Making high school team after being cut

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Cheesy 80’s and 90’s sports movies do a disservice to parents’ understanding of how coaches shape their teams. Yes, a promising freshman is more valuable than a senior who’s a little better right now. The booster club president has earned a spot for her kid. That’s just how it is, and really how it should be as EVERYONE benefits from her dedication.

Let’s take the story of the new kid in town, who the established kids bully even though the new kid is really good. The new kid struggles against the bullying, beats the odds and eventually joins with the reformed bullies to win the championship.

Now put yourself in the coach’s position. He’s got these kids who have played together since 9U travel. They read each other so well, know how each other moves. They’re invested in each other. In 80’s movie terms they’re a clique, and shedding one will upset the bunch.

But as a coach, if you have five kids for four spots, and four are friends who hate the fifth, then does it really matter if the outsider technically say fourth or third or even second-best? If the others will be mad and hassle the outsider, then the outsider won’t do as well. If the clique is mad at the outsider, then the outsider is a distraction. If you just pick the clique of four, they’ll focus on the sport and you’ll get their max performance, rather than 85 or 90% of a team that includes the outsider.

That’s why you’ll see cut lists that appear “unfair”. The coach has to think about what builds a program, not who scored highest on some drill. So do everything you can to show the coach he benefits personally from keeping your kid on the team. That’s how you can support your kid OP.

This isn't how I coached, nor is it how coaches of my kid's teams coached (my kid never played for me). Note that this is for school funded sports at a big public school with lots of community involvement. May be different for a sport like crew and/or at a private school.

For me and high school coaches I know, parents/boosters inserting themselves into team dynamics and trying to assert influence are a PITA and get nipped in the bud immediately. Kids' feelings about their teammates (except when those are based on a kid's laziness or selfishness) likewise don't get to impact the roster. The successful high school head coaches that I know very much believe that it's "my way or the highway." If kids hassle a player not in their clique or don't work with that player, they will run until they either see the error of their ways or quit the team. Allowing kids to determine who gets on the roster is a recipe for disaster, and if you are building a program, part of that is making it crystal clear who is in charge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid is in tryouts this week after a long winter conditioning season. The sport is not school-funded so we have a lot of expectations for money we pay and hours we volunteer. We had one round for the winter, and another coming up this spring.

After tryouts each kid meets with the coach individually to find out why they made or didn’t make the team. The coach tells the kids who get cut what needs to improve to make the team next year, and how they can make those improvements over the spring, summer and fall. Other parents tell me this relates to workout routines, as well as learning the craft by attending the coach’s summer camp or other camps.

How likely is it that a kid actually makes a team the next year after being cut? Will the coaches really look at my kid? Won’t the other kids actually on the team jump way ahead of mine? And for camp, could my kid attend a camp near where we summer, or is it be essential to get time with the high school coach learning what he wants.

My kid has never really done sports beyond rec before so I don’t know what to think. When I was young coaches would never keep a kid they cut the year prior, but they also never devoted a 15-minute individual meeting to tell you if you made the team and what you can do to improve.

Cheesy 80’s and 90’s sports movies do a disservice to parents’ understanding of how coaches shape their teams. Yes, a promising freshman is more valuable than a senior who’s a little better right now. The booster club president has earned a spot for her kid. That’s just how it is, and really how it should be as EVERYONE benefits from her dedication.

Let’s take the story of the new kid in town, who the established kids bully even though the new kid is really good. The new kid struggles against the bullying, beats the odds and eventually joins with the reformed bullies to win the championship.

Now put yourself in the coach’s position. He’s got these kids who have played together since 9U travel. They read each other so well, know how each other moves. They’re invested in each other. In 80’s movie terms they’re a clique, and shedding one will upset the bunch.

But as a coach, if you have five kids for four spots, and four are friends who hate the fifth, then does it really matter if the outsider technically say fourth or third or even second-best? If the others will be mad and hassle the outsider, then the outsider won’t do as well. If the clique is mad at the outsider, then the outsider is a distraction. If you just pick the clique of four, they’ll focus on the sport and you’ll get their max performance, rather than 85 or 90% of a team that includes the outsider.

That’s why you’ll see cut lists that appear “unfair”. The coach has to think about what builds a program, not who scored highest on some drill. So do everything you can to show the coach he benefits personally from keeping your kid on the team. That’s how you can support your kid OP.

Uh, that DOES sound unfair. Sounds like your targeting the "outsider" b/c the other little jerks on your team don't like him. Even though he's the better player.

So, yeah. Unfair. This is HS ball. Not the NBA.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Cheesy 80’s and 90’s sports movies do a disservice to parents’ understanding of how coaches shape their teams. Yes, a promising freshman is more valuable than a senior who’s a little better right now. The booster club president has earned a spot for her kid. That’s just how it is, and really how it should be as EVERYONE benefits from her dedication.

Let’s take the story of the new kid in town, who the established kids bully even though the new kid is really good. The new kid struggles against the bullying, beats the odds and eventually joins with the reformed bullies to win the championship.

Now put yourself in the coach’s position. He’s got these kids who have played together since 9U travel. They read each other so well, know how each other moves. They’re invested in each other. In 80’s movie terms they’re a clique, and shedding one will upset the bunch.

But as a coach, if you have five kids for four spots, and four are friends who hate the fifth, then does it really matter if the outsider technically say fourth or third or even second-best? If the others will be mad and hassle the outsider, then the outsider won’t do as well. If the clique is mad at the outsider, then the outsider is a distraction. If you just pick the clique of four, they’ll focus on the sport and you’ll get their max performance, rather than 85 or 90% of a team that includes the outsider.

That’s why you’ll see cut lists that appear “unfair”. The coach has to think about what builds a program, not who scored highest on some drill. So do everything you can to show the coach he benefits personally from keeping your kid on the team. That’s how you can support your kid OP.

This isn't how I coached, nor is it how coaches of my kid's teams coached (my kid never played for me). Note that this is for school funded sports at a big public school with lots of community involvement. May be different for a sport like crew and/or at a private school.

For me and high school coaches I know, parents/boosters inserting themselves into team dynamics and trying to assert influence are a PITA and get nipped in the bud immediately. Kids' feelings about their teammates (except when those are based on a kid's laziness or selfishness) likewise don't get to impact the roster. The successful high school head coaches that I know very much believe that it's "my way or the highway." If kids hassle a player not in their clique or don't work with that player, they will run until they either see the error of their ways or quit the team. Allowing kids to determine who gets on the roster is a recipe for disaster, and if you are building a program, part of that is making it crystal clear who is in charge.

Yeah. Umm. So you probably don't know any volleyball coaches. The team dynamics can be toxic for that sport.