Comments on specializing too early

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I think we will just stick with the plan and drop baseball. If he changes his mind later he can always switch to that instead of lax.

I am an intense crazy sports parent of 2 teens. Your plan is fine. At this age you should prioritize yourself and what you are willing to drive to. Your kid should be having fun. Don’t worry about others or specializing in 1st grade. Only think about how much you are willing to drive, how much you want to pay and if he’s still having fun.

Neither of mine play the sports they did in 1st grade. Both switched at least 2-3 times if not more by HS and yes, one is on a high level team that (unfortunately) involves us flying for the sport. In 1st grade they signed up for whatever their friends were playing.

[Anonymous]

Organized baseball is cute and can be fun, but is pretty much pointless at this age, so you can easily drop it for a year or two and he won’t really even have missed anything. LOL. Playing catch in the backyard is far more beneficial than whatever is going on at the baseball field at these ages. If he changes his mind, he can restart fairly easily in 3rd or 4th grade without having to do much to catch up (beyond basic throwing and catching in the backyard, which can be done anytime).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok, I think we will just stick with the plan and drop baseball. If he changes his mind later he can always switch to that instead of lax.

Sad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

And see how few of them there are. High school basketball team has about 15 kids. Baseball, Lacrosse have about 20 kids playing. The only sport with large numbers is football.

Lacrosse players usually play football too. The 1% of naturally talented kids will play whatever sport they want.

The OPs kid is 6 years old and he’s in too many organized classes. If he has older brothers why doesn’t he play with them? Basketball hoops are everywhere. He can be introduced to sports without signing him up to everything that’s available.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

My point is that playing more than one varsity sport is getting tough unless one of your second or third sports is a no-cut sport like football, track, or cross-country. We have one boy that could do it at our high school, and he's 6'4, very fast and strong, and both of his parents were D1 athletes. He's the exception, not the rule. 95% of our kids need to pick a main sport and prioritize it if they want to make the high school team. It's fine to play other sports for fun, but by a certain age, you pick one main sport and resolve conflicts in its favor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

My point is that playing more than one varsity sport is getting tough unless one of your second or third sports is a no-cut sport like football, track, or cross-country. We have one boy that could do it at our high school, and he's 6'4, very fast and strong, and both of his parents were D1 athletes. He's the exception, not the rule. 95% of our kids need to pick a main sport and prioritize it if they want to make the high school team. It's fine to play other sports for fun, but by a certain age, you pick one main sport and resolve conflicts in its favor.

It sounds like there just aren’t many gifted athletes at your wealthy suburban school, which honestly isn’t shocking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

My point is that playing more than one varsity sport is getting tough unless one of your second or third sports is a no-cut sport like football, track, or cross-country. We have one boy that could do it at our high school, and he's 6'4, very fast and strong, and both of his parents were D1 athletes. He's the exception, not the rule. 95% of our kids need to pick a main sport and prioritize it if they want to make the high school team. It's fine to play other sports for fun, but by a certain age, you pick one main sport and resolve conflicts in its favor.

It sounds like there just aren’t many gifted athletes at your wealthy suburban school, which honestly isn’t shocking.

DP. Our high school also doesn't have kids who make multiple selective teams. For example, there is no crossover at our high school that I am aware of in boys' varsity basketball, baseball, lacrosse, or soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

My point is that playing more than one varsity sport is getting tough unless one of your second or third sports is a no-cut sport like football, track, or cross-country. We have one boy that could do it at our high school, and he's 6'4, very fast and strong, and both of his parents were D1 athletes. He's the exception, not the rule. 95% of our kids need to pick a main sport and prioritize it if they want to make the high school team. It's fine to play other sports for fun, but by a certain age, you pick one main sport and resolve conflicts in its favor.

It sounds like there just aren’t many gifted athletes at your wealthy suburban school, which honestly isn’t shocking.

