Reply to Why is there nothing between Rec and Low level travel?

Forum Index » Sports General Discussion

Reply to "Why is there nothing between Rec and Low level travel?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]After having 3 kids in travel baseball/softball (2 are now playing in high school), and seeing so many teams: IME 95% of playing time issues are created when the roster is set. Most youth teams carry too many kids, and this is often due to PARENT issues.  Coaches are darned if they do, darned if they don’t. . If a coach tries to carry a smaller roster (say- 11), the team will end up short handed due to absences. If a coach rosters 13-14 somehow they will all show up to every.single.game. Kids and parents also often team hop, and bail at the last second if a better offer comes along (often after committing to the first team). Which makes larger rosters necessary. Parent philosophy seems to be “little Susie will miss tournaments for mundane reasons- despite having the schedule months in advance, but we will throw a fit if she doesn’t play all the time when she is there. Oh- and she doesn’t pitch or catch and has no desire to learn” All of which makes larger rosters necessary- just to have enough kids at tournaments, and to have enough pitching and catching. Also when kids bail last minute after committing to the team, coaches often add “filler” kids- as most kids are already committed elsewhere- just to round out the roster. [b]Often those filler kids end up not seeing much playing time, and then the parents get (rightfully, perhaps) upset. [/b]

That is what I have seen over the years anyway- repeatedly. And no- I don’t coach and neither does my spouse.  I don’t think coaches relish having kids sit the bench a lot at the youth level (and any potential drama that creates). Rather, they are often forced into tough roster situations by the choices of (some) parents- resulting in playing time issues. [/quote]

I despise coaches like that. If a kid is good enough to make the team, they should be good enough to play. If they aren't good enough to play, they shouldn't make the team [/quote]

This is my thought too. Its too time consuming and precluding of other activities to not really play. [/quote]

I get what you're saying, but it also depends on the age.

By 13/14, some coaches want to prepare their kids to play for HS or ultimately, play in college.

And part of that is competing for a spot in the line up or coming off the bench to play.

But I agree that in 12 and below, it should be more about development and more equal playing time[/quote]

Definitely agree with this, but it’s a fine line IMO….it’s one thing to play 50-70% of the time for example, and another to rarely get in at all. My 13u DS is on a baseball team that rosters 14, and 2 boys rarely play. MAYBE 2 at bats and a few innings in the field per tournament (3-4 games +). If they are lucky. I feel bad for them, and their parents- who probably didn’t expect this. They’d be developmentally better off moving to a lower level team IMO, and I honestly don’t understand why coaches add kids to the roster and don’t play them at all.  If it were my kid, I’d rather be told “thanks, but no thanks” upfront, I think. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics