Why are youth and high school sports so competitive to get into now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

Really? None at atll? Not XC or track? Bc it seems like its so different by school; we have a lot of options for girls. We are in MD, in a school of around 2,200 kids.

In the fall:

Football was no cut.
Field Hockey was no cut.
Girls Flag Football had the MOST cuts (but that may be because this is such a new sport & some kids just know enough about themselves to not even try out for the soccer teams?)
XC was no cut.

In the spring
Baseball made approximately 50 cuts
Lax was cut for both girls and boys
Softball only cut 2-3 girls
Track is no cut

So, at at our school, we have at least 3-4 options for girls that are no cut (they could join the wrestling team as well, which is also no cut, even if you don't get any matches). A girl could tie up her sneaks and make a XC team, or grab a stick and join the FH team

And essentially the same number of no cut teams for boys.

Meanwhile, the competitive sports have to cut a TON of kids. Basically, your kid has to be open-minded to trying new sports if they want to play a HS sport but there is an option for them

You listed one team sport with no cuts. At our school field hockey has cuts leave no team sports for girls that are no cut.

I understand what you're suggesting, but I disagree that XC, Track & Field, and Wrestling are not team sports. They may not pass a ball, or they may be more invidually focused, but you are still a part of a team

The individual nature of these sports really only comes into play at meets and that's a relatively small amount of your time. In any of these sports you will train as a team, race or compete with and against each other in practice, etc. You get most of the benefits of teamwork and social aspects as you would if you played basketball or volleyball or soccer. And actually even with team sports you always have starters and people who spend more time on the bench and for the people who spend a lot of games on the bench their experience is actually inferior to what it would be on a no-cut track or CC team because in those sports generally even the worst people on the team still get to compete. You might not make an event final or you might go out early in an elimination tournament for wrestling but you will have an opportunity to put your skills to the test whereas that is not always true for kids in team sports especially if they are underclassmen on a varsity squad or they play a position where they are just the alternate.

I'm in total agreement. The poster that says XC and track are not team sports is honestly just coming off a little obnoxious. As if their DD didn't make the soccer team, and doesnt want to accept the alternate options as viable. That they are not "team" sports bc the nature of the game is different.

In fact, the experience for the 50th member of the jv football team is WAY worse than the slowest kid on the XC team. The football player will never even get close to seeing the field. And in fact, in practice, they'll probably stand around on the sidelines most of the time too. They'll be third team defense and watch the first and second team defense get all the reps.

Meanwhile, the slow kid that joins XC will get all the same workouts, same coaching, and even changes to run in a race.

PP that doesnt think they are team sports is just being cranky and wants to complain

They just want to complain

I agree that cross-country and track are team sports, but as a side note, the kids who make varsity in cross-country and track come from doing other highly competitive sports when they were younger. The distance runners are former club soccer players, and the jumpers are former gymnasts. The sprinters play(ed) football or were gymnasts. I can't think of one kid on our varsity track or cross-country team who just started running in 9th grade with no athletic background.

That I find hard to believe

DP. A lot of lacrosse players run cross country in the fall for training. A lot of football players do track and field. There are still multi sport athletes today. Although your basketball/tennis/football phenom is harder to come by today. Other combos make more sense.

I get that, but it's actually somewhat rare for the top XCountry runner to be a top LAX player, and vice versa. Especially, considering everyone trains for sports at a young age...even XCountry/Track & Field.

The top XC runners are often former soccer (or lax) players who recognize they are better runners than soccer players and then choose to run full-time in high school and college. XC isn't actually great as cross-training for explosive sports. Their conditioning workouts are more like Hill sprints and box jumps. Still, if they want to do both, they're going to be ahead of nonathletes. The point is, at a good-sized school, you aren't making varsity track or XC without an athletic background because you're too far behind athletically to catch up.

This is categorically untrue. The actual top XC runners started training at a young age. The top XC runners started training in middle school and ran for club teams.

Maybe the top ones at your school...but not the top XC runners in the DMV or the country.

I believe Loudon County High School has produced national champion runners and the high school has won the team national championships. These aren't former soccer or lax players...they trained as distance runners at a young age.

Have you seen the physique of the kids running 14:45/15:00 times? They aren't soccer or lax physiques.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

Really? None at atll? Not XC or track? Bc it seems like its so different by school; we have a lot of options for girls. We are in MD, in a school of around 2,200 kids.

In the fall:

Football was no cut.
Field Hockey was no cut.
Girls Flag Football had the MOST cuts (but that may be because this is such a new sport & some kids just know enough about themselves to not even try out for the soccer teams?)
XC was no cut.

In the spring
Baseball made approximately 50 cuts
Lax was cut for both girls and boys
Softball only cut 2-3 girls
Track is no cut

So, at at our school, we have at least 3-4 options for girls that are no cut (they could join the wrestling team as well, which is also no cut, even if you don't get any matches). A girl could tie up her sneaks and make a XC team, or grab a stick and join the FH team

And essentially the same number of no cut teams for boys.

Meanwhile, the competitive sports have to cut a TON of kids. Basically, your kid has to be open-minded to trying new sports if they want to play a HS sport but there is an option for them

You listed one team sport with no cuts. At our school field hockey has cuts leave no team sports for girls that are no cut.

I understand what you're suggesting, but I disagree that XC, Track & Field, and Wrestling are not team sports. They may not pass a ball, or they may be more invidually focused, but you are still a part of a team

The individual nature of these sports really only comes into play at meets and that's a relatively small amount of your time. In any of these sports you will train as a team, race or compete with and against each other in practice, etc. You get most of the benefits of teamwork and social aspects as you would if you played basketball or volleyball or soccer. And actually even with team sports you always have starters and people who spend more time on the bench and for the people who spend a lot of games on the bench their experience is actually inferior to what it would be on a no-cut track or CC team because in those sports generally even the worst people on the team still get to compete. You might not make an event final or you might go out early in an elimination tournament for wrestling but you will have an opportunity to put your skills to the test whereas that is not always true for kids in team sports especially if they are underclassmen on a varsity squad or they play a position where they are just the alternate.

I'm in total agreement. The poster that says XC and track are not team sports is honestly just coming off a little obnoxious. As if their DD didn't make the soccer team, and doesnt want to accept the alternate options as viable. That they are not "team" sports bc the nature of the game is different.

In fact, the experience for the 50th member of the jv football team is WAY worse than the slowest kid on the XC team. The football player will never even get close to seeing the field. And in fact, in practice, they'll probably stand around on the sidelines most of the time too. They'll be third team defense and watch the first and second team defense get all the reps.

Meanwhile, the slow kid that joins XC will get all the same workouts, same coaching, and even changes to run in a race.

PP that doesnt think they are team sports is just being cranky and wants to complain

They just want to complain

I agree that cross-country and track are team sports, but as a side note, the kids who make varsity in cross-country and track come from doing other highly competitive sports when they were younger. The distance runners are former club soccer players, and the jumpers are former gymnasts. The sprinters play(ed) football or were gymnasts. I can't think of one kid on our varsity track or cross-country team who just started running in 9th grade with no athletic background.

That I find hard to believe

DP. A lot of lacrosse players run cross country in the fall for training. A lot of football players do track and field. There are still multi sport athletes today. Although your basketball/tennis/football phenom is harder to come by today. Other combos make more sense.

I get that, but it's actually somewhat rare for the top XCountry runner to be a top LAX player, and vice versa. Especially, considering everyone trains for sports at a young age...even XCountry/Track & Field.

The top XC runners are often former soccer (or lax) players who recognize they are better runners than soccer players and then choose to run full-time in high school and college. XC isn't actually great as cross-training for explosive sports. Their conditioning workouts are more like Hill sprints and box jumps. Still, if they want to do both, they're going to be ahead of nonathletes. The point is, at a good-sized school, you aren't making varsity track or XC without an athletic background because you're too far behind athletically to catch up.

This is categorically untrue. The actual top XC runners started training at a young age. The top XC runners started training in middle school and ran for club teams.

Maybe the top ones at your school...but not the top XC runners in the DMV or the country.

I believe Loudon County High School has produced national champion runners and the high school has won the team national championships. These aren't former soccer or lax players...they trained as distance runners at a young age.

Have you seen the physique of the kids running 14:45/15:00 times? They aren't soccer or lax physiques.

Yes, actually. My nephew estimates that ~ 50% of his D1 (Ivy) XC team had a soccer background. We have 5 college XC runners across our extended family on both sides and we (the parents) still run and are quite familiar with the good college distance runners. Soccer is to XC like gymnastics is to pole vaulting or swimming is to water polo.

[Anonymous]

What's with the one poster that lurks on this board and just craps all over XC?

Yes, many athletes from other sports use track to stay fit over the winter, especially football players. BFD.

And as others have mentioned, as fit as soccer or lax or defensive backs/wide receivers are, none of them are running a sub 15:00 5k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's with the one poster that lurks on this board and just craps all over XC?

Yes, many athletes from other sports use track to stay fit over the winter, especially football players. BFD.

And as others have mentioned, as fit as soccer or lax or defensive backs/wide receivers are, none of them are running a sub 15:00 5k.

Thank you! I’ve been wondering the same thing.

There is no such thing as a single “soccer physique”. Look at Peter Crouch vs. Messi. Or your average U13 boys team, where the builds and heights are all over the map. The fastest and most skilled player isn’t always the biggest kid.

Several kids at our middle school who have played club soccer since U8 recently took up cross country in the 8th grade. They’re excelling at it. Midfielders run anywhere from 3-5 miles during a game, which is why soccer and lax translate well to distance running.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

Really? None at atll? Not XC or track? Bc it seems like its so different by school; we have a lot of options for girls. We are in MD, in a school of around 2,200 kids.

In the fall:

Football was no cut.
Field Hockey was no cut.
Girls Flag Football had the MOST cuts (but that may be because this is such a new sport & some kids just know enough about themselves to not even try out for the soccer teams?)
XC was no cut.

In the spring
Baseball made approximately 50 cuts
Lax was cut for both girls and boys
Softball only cut 2-3 girls
Track is no cut

So, at at our school, we have at least 3-4 options for girls that are no cut (they could join the wrestling team as well, which is also no cut, even if you don't get any matches). A girl could tie up her sneaks and make a XC team, or grab a stick and join the FH team

And essentially the same number of no cut teams for boys.

Meanwhile, the competitive sports have to cut a TON of kids. Basically, your kid has to be open-minded to trying new sports if they want to play a HS sport but there is an option for them

You listed one team sport with no cuts. At our school field hockey has cuts leave no team sports for girls that are no cut.

I understand what you're suggesting, but I disagree that XC, Track & Field, and Wrestling are not team sports. They may not pass a ball, or they may be more invidually focused, but you are still a part of a team

The individual nature of these sports really only comes into play at meets and that's a relatively small amount of your time. In any of these sports you will train as a team, race or compete with and against each other in practice, etc. You get most of the benefits of teamwork and social aspects as you would if you played basketball or volleyball or soccer. And actually even with team sports you always have starters and people who spend more time on the bench and for the people who spend a lot of games on the bench their experience is actually inferior to what it would be on a no-cut track or CC team because in those sports generally even the worst people on the team still get to compete. You might not make an event final or you might go out early in an elimination tournament for wrestling but you will have an opportunity to put your skills to the test whereas that is not always true for kids in team sports especially if they are underclassmen on a varsity squad or they play a position where they are just the alternate.

I'm in total agreement. The poster that says XC and track are not team sports is honestly just coming off a little obnoxious. As if their DD didn't make the soccer team, and doesnt want to accept the alternate options as viable. That they are not "team" sports bc the nature of the game is different.

In fact, the experience for the 50th member of the jv football team is WAY worse than the slowest kid on the XC team. The football player will never even get close to seeing the field. And in fact, in practice, they'll probably stand around on the sidelines most of the time too. They'll be third team defense and watch the first and second team defense get all the reps.

Meanwhile, the slow kid that joins XC will get all the same workouts, same coaching, and even changes to run in a race.

PP that doesnt think they are team sports is just being cranky and wants to complain

They just want to complain

I agree that cross-country and track are team sports, but as a side note, the kids who make varsity in cross-country and track come from doing other highly competitive sports when they were younger. The distance runners are former club soccer players, and the jumpers are former gymnasts. The sprinters play(ed) football or were gymnasts. I can't think of one kid on our varsity track or cross-country team who just started running in 9th grade with no athletic background.

That I find hard to believe

DP. A lot of lacrosse players run cross country in the fall for training. A lot of football players do track and field. There are still multi sport athletes today. Although your basketball/tennis/football phenom is harder to come by today. Other combos make more sense.

