Pet peeve! Why do parents of holdback kids
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It is annoying, but keep an eye on the kids that are on time or participate young and holding their own or on the back half of the team. As they grow into their bodies they overtake the redshirts. The redshirt is an advantage when they are younger, but as the other boys catch up in maturity much of the advantage goes away and being a redshirt can be a hindrance. I get it, on average, all else being equal, an 18 year old is better positioned athletically than the 17 year old, but on population level scales, the margins get wonky so that an on time or particularly young kid who has been good enough to hang with the redshirts closes on the redshirts really strong that junior/senior year. I’ve seen it a lot as a coach. |
Anonymous
What’s the functional difference between the 18 year old who is 375 days older than the 16 year old versus the 17 year old who is 350 days older than another 17 year old? Logically the older 17 year old is closer to the 18 year old in age, while the younger 17 year old is closer to the 16 year old, but if both 17 year olds are 17 on the *arbitrary* cutoff date, they compete against each other, while the 18 and 16 year old might be two full years apart despite having an almost identical age gap. (I have starred the key word for you.) |
Anonymous
Ask the parent who redshirted the 18 year old because they couldn’t stand the possibility that their son would be at most 364 days younger than his classmates. That’s the rub here: you can’t simultaneously redshirt a child and then claim the age discrepancy doesn’t matter. |
Anonymous
Exactly- if it makes no difference than why red shirt? Age doesn’t matter right |
Anonymous
You are deliberately missing the point; I assume because you can’t or won’t admit that after the kids go through puberty there are MANY factors that are FAR more important to their athletic success than their age. Size, skill, overall athleticism, etc. |
Anonymous
No...you are missing the point that it's the best athletes that are redshirting, not mediocre athletes...because they are competing nationally for D1 slots (made even more competitive because of the changes to roster sizes). Colleges don't care how old you are, at all. There are no age rules. So, the great 16 year old becomes an even better 18 year old, yet that 18 year old is now just a junior in high school. Juan Soto was much better at 18 than 16. Premier League soccer has 25 18 year olds actively competing and just 1 16 year old...of course, that 16 year old will become a starter at 18, but the great 18 year olds are of course just better than the best 16 year old. |
Anonymous
So if redshirting is so prevalent amongst the “great” athletes (and I would honestly love to see your statistics on this because I don’t believe this is happening on such a large scale to get so worked up about) and YOU had a “great” athlete competing for a D1 scholarship… what would YOU do? |
Anonymous
And yet, all else being equal, until around the age of 26-28 when male athletic performance peaks, an extra year of age does confer an advantage. Yes, the age cutoffs are arbitrary. But you seem to believe that arbitrary means illegitimate—which it does not. An age cutoffs must exist, even if it is an arbitrary date. Again, the fact that redshirting exists proves that people believe there is something materially gained by redshirting. Otherwise it would not happen. And if you as a parent aren’t willing to let little Aiden suffer the disadvantage of being a maximum of 364 years younger than his classmates, then don’t come around and tell us 375 days is no big deal and other factors matter. Your own actions betray your beliefs. I guarantee you that if all sports were age based and if redshirts were forbidden from participating in high school sports in their senior year (if they turn 18 before the start of the cutoff dates), then redshirting would immediately become rare and reserved for the kids that were outliers in their developmental delays. |
Anonymous
I know several kids doing a "5th year" of high school. One is going down to IMG Academy in Florida for baseball. It's actually standard practice to do a 5th year for hockey and we know a kid playing at one of the New England boarding schools. I love how you don't have an athlete, don't know at all what you are talking about...but sure, it's the rest of us that are living this stuff that are making things up. Here are stats on D1 basketball teams. Again, this is the average age of team which if it was evenly distributed between 18 - 22 year olds, then the average age would be 20...but'it's not. The average age of starting lineups in D1 college basketball has been steadily increasing. In 2019, the average age of Sweet 16 starters was 20.8, but by 2025, it had risen to 21.6. A 2025 study found that the average age of Auburn's starting five was 23.2 years old, showcasing the trend of older players in college basketball. |
Anonymous
I'm wondering how much of this is driven by attempting to maximize NIL money opportunities + 5th year eligibility due to covid. It will be interesting to see if the average age begins to trend down slightly since the extra covid year of eligibility is now gone. At the same time, NIL is almost certainly keeping players in NCAA that would otherwise leave from pro opportunities overseas. |
Anonymous
DP. The age advantage is real. And some kids are holding back in middle/high school. But the majority of hold backs remain from early education years. You’re mixing up a lot of different numbers suggesting that you are not as informed as you hold yourself out to be. 1. You are comparing and expecting the average age of TEAMS to be evenly distributed around 20 while citing average age of STARTING LINEUPS (the top 5 players). Starting lineups will almost always be older than average roster age, especially across the entire NCAA. You’ll find a small, select few teams (like Duke) last year where the starting lineups average age may be younger than the roster age. 2. Comparing 2019 to 2025 is an awful mistake. The NCAA granted players an extra year of eligibility if they were enrolled during COVID. This is the final year for those players (LJ Cryer for Houston in college basketball is a prime example). My guess is that the average ages of starting lineups will regress a tad as the last of the COVID players now cycle out of the system. |
Anonymous
The average age won't regress. If anything, it will continue to get older. NIL $$$s has completely transformed college athletics in sports like basketball and football...even at the HS level (kid at Highland signed a low 6 figure deal with Reebok). It will spur even more redshirting because many college athletes will earn more $$$s in HS and college then ever thought possible...considering most of those kids won't go pro. The QB from UGA transferred to University of Miami and is getting paid $6MM for one year. I think he is 24 or 25. He isn't even considered an NFL prospect, or at least a high draft pick. He makes 5x more than Brock Purdy does at the 49ers, though in theory Brock will get a nice payday when his rookie contract is up. |
Anonymous
Under NCAA rules you have 5 years to play 4 seasons. The clock starts ticking the first season you participate. There are notable exceptions like Mormon players on their two-year mission or injured players can get extra time. But, once a kid starts (at say 19) then they have to be done by 24. So unless you think kids will take multiple non-ncaa years and start at an older and older age, then there is a sort of firm upper bound to what average ages will be in the NCAA. THE UGA to Miami QB (Carson Beck) is another one of those Covid players who got an extra year of eligibility even though he redshirted in 2020. There is also an upper bound to redshirting in high school. In many (most) states, if you turn 19 before the start of your senior year you are ineligible to participate in sports your senior year. So, for average age to move up materially, you would need kids to take some sort of gap year. Between high school (prep like IMG included) and college. I just don’t see kids with the type of prospects to get paid real money college taking a gap year. |
Anonymous
|
They need to make ALL school sports age based. It’s the only fair thing to do. I’m honestly shocked that they haven’t done this already for equity reasons - lower class people need the free daycare that public school provides and can’t afford to redshirt them.
I’m relatively conservative on most things but I can see the injustice of correct age kids playing sports against kids so much older. You can have a spread of 2 whole years on the field if one kid is young for their grade and a redshirted kid is older for their grade. Not cool. |
Anonymous
This doesn't apply to private schools which is the route many of the top athletes go these days. Yes, there is an age maximum that will likely be hit...it just means D1 athlete's ages will continue to trend to that cap. Your $$$s in college are fairly tied to the school where you go. The Miami QB is going to get paid big $$$s...while anyone in a non-Power 4 D1 conference is lucky to get much of anything. If a Power 4 coach thinks you may be a recruit after a gap year, then most athletes will take/seriously consider that gap year. |