If 60 kids at a school want to play a sport that has 11 players on the field at a time then I would create 4 teams of 15 kids, 11 starters and 4 reserves.

You could have a mini intramural tournament that way. The winning team could be the official Varsity/ JV team, depending on the ages , who go on to represent the school outside.

Fields don’t evaporate after school hours. Create a schedule of practices that include weekends, early mornings, evenings and the holidays.

This could preclude some rec and travel play then. Schools often allow non-school teams to use their fields. Is that a trade-off we are willing to do? More kids play for their school but fewer or no rec kids?

Hell year- Kids at a school should get first priority of the buildings of that school.

Non - school members are not entitled to the use of school buildings! WTF! How is this even a consideration?

I don't know how the counties decide which outside organizations get to use their facilities but there are a ton of travel and rec sports that do.

Schools are some of the only facilities with gyms and fields- aside from a few rec centers. There is a big demand for space.

[Anonymous]

And the kids of the school, ALL kids should get free open access to those facilities year around for their health and development as is the only purpose of that School.