If your kids football team had over 100 on their roster, do most kids get playing time?

[Anonymous]

Nope no way. The same 20 kids will play the rest are practice cones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. There are 100 kids on the team because each kid brings money in to the team. Either through fundraising or directly with dues.
Think twice about this team. This is highly unethical.

Why is it unethical? They still get to practice and be a part of the team.

Every roster from high school, college, and the NFL has players who don't see the field.

Some kids want to be on the roster of a football team regardless of if they play.

+1

Also in HS it isn’t unique to football by any means. Many other sports run the same - basketball, baseball etc. and Track & CC have kids on the team who aren’t invited to most meets etc.

[Anonymous]

Show me a baseball team with 100 "players"!
It's unethical because they are collecting money from kids who they know will never make it to 2nd team.
The kids don't know that but if they were cut- like any other sport would have cut them - they would have the opportunity to get involved with something else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Show me a baseball team with 100 "players"!
It's unethical because they are collecting money from kids who they know will never make it to 2nd team.
The kids don't know that but if they were cut- like any other sport would have cut them - they would have the opportunity to get involved with something else.

No one is forcing them to play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you or your kids went to a big football school with over 100 on the varsity roster alone (JV and freshman are equally large) do most of the kids get playing time or do a large number just practice and stay on the sidelines?

That is weird.

That is exceedingly high.
I think we had like 50 on our high school varsity team and several senior players were there as a courtesy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Colleges can move to 105 rosters from 85 under the new settlement...not sure if HS copies things like that or what.

I'm glad it's getting reduced and even at 85 it's kind of ridiculous and I've always found it sad that football won't have players play both sides of the ball or be able to play more than one offensive position except on rare occasions.
11 x 4 on defense = 33 + 11 x 4 on offense = 33 plus a kicker and a punter or even two of each and that's 68-70 players. So with 85 there are 15 additional spots that are completely unnecessary, IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Show me a baseball team with 100 "players"!
It's unethical because they are collecting money from kids who they know will never make it to 2nd team.
The kids don't know that but if they were cut- like any other sport would have cut them - they would have the opportunity to get involved with something else.

No one is forcing them to play.

13 14 year olds don't have the best perspective on their own capabilities. That's why you have cuts.

[Anonymous]

The whole point of high school football is it’s a No Cut sport that can accommodate and gobble up any student that wants to play/participate in a sport. The ones that don’t play or factor into the depth chart (many) are typically just happy to be there and be part of the football culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No. There are 100 kids on the team because each kid brings money in to the team. Either through fundraising or directly with dues.
Think twice about this team. This is highly unethical.

My kid’s school lets any freshman play if they want to. They had 178 this year split between 2 teams. We paid 0 and did zero fundraising. How is this unethical?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of high school football is it’s a No Cut sport that can accommodate and gobble up any student that wants to play/participate in a sport. The ones that don’t play or factor into the depth chart (many) are typically just happy to be there and be part of the football culture.

Football at the varsity level is definitely a cut sport if you have at least a semi decent steam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of high school football is it’s a No Cut sport that can accommodate and gobble up any student that wants to play/participate in a sport. The ones that don’t play or factor into the depth chart (many) are typically just happy to be there and be part of the football culture.

It's great for girls because any time a girls sport needs anything, the size of the football roster and the resources it consumes makes for a very easy title IX threat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of high school football is it’s a No Cut sport that can accommodate and gobble up any student that wants to play/participate in a sport. The ones that don’t play or factor into the depth chart (many) are typically just happy to be there and be part of the football culture.

Football isn't a no cut sport. Track is. I can name several high schools in mcps that hold real try outs and cuts. Even at jv