DP. Our high school also doesn't have kids who make multiple selective teams. For example, there is no crossover at our high school that I am aware of in boys' varsity basketball, baseball, lacrosse, or soccer.

NP: similar here. At our school some sports are basically year round (baseball and basketball are for sure). And for girls, volleyball and softball. They all play travel most of the year, along with offseason workouts. Not as familiar with soccer and lacrosse but I think it is the same.

Now there are multi sport athletes in some varsity sports for sure- for example football & track, or football & wrestling, track & cross country etc. Those sports compliment each other a bit more and have large rosters or are even no-cut.

But something like baseball & basketball? Very very rare at our school. Kids will sometimes try to balance 2 very selective sports as underclassmen but almost all end up focusing on only one sport after the first year of HS or so.

Our school has extremely strong golf, tennis, and swim teams, and most of those kids also play only one sport (their main sport) and compete, practice, and take lessons in that sport year round. It is extremely difficult to make the golf and tennis teams at our school, while swim team takes most but many will not be invited to most meets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

My point is that playing more than one varsity sport is getting tough unless one of your second or third sports is a no-cut sport like football, track, or cross-country. We have one boy that could do it at our high school, and he's 6'4, very fast and strong, and both of his parents were D1 athletes. He's the exception, not the rule. 95% of our kids need to pick a main sport and prioritize it if they want to make the high school team. It's fine to play other sports for fun, but by a certain age, you pick one main sport and resolve conflicts in its favor.

It sounds like there just aren’t many gifted athletes at your wealthy suburban school, which honestly isn’t shocking.

DP. Our high school also doesn't have kids who make multiple selective teams. For example, there is no crossover at our high school that I am aware of in boys' varsity basketball, baseball, lacrosse, or soccer.

Seems like many responding are thinking back to their own experience 30 years ago. The reality is there is very little crossover at the high school level unless you’re talking a main sport and a no cut sport. There are zero kids playing basketball and football. Basketball is one of the hardest teams to make. Basically no crossover.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

My point is that playing more than one varsity sport is getting tough unless one of your second or third sports is a no-cut sport like football, track, or cross-country. We have one boy that could do it at our high school, and he's 6'4, very fast and strong, and both of his parents were D1 athletes. He's the exception, not the rule. 95% of our kids need to pick a main sport and prioritize it if they want to make the high school team. It's fine to play other sports for fun, but by a certain age, you pick one main sport and resolve conflicts in its favor.

It sounds like there just aren’t many gifted athletes at your wealthy suburban school, which honestly isn’t shocking.

DP. Our high school also doesn't have kids who make multiple selective teams. For example, there is no crossover at our high school that I am aware of in boys' varsity basketball, baseball, lacrosse, or soccer.

Seems like many responding are thinking back to their own experience 30 years ago. The reality is there is very little crossover at the high school level unless you’re talking a main sport and a no cut sport. There are zero kids playing basketball and football. Basketball is one of the hardest teams to make. Basically no crossover.

At least two of us are responding to our kids’ experiences NOW but okay. Keep thinking that your suburban wealthy schools are representative of the entire region or even country if it makes you happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

My point is that playing more than one varsity sport is getting tough unless one of your second or third sports is a no-cut sport like football, track, or cross-country. We have one boy that could do it at our high school, and he's 6'4, very fast and strong, and both of his parents were D1 athletes. He's the exception, not the rule. 95% of our kids need to pick a main sport and prioritize it if they want to make the high school team. It's fine to play other sports for fun, but by a certain age, you pick one main sport and resolve conflicts in its favor.

It sounds like there just aren’t many gifted athletes at your wealthy suburban school, which honestly isn’t shocking.

DP. Our high school also doesn't have kids who make multiple selective teams. For example, there is no crossover at our high school that I am aware of in boys' varsity basketball, baseball, lacrosse, or soccer.

Seems like many responding are thinking back to their own experience 30 years ago. The reality is there is very little crossover at the high school level unless you’re talking a main sport and a no cut sport. There are zero kids playing basketball and football. Basketball is one of the hardest teams to make. Basically no crossover.

