Sidwell football article in post....what are the parents saying?

[Anonymous]

I don't care in the long run whether my child's team wins or loses. (Of course I will be standing on the sidelines cheering for my kid's team when it plays, but just between you and me, I don't care whether or not they win.)

This is precisely the mentality of sports at Sidwell. If this is one's attitude as well, this is the school for you; if not, you should look elsewhere.

It is the attitude of the administration and the parents as whole. It is why Sidwell is Sidwell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids aren't in high school yet, but I'd want them to have the option of playing all those sports if they choose. In the long run, I don't care whether they win or lose -- if the team has an 0-10 season, that's fine by me. I don't understand why so many people here seem to think that being on a winning team is important. If you're ever played competitive sports, you should understand that sometimes you lose (and sometimes you lose a lot). That's just part of the game. Get over it, and start getting ready for next week.

Do you think the issue is winning or losing? Sidwell is putting those students at risk. Starting 10 freshmen and playing them both ways is more indicative of a small youth league team roster rotation.

9/27@18:34 again. Aren't we now coming full circle back to where this whole discussion started? Sidwell's athletics director looked that the football team's depleted roster, and decided to forfeit a game rather than put kids at risk. So Sidwell did exactly what you (and I) think is right -- she put the safety of her students ahead of winning. Like I said in my earlier post, I don't care in the long run whether my child's team wins or loses. (Of course I will be standing on the sidelines cheering for my kid's team when it plays, but just between you and me, I don't care whether or not they win.)

Not quite full circle. Should Sidwell have even begun this football season knowing the sport and the roster content? What happened at that school over the last few years that so dramatically changed the school culture for student activities and athletics? The participation numbers in xcountry are even low compared to other schools.

[Anonymous]

The disdain for athletics has existed at Sidwell for years. It is NOT a recent phenomenon.

[Anonymous]

They have a very competitive cross country team and a very good tennis team--I know, DS' schools competes against them. I don't believe they disdain sports. However, they do emphasize academics and safety above all else. Good for them.

[Anonymous]

Doing well in the classroom and doing well on the athletic field do not have to be mutually exclusive propositions.

[Anonymous]

And in terms of participation overall, the numbers (in my quick back of envelope calculation) are quite good, with over half of girls and boys in the high school participating on some fall athletics team. There are plenty others that do a sport seriously outside of school (gymnastics, horseback riding, sculling, swimming year-round, or are serious dancers) that preclude being on a school team. Anyway, if the point it to stay healthy, have fun and encourage school spirit, Sidwell does just fine, and quite a few teams and coaches are quite a bit more than just fine (ie both soccer teams, wrestling, track and field and cross country, girls lacrosse). Many kids have gone on to d1 top college sports programs in soccer, track/cross country and wrestling. Football is a problem particularly since kids don't tend to play on out of school teams like they do for soccer and lacrosse or basketball, but I doubt even before the current football problem that anyone came to Sidwell to play football in preparation for college!

[Anonymous]

There have been a long line of D3 and a handful of D1 football players in Sidwell's past. This kind of thing is cyclical, and I would guess that this is just the trough.

[Anonymous]

I am affiliated with another league school but am familiar with SFS athletics over a significant time period. I would add to 14:00's list that (1) girls' basketball reliably produces quite a number of college players, including two current Division I players on full scholarships; (2) boys' basketball is a good team with at least one current Div. I prospect; and (3) even in the past few lean years for SFS football they have produced Division III players every year. As 14:23 says, team success is cyclical. With a new facility and new Head with a bit more interest in sports, my guess is that there will be an additional uptick in their athletic fortunes but they will be wise enough to know that their niche is not as a jock finishing school but as an academic powerhouse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There have been a long line of D3 and a handful of D1 football players in Sidwell's past. This kind of thing is cyclical, and I would guess that this is just the trough.

Really? Can you name some of the Division 1 football players Sidwell has produced?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There have been a long line of D3 and a handful of D1 football players in Sidwell's past. This kind of thing is cyclical, and I would guess that this is just the trough.

Really? Can you name some of the Division 1 football players Sidwell has produced?

Without using exact names, I can tell you with complete certainty that in the past decade or so, numerous Sidwell students have gone on to play D-1 football
Here are the ones I know off the top of my head:
Stanford, Brown, Harvard, Shepherd, Georgetown, Columbia, Wake Forest, Ithaca
The list of D-3 schools is of course way longer.
While I don't think this necessarily proves anything, I thought I'd confirm the validity of the statement asserting the existence of Division 1 collegiate football players from Sidwell.

[Anonymous]

PP here.
My mistake, Ithaca college is division 3. I think I put that there because one of Sidwell's best ever all-around athletes ended up playing football there.
For those who were at the 2002 STA homecoming game against Sidwell, you know the kid I'm talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There have been a long line of D3 and a handful of D1 football players in Sidwell's past. This kind of thing is cyclical, and I would guess that this is just the trough.

Really? Can you name some of the Division 1 football players Sidwell has produced?

One of my Sidwell classmates played for Stanford with John Elway.

[Anonymous]

Navy too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Really? Can you name some of the Division 1 football players Sidwell has produced?

I just spend 5 minutes on Google, and I found Sidwell grads currently playing football at Brown and Columbia. I also saw football players at F&M and Ithaca, but I'm not sure they're D1. (For those who like other sports, I also saw one person on Michigan's lacrosse team and a few college basketball players.) I'm sure there are others, but I'm not motivated to search further.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There have been a long line of D3 and a handful of D1 football players in Sidwell's past. This kind of thing is cyclical, and I would guess that this is just the trough.

Really? Can you name some of the Division 1 football players Sidwell has produced?

Without using exact names, I can tell you with complete certainty that in the past decade or so, numerous Sidwell students have gone on to play D-1 football
Here are the ones I know off the top of my head:
Stanford, Brown, Harvard, Shepherd, Georgetown, Columbia, Wake Forest, Ithaca
The list of D-3 schools is of course way longer.
While I don't think this necessarily proves anything, I thought I'd confirm the validity of the statement asserting the existence of Division 1 collegiate football players from Sidwell.

When people talk about Division 1 schools, they are talking about Football Bowl Subdivision, or BCS schools (formerly Division 1-A). Stanford and Wake Forest are BCS schools. But when you talk about Ivy schools like Brown, Harvard and Columbia, nobody refers to them as Division 1 schools. Those schools are Football Championship Subdivision schools, which most still refer to as Division 1-AA. Nobody in their right mind would equate playing football at Stanford to playing football at Brown.

Georgetown is also I-AA. Shepherd is Division 2. Ithaca is Division 3.

If Sidwell has had a student or two play football at a place like Stanford, that is great. But it is a huge overstatement to say the school is producing Division 1 talent. St. Albans had Jonathan Ogden, who played for UCLA and is very possibly going to be in the NFL Hall of Fame someday, but nobody would claim that STA produces Division 1 talent. Please.

Look at CJ Uy, Sidwell's best lacrosse player in years. He went to Yale and didn't play a single minute there and is now no longer on the team.