Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:i have coached 4 Rec sports - ages 4 to 14. I have always played to win, but will always play every kid who shows up to practice and games and tries their best. That is what Rec sports is about.
I also never allowed kids to focus on one position each and every game ( i.e send THAT kid tot he outfield). Much better that all kids have an opportunity to plan sports at a recreational level. Travel and high school teams should have a different philosophy.
I’m sure if you try you will find people who want to win every game, though those coaches will often play their DC first and foremost also IME.
Have you ever allowed kids to choose their one positions at the beginning of the game “just for fun”? Because Rec doesn’t have cuts, there are definitely kids who aren’t great at any position. You don’t put those kids in the outfield? What if your team is losing and is trying for a comeback?
NP here. Yes, of course rec is going to have kids who are playing for fun and aren't that good -- that's the point of rec. And they should be able to play as fully as anyone else -- go to a competitive team if you don't like that philosophy.
OP here. I guess that’s what will sadly have to do. I just don’t want to hear any more lamenting and handwringing from our league commissioner (as we have heard many many times) about why “so many kids leave for travel.” Like it’s some mystery. It’s not a mystery - this is why. I’m fine with the not-so-great kids being on the team and having a spot. But they shouldn’t be playing catcher or first base if they can’t throw or catch. It’s not fair to the other kids.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Largely agree with PP. Starting around age 10, there is more emphasis on winning, but all do play & playing time rules are followed. But some kids play more than others and not everyone gets a chance at key positions.
Sounds like your kid plays baseball. Most common scenario on rec teams is 6 kids who play full time (mostly at key positions), 6 split time 50/50 and are more limited in what positions they play. The nicer coaches flip things around during scrimmages and blowouts - sitting starters and putting weaker players in full time. So- everyone plays- but they do try to be competitive as well.
Travel teams are far different, especially at ages 12+, so make sure to do your homework if you go that route. I have two sons that play travel (12u and 14u) Many teams at the older ages play to WIN, period. Especially on Sundays/bracket play. It depends on the team, but - on some teams- there will be kids that see shockingly little playing time. Basically the opposite of what you are seeing now in rec. So be prepared.
Disagree on travel. These are paid coaches, and they don't seem to care about winning but about developing players and make sure everyone gets playing time so they will continue to pay for travel. Some players will get far less, but I was surprised to see a coach while leading by 1 at the end put in a pretty weak player who was clearly out of it that day.
Watch an AAU team. The end of the bench isn't playing in a close game. My DD has been on teams where she plays whole and games where she plays a couple of minutes. It's one sport where a kid needs a team that matchers their ability level. Rec is great for a kid who wants to play because most leagues force coaches to play everyone even if it means losing.
Anonymous wrote:Or do they rotate through all the positions for “fairness” even if that means giving up any chance of winning a game?
If they do this, is there a certain age group where they stop doing this? Is there a certain age where the kids want to win more than they want to rotate everyone through the “good” positions fairly?
Just trying to get a sense of what’s typical here. We really don’t want to switch to travel for many reasons but I feel like our Rec team isn’t really giving us another option. This is for older kids btw, 12+.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Largely agree with PP. Starting around age 10, there is more emphasis on winning, but all do play & playing time rules are followed. But some kids play more than others and not everyone gets a chance at key positions.
Sounds like your kid plays baseball. Most common scenario on rec teams is 6 kids who play full time (mostly at key positions), 6 split time 50/50 and are more limited in what positions they play. The nicer coaches flip things around during scrimmages and blowouts - sitting starters and putting weaker players in full time. So- everyone plays- but they do try to be competitive as well.
Travel teams are far different, especially at ages 12+, so make sure to do your homework if you go that route. I have two sons that play travel (12u and 14u) Many teams at the older ages play to WIN, period. Especially on Sundays/bracket play. It depends on the team, but - on some teams- there will be kids that see shockingly little playing time. Basically the opposite of what you are seeing now in rec. So be prepared.
Disagree on travel. These are paid coaches, and they don't seem to care about winning but about developing players and make sure everyone gets playing time so they will continue to pay for travel. Some players will get far less, but I was surprised to see a coach while leading by 1 at the end put in a pretty weak player who was clearly out of it that day.
Anonymous wrote:Largely agree with PP. Starting around age 10, there is more emphasis on winning, but all do play & playing time rules are followed. But some kids play more than others and not everyone gets a chance at key positions.
Sounds like your kid plays baseball. Most common scenario on rec teams is 6 kids who play full time (mostly at key positions), 6 split time 50/50 and are more limited in what positions they play. The nicer coaches flip things around during scrimmages and blowouts - sitting starters and putting weaker players in full time. So- everyone plays- but they do try to be competitive as well.
Travel teams are far different, especially at ages 12+, so make sure to do your homework if you go that route. I have two sons that play travel (12u and 14u) Many teams at the older ages play to WIN, period. Especially on Sundays/bracket play. It depends on the team, but - on some teams- there will be kids that see shockingly little playing time. Basically the opposite of what you are seeing now in rec. So be prepared.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:i have coached 4 Rec sports - ages 4 to 14. I have always played to win, but will always play every kid who shows up to practice and games and tries their best. That is what Rec sports is about.
I also never allowed kids to focus on one position each and every game ( i.e send THAT kid tot he outfield). Much better that all kids have an opportunity to plan sports at a recreational level. Travel and high school teams should have a different philosophy.
I’m sure if you try you will find people who want to win every game, though those coaches will often play their DC first and foremost also IME.
Have you ever allowed kids to choose their one positions at the beginning of the game “just for fun”? Because Rec doesn’t have cuts, there are definitely kids who aren’t great at any position. You don’t put those kids in the outfield? What if your team is losing and is trying for a comeback?
NP here. Yes, of course rec is going to have kids who are playing for fun and aren't that good -- that's the point of rec. And they should be able to play as fully as anyone else -- go to a competitive team if you don't like that philosophy.
OP here. I guess that’s what will sadly have to do. I just don’t want to hear any more lamenting and handwringing from our league commissioner (as we have heard many many times) about why “so many kids leave for travel.” Like it’s some mystery. It’s not a mystery - this is why. I’m fine with the not-so-great kids being on the team and having a spot. But they shouldn’t be playing catcher or first base if they can’t throw or catch. It’s not fair to the other kids.
I agree with this. Does your team have willing catchers? Our team is lucky because we have a few who love catching but some teams have to force kids into it. Our coach is excellent at balance IMO (but my son often plays catcher or 1st base)
OP here. Yes we have 2 excellent catchers, 3 fairly good pitchers, and a couple strong in-fielders. (Some of these are the same kids.)
I am scared of travel for lots of reasons - time, money, hassle, intensity/stress. My kid is willing to stay Rec, but she wants to play to win. She’s fine switching it out during blowouts (on either side) but if it’s a close game we should be putting forth a competitive lineup. Otherwise she doesn’t want to play.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:i have coached 4 Rec sports - ages 4 to 14. I have always played to win, but will always play every kid who shows up to practice and games and tries their best. That is what Rec sports is about.
I also never allowed kids to focus on one position each and every game ( i.e send THAT kid tot he outfield). Much better that all kids have an opportunity to plan sports at a recreational level. Travel and high school teams should have a different philosophy.
I’m sure if you try you will find people who want to win every game, though those coaches will often play their DC first and foremost also IME.
Have you ever allowed kids to choose their one positions at the beginning of the game “just for fun”? Because Rec doesn’t have cuts, there are definitely kids who aren’t great at any position. You don’t put those kids in the outfield? What if your team is losing and is trying for a comeback?
NP here. Yes, of course rec is going to have kids who are playing for fun and aren't that good -- that's the point of rec. And they should be able to play as fully as anyone else -- go to a competitive team if you don't like that philosophy.
OP here. I guess that’s what will sadly have to do. I just don’t want to hear any more lamenting and handwringing from our league commissioner (as we have heard many many times) about why “so many kids leave for travel.” Like it’s some mystery. It’s not a mystery - this is why. I’m fine with the not-so-great kids being on the team and having a spot. But they shouldn’t be playing catcher or first base if they can’t throw or catch. It’s not fair to the other kids.
I agree with this. Does your team have willing catchers? Our team is lucky because we have a few who love catching but some teams have to force kids into it. Our coach is excellent at balance IMO (but my son often plays catcher or 1st base)
OP here. Yes we have 2 excellent catchers, 3 fairly good pitchers, and a couple strong in-fielders. (Some of these are the same kids.)
I am scared of travel for lots of reasons - time, money, hassle, intensity/stress. My kid is willing to stay Rec, but she wants to play to win. She’s fine switching it out during blowouts (on either side) but if it’s a close game we should be putting forth a competitive lineup. Otherwise she doesn’t want to play.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:i have coached 4 Rec sports - ages 4 to 14. I have always played to win, but will always play every kid who shows up to practice and games and tries their best. That is what Rec sports is about.
I also never allowed kids to focus on one position each and every game ( i.e send THAT kid tot he outfield). Much better that all kids have an opportunity to plan sports at a recreational level. Travel and high school teams should have a different philosophy.
I’m sure if you try you will find people who want to win every game, though those coaches will often play their DC first and foremost also IME.
Have you ever allowed kids to choose their one positions at the beginning of the game “just for fun”? Because Rec doesn’t have cuts, there are definitely kids who aren’t great at any position. You don’t put those kids in the outfield? What if your team is losing and is trying for a comeback?
NP here. Yes, of course rec is going to have kids who are playing for fun and aren't that good -- that's the point of rec. And they should be able to play as fully as anyone else -- go to a competitive team if you don't like that philosophy.
OP here. I guess that’s what will sadly have to do. I just don’t want to hear any more lamenting and handwringing from our league commissioner (as we have heard many many times) about why “so many kids leave for travel.” Like it’