A lot of football players also play lacrosse. Football players make excellent lacrosse players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

Really? None at atll? Not XC or track? Bc it seems like its so different by school; we have a lot of options for girls. We are in MD, in a school of around 2,200 kids.

In the fall:

Football was no cut.
Field Hockey was no cut.
Girls Flag Football had the MOST cuts (but that may be because this is such a new sport & some kids just know enough about themselves to not even try out for the soccer teams?)
XC was no cut.

In the spring
Baseball made approximately 50 cuts
Lax was cut for both girls and boys
Softball only cut 2-3 girls
Track is no cut

So, at at our school, we have at least 3-4 options for girls that are no cut (they could join the wrestling team as well, which is also no cut, even if you don't get any matches). A girl could tie up her sneaks and make a XC team, or grab a stick and join the FH team

And essentially the same number of no cut teams for boys.

Meanwhile, the competitive sports have to cut a TON of kids. Basically, your kid has to be open-minded to trying new sports if they want to play a HS sport but there is an option for them

You listed one team sport with no cuts. At our school field hockey has cuts leave no team sports for girls that are no cut.

I understand what you're suggesting, but I disagree that XC, Track & Field, and Wrestling are not team sports. They may not pass a ball, or they may be more invidually focused, but you are still a part of a team

The individual nature of these sports really only comes into play at meets and that's a relatively small amount of your time. In any of these sports you will train as a team, race or compete with and against each other in practice, etc. You get most of the benefits of teamwork and social aspects as you would if you played basketball or volleyball or soccer. And actually even with team sports you always have starters and people who spend more time on the bench and for the people who spend a lot of games on the bench their experience is actually inferior to what it would be on a no-cut track or CC team because in those sports generally even the worst people on the team still get to compete. You might not make an event final or you might go out early in an elimination tournament for wrestling but you will have an opportunity to put your skills to the test whereas that is not always true for kids in team sports especially if they are underclassmen on a varsity squad or they play a position where they are just the alternate.

I'm in total agreement. The poster that says XC and track are not team sports is honestly just coming off a little obnoxious. As if their DD didn't make the soccer team, and doesnt want to accept the alternate options as viable. That they are not "team" sports bc the nature of the game is different.

In fact, the experience for the 50th member of the jv football team is WAY worse than the slowest kid on the XC team. The football player will never even get close to seeing the field. And in fact, in practice, they'll probably stand around on the sidelines most of the time too. They'll be third team defense and watch the first and second team defense get all the reps.

Meanwhile, the slow kid that joins XC will get all the same workouts, same coaching, and even changes to run in a race.

PP that doesnt think they are team sports is just being cranky and wants to complain

They just want to complain

I agree that cross-country and track are team sports, but as a side note, the kids who make varsity in cross-country and track come from doing other highly competitive sports when they were younger. The distance runners are former club soccer players, and the jumpers are former gymnasts. The sprinters play(ed) football or were gymnasts. I can't think of one kid on our varsity track or cross-country team who just started running in 9th grade with no athletic background.

While that's not true everywhere (we live in an area where track and cross-country are offered at the elementary and middle school level so actually a lot of the varsity runners and field event athletes are simply longtime XC and track athletes and have never played other sports -- it's actually pretty great because it's one of the very few sports where you can become highly competitive through free or close-to-free programs at school and never have to join a travel team) you missed that this conversation was specifically about the no-cut nature of these sports.

The point is that some parents would like their kids to be able to participate in sports even if the are not elite athletes. And it's frustrating how "all or nothing" youth sports has become where there are fewer opportunities for kids to join teams and play a sport without (1) the kid having to be very good and competitive and (2) the family is not required to give up their whole life to the sport starting at a young age just to preserve the option for their kid to play it in HS.

The people who are enthusiastic that XC and track are more likely to be no-cut are not mad that kids from other sports might come in and grab varsity spots. If their kid doesn't make varsity it's fine. They just want their kid to have a chance to enjoy the benefits of playing sports in HS even if they are never good enough to make a varsity squad or get recruited for college or whatever.

Some of us just genuinely believe that sports are for everyone and that especially kids should have opportunities to play and get something out of it.

On top of it, if you don't get your kid into a sport at a crazy young age, it's next to impossible for them to catch up if they decide later that they're interested.

It's all a symptom of this competitive arms race American society has become, especially among the type of status anxious people who populate places like the DMV.