They may be talking about smaller public high schools, or smaller/less competitive private high schools? I have plenty of friends whose kids attend those types of schools and play up to 3 varsity sports. At our large suburban public HS or the large private HS in our area- it is pretty rare to play more than one (unless one of the sports is no-cut). Nearly all of the cut sports teams basically run all year in some capacity (unofficially)…(travel teams, tournaments, camps, off season workouts etc etc).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Eventually your kid will tell you. You'll have the option to go to the park and throw the ball around they'll either have the baseball glove or lacrosse stick in their hand.

That's where we're at with swimming v basketball, but it wasn't OK to drop summer recreation swim league just yet.

IMO that is a little young for ball sport decisions, kids don't get eye hand coordination until nine or ten.

Why wasn’t it ok to drop summer swim league? It that statement coming from you or the coach?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take a look at your high school football, basketball and baseball games. The OVERWHELMING majority of these kids play varsity in multiple sports.

This must be a small and remote private school. The unfortunate reality in most communities is that single-sport specialization occurs by middle school. Which is awful. Even professional NBA and MLB coaches are lamenting the early specialization of today's athletes. People who play multiple sports tend to be better overall athletes and more resilient to repetitive-use injuries. I think the best approach is to simply pretend it's still 1984 and change sports with the seasons and ignore the pressure to specialize early.

And yet the talented multi sport athletes will continue to make the high school teams over the less talented kids who were forced to “specialize” at the age of 7.

I agree with your final point. Just because everybody else is doing something one way doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

That being said, OP is going the other way. Her 7 year old isn’t an athlete by any stretch of the definition- he’s a little kid. Maybe she should consider cutting back to let him play with toys or take a nap or something.

Sort of... Our high school has about 400 people per class in a wealthy suburb, and I know of only one boy who is a 3-sport varsity athlete and will play one of those sports in college. Of those sports, lacrosse is the most competitive in our school and all but the 1 kid I mentioned specialized pretty early and played a lot of club lax. I know of several kids who do two sports, but their second sport is a no-cut sport like cross country, track, or football. I know of a few girls who play a combination of lax, soccer, basketball, and volleyball.

Why is the bar now three sports? Most of the best athletes at our large high school play two sports at a high level; very few specialize in just one.

My point is that playing more than one varsity sport is getting tough unless one of your second or third sports is a no-cut sport like football, track, or cross-country. We have one boy that could do it at our high school, and he's 6'4, very fast and strong, and both of his parents were D1 athletes. He's the exception, not the rule. 95% of our kids need to pick a main sport and prioritize it if they want to make the high school team. It's fine to play other sports for fun, but by a certain age, you pick one main sport and resolve conflicts in its favor.

It sounds like there just aren’t many gifted athletes at your wealthy suburban school, which honestly isn’t shocking.

DP. Our high school also doesn't have kids who make multiple selective teams. For example, there is no crossover at our high school that I am aware of in boys' varsity basketball, baseball, lacrosse, or soccer.

Seems like many responding are thinking back to their own experience 30 years ago. The reality is there is very little crossover at the high school level unless you’re talking a main sport and a no cut sport. There are zero kids playing basketball and football. Basketball is one of the hardest teams to make. Basically no crossover.

They may be talking about smaller public high schools, or smaller/less competitive private high schools? I have plenty of friends whose kids attend those types of schools and play up to 3 varsity sports. At our large suburban public HS or the large private HS in our area- it is pretty rare to play more than one (unless one of the sports is no-cut). Nearly all of the cut sports teams basically run all year in some capacity (unofficially)…(travel teams, tournaments, camps, off season workouts etc etc).

The more competitive the high school the less kids playing more than one V sport.

[Anonymous]

People are responding for non competitive schools so that makes sense but those kids aren’t recruitment schools for the most part. They may have a kid who goes off each year but not a number from each team to play in college.