Why don’t schools have stronger policies about redshirting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Redshirting doesn't really make any difference unless you do it multiple times. At least three or four times, ideally. Your 10 year old should be in first grade.

Usually for lacrosse you’ll see double redshirts. Summer and spring Kinder hold sacks then again at 8th. That’s the majority of D1 recruits. Other sports are based more on genetics and athletic ability.

Is lacrosse just based on size?

I really don’t think so. There’s smaller kids who do well but the average d1 player like most sports is over 6’. Lax is just a white kid sport that rewards this kind of thing. You can’t get away with it as much in football or basketball. Recruiters want to see pure genetics, not just parenting helping make it happen all the way through by holding back.

I love it when DCUM posters betray how little they know about football recruiting. Man, the lack of understanding is something to see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The redshirt debate is so dumb. The advantages are highly exaggerated. No one is going to think your kid is super smart because they repeated a grade. And your kid may feel self conscious and embarrassed by being older than everyone else for the rest of their time in school (not to mention being incredibly bored having to repeat a grade).

Lol no. The only people who have a problem are people like OP who think they made a mistake or missed out. It’s all upside for redshirters.

I’ve seen it go sideways in athletics with kids who were used to cruising by being the stars in elementary and when some of the younger kids came out ahead post puberty they struggled not being the best on the team and didn’t have the grit and work ethic to keep up and dropped altogether. I saw that even in 4/5 grade when kids started evening out.

I haven’t. No regrets in anyone i have known.

You haven’t reached a higher level of athletics. Both myself and my DH played D1- football and soccer and both of us are summer on time. You can’t fake it at the higher levels

Why do you think your recruiting experience from thirty years ago is at all relevant to how NCAA works today?

As someone with kids playing college now, I’ve found the former athletes are often the most clueless and entitled parents, because they think their connections will carry their kids and they don’t understand just how changed the landscape is from when they played.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The redshirt debate is so dumb. The advantages are highly exaggerated. No one is going to think your kid is super smart because they repeated a grade. And your kid may feel self conscious and embarrassed by being older than everyone else for the rest of their time in school (not to mention being incredibly bored having to repeat a grade).

Lol no. The only people who have a problem are people like OP who think they made a mistake or missed out. It’s all upside for redshirters.

I’ve seen it go sideways in athletics with kids who were used to cruising by being the stars in elementary and when some of the younger kids came out ahead post puberty they struggled not being the best on the team and didn’t have the grit and work ethic to keep up and dropped altogether. I saw that even in 4/5 grade when kids started evening out.

Same for academics.

If you are truly gifted, then redshirting can give you that edge to be a champion. But that needs to overcome the challenge of not being challenged in your grade level program.

If you are not truly gifted, but redshirting for edge, then redshirting is just delaying inevitable lackluster performance.

If you are holding back a year because you aren't mature enough for the original assigned grade, you'll thrive.

Truly gifted kids don't gain an edge by being redshirted. They perform at the top either way.

One of my kids is gifted and has a summer birthday and we would never have redshirted her because it would have been so painful. Can you imagine teaching yourself to read at age 3, and the. Not starting K until 6, and having to sit there while your peers sound out letters? It was hard enough at 5.

Starting on time and then working with the school for pullouts (for instance doing reading and math lessons with a higher grade group) has worked for us. We also supplement a ton with AoPs and a writing group after school. School is still valuable for socializing, making friends, developing classroom skills and learning to work with many different types of people.

Had this particular kid not been academically advanced, we might have redshirted for social reasons. But she was so it was off the table. But the social stuff is why she will not be skipping a grade. It will get easier in middle where there is more differentiation, as she'll be able to bump up grades for certain subjects and may even take some HS classes. Elementary has been about balancing social and academic needs. They are both important.

Most people are talking about boys when redshirting.

[Anonymous]

Feel bad for the kids of the parents on this thread. Redshirting screams "I don't accept my kid for the person they are." And those parents are going to be *so* disappointed when redshirting (inevitable) fails to transform their child into the child they hoped for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Redshirting doesn't really make any difference unless you do it multiple times. At least three or four times, ideally. Your 10 year old should be in first grade.

Usually for lacrosse you’ll see double redshirts. Summer and spring Kinder hold sacks then again at 8th. That’s the majority of D1 recruits. Other sports are based more on genetics and athletic ability.

Is lacrosse just based on size?

I really don’t think so. There’s smaller kids who do well but the average d1 player like most sports is over 6’. Lax is just a white kid sport that rewards this kind of thing. You can’t get away with it as much in football or basketball. Recruiters want to see pure genetics, not just parenting helping make it happen all the way through by holding back.

I love it when DCUM posters betray how little they know about football recruiting. Man, the lack of understanding is something to see.

Tell me what you know? Both Dh and I were D1 college athletes. Dh was top 25 college program for football. But tell me what you know. He was summer birthday bday, on time, young for his age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The redshirt debate is so dumb. The advantages are highly exaggerated. No one is going to think your kid is super smart because they repeated a grade. And your kid may feel self conscious and embarrassed by being older than everyone else for the rest of their time in school (not to mention being incredibly bored having to repeat a grade).

Lol no. The only people who have a problem are people like OP who think they made a mistake or missed out. It’s all upside for redshirters.

I’ve seen it go sideways in athletics with kids who were used to cruising by being the stars in elementary and when some of the younger kids came out ahead post puberty they struggled not being the best on the team and didn’t have the grit and work ethic to keep up and dropped altogether. I saw that even in 4/5 grade when kids started evening out.

I haven’t. No regrets in anyone i have known.

You haven’t reached a higher level of athletics. Both myself and my DH played D1- football and soccer and both of us are summer on time. You can’t fake it at the higher levels

Why do you think your recruiting experience from thirty years ago is at all relevant to how NCAA works today?

As someone with kids playing college now, I’ve found the former athletes are often the most clueless and entitled parents, because they think their connections will carry their kids and they don’t understand just how changed the landscape is from when they played.

Right. You think you know more as someone sitting on the sideline reading articles than someone who actually was a college athlete, makes total sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feel bad for the kids of the parents on this thread. Redshirting screams "I don't accept my kid for the person they are." And those parents are going to be *so* disappointed when redshirting (inevitable) fails to transform their child into the child they hoped for.

Sure you do. You should feel bad for OP kicking herself. She’s the only one complaining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Redshirting doesn't really make any difference unless you do it multiple times. At least three or four times, ideally. Your 10 year old should be in first grade.

Usually for lacrosse you’ll see double redshirts. Summer and spring Kinder hold sacks then again at 8th. That’s the majority of D1 recruits. Other sports are based more on genetics and athletic ability.

Is lacrosse just based on size?

I really don’t think so. There’s smaller kids who do well but the average d1 player like most sports is over 6’. Lax is just a white kid sport that rewards this kind of thing. You can’t get away with it as much in football or basketball. Recruiters want to see pure genetics, not just parenting helping make it happen all the way through by holding back.

I love it when DCUM posters betray how little they know about football recruiting. Man, the lack of understanding is something to see.

Tell me what you know? Both Dh and I were D1 college athletes. Dh was top 25 college program for football. But tell me what you know. He was summer birthday bday, on time, young for his age.

Oh my God you are so clueless. Let’s start with this: NCAA has almost completely changed since your DH played college football. It can barely be called amateur with a straight face any more. Redshirting for top prospects is part of the current process, as is use of community colleges. The transfer portal has transformed football in particular, and kids (men) are old. The average age of NCAA athletes is creeping up every year, especially the stars.

The point about how former athletes are the most clueless and entitled is obviously correct.

[Anonymous]

Our kids are young adults, but I'll always remember one of them coming home from second grade and telling me about their classmates who was two and three years older. Redshirted. I remember thinking to myself how these parents are going to have a 20-year-old high school graduate. People don't think about the backend of this stuff enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The redshirt debate is so dumb. The advantages are highly exaggerated. No one is going to think your kid is super smart because they repeated a grade. And your kid may feel self conscious and embarrassed by being older than everyone else for the rest of their time in school (not to mention being incredibly bored having to repeat a grade).

Lol no. The only people who have a problem are people like OP who think they made a mistake or missed out. It’s all upside for redshirters.

I’ve seen it go sideways in athletics with kids who were used to cruising by being the stars in elementary and when some of the younger kids came out ahead post puberty they struggled not being the best on the team and didn’t have the grit and work ethic to keep up and dropped altogether. I saw that even in 4/5 grade when kids started evening out.

Same for academics.

If you are truly gifted, then redshirting can give you that edge to be a champion. But that needs to overcome the challenge of not being challenged in your grade level program.

If you are not truly gifted, but redshirting for edge, then redshirting is just delaying inevitable lackluster performance.

If you are holding back a year because you aren't mature enough for the original assigned grade, you'll thrive.

Truly gifted kids don't gain an edge by being redshirted. They perform at the top either way.

This depends. Our county’s gifted program for math and English starts in 7th grade. Not only is it very accelerated in material, the pace is also very accelerated- as in it requires 2+ hours of homework per night. Even many kids that test into it can’t keep up. The ones on the younger side tend to lack the executive function skills and maturity to handle such a high volume of work and expectations

Give me a break. Send your kid to RSM and tell me how "gifted" they are. The seven year olds will run circles around your seventh grader.

My kids finished through precalc and 12th grade English through this program by the end of 8th grade. They have winter birthdays. Their peers with late summer/early fall birthdays that didn’t redshirt really struggled in this program and dropped. It wasn’t for lack of intellect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The redshirt debate is so dumb. The advantages are highly exaggerated. No one is going to think your kid is super smart because they repeated a grade. And your kid may feel self conscious and embarrassed by being older than everyone else for the rest of their time in school (not to mention being incredibly bored having to repeat a grade).

Lol no. The only people who have a problem are people like OP who think they made a mistake or missed out. It’s all upside for redshirters.

I’ve seen it go sideways in athletics with kids who were used to cruising by being the stars in elementary and when some of the younger kids came out ahead post puberty they struggled not being the best on the team and didn’t have the grit and work ethic to keep up and dropped altogether. I saw that even in 4/5 grade when kids started evening out.

I haven’t. No regrets in anyone i have known.

You haven’t reached a higher level of athletics. Both myself and my DH played D1- football and soccer and both of us are summer on time. You can’t fake it at the higher levels

Why do you think your recruiting experience from thirty years ago is at all relevant to how NCAA works today?

As someone with kids playing college now, I’ve found the former athletes are often the most clueless and entitled parents, because they think their connections will carry their kids and they don’t understand just how changed the landscape is from when they played.

Right. You think you know more as someone sitting on the sideline reading articles than someone who actually was a college athlete, makes total sense.

Someone who has kids who were successfully recruited to a top athletic college program now absolutely knows more about current NCAA recruiting than someone who is as painfully out of touch as a former athlete resting on their admissions from thirty years ago.

It’s funny to read how out of touch PP is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our kids are young adults, but I'll always remember one of them coming home from second grade and telling me about their classmates who was two and three years older. Redshirted. I remember thinking to myself how these parents are going to have a 20-year-old high school graduate. People don't think about the backend of this stuff enough.

It always comes back to the fake 20yr old seniors. Sure, sure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our kids are young adults, but I'll always remember one of them coming home from second grade and telling me about their classmates who was two and three years older. Redshirted. I remember thinking to myself how these parents are going to have a 20-year-old high school graduate. People don't think about the backend of this stuff enough.

I guess this thread got a little further than most before we had an anti-redshirter demonstrate once again that none of the DCUM anti-redshirters can do basic math.

It is so curious to me that people who are convinced their on-time children are brilliant can’t do basic addition on their own. It’s always a jarring disconnect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Redshirting doesn't really make any difference unless you do it multiple times. At least three or four times, ideally. Your 10 year old should be in first grade.

Usually for lacrosse you’ll see double redshirts. Summer and spring Kinder hold sacks then again at 8th. That’s the majority of D1 recruits. Other sports are based more on genetics and athletic ability.

Is lacrosse just based on size?

I really don’t think so. There’s smaller kids who do well but the average d1 player like most sports is over 6’. Lax is just a white kid sport that rewards this kind of thing. You can’t get away with it as much in football or basketball. Recruiters want to see pure genetics, not just parenting helping make it happen all the way through by holding back.

I love it when DCUM posters betray how little they know about football recruiting. Man, the lack of understanding is something to see.

Tell me what you know? Both Dh and I were D1 college athletes. Dh was top 25 college program for football. But tell me what you know. He was summer birthday bday, on time, young for his age.

Oh my God you are so clueless. Let’s start with this: NCAA has almost completely changed since your DH played college football. It can barely be called amateur with a straight face any more. Redshirting for top prospects is part of the current process, as is use of community colleges. The transfer portal has transformed football in particular, and kids (men) are old. The average age of NCAA athletes is creeping up every year, especially the stars.

The point about how former athletes are the most clueless and entitled is obviously correct.

If you're redshirted, you're by definition not a top prospect. If you were a top prospect, you'd be playing. See: Cooper Flagg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Redshirting doesn't really make any difference unless you do it multiple times. At least three or four times, ideally. Your 10 year old should be in first grade.

Usually for lacrosse you’ll see double redshirts. Summer and spring Kinder hold sacks then again at 8th. That’s the majority of D1 recruits. Other sports are based more on genetics and athletic ability.

Is lacrosse just based on size?

I really don’t think so. There’s smaller kids who do well but the average d1 player like most sports is over 6’. Lax is just a white kid sport that rewards this kind of thing. You can’t get away with it as much in football or basketball. Recruiters want to see pure genetics, not just parenting helping make it happen all the way through by holding back.

I love it when DCUM posters betray how little they know about football recruiting. Man, the lack of understanding is something to see.

Tell me what you know? Both Dh and I were D1 college athletes. Dh was top 25 college program for football. But tell me what you know. He was summer birthday bday, on time, young for his age.

Oh my God you are so clueless. Let’s start with this: NCAA has almost completely changed since your DH played college football. It can barely be called amateur with a straight face any more. Redshirting for top prospects is part of the current process, as is use of community colleges. The transfer portal has transformed football in particular, and kids (men) are old. The average age of NCAA athletes is creeping up every year, especially the stars.

The point about how former athletes are the most clueless and entitled is obviously correct.

You understand that the biggest component to playing d1 sports is and will always be genetics right? That hasn’t change in 30 years. You can fake your way in as the star of 3rd grade football team but you can’t fake it later. Redshirting in Kinder is not the same thing as redshirting your senior year for a spot on a d1 team. Apples and oranges, but tell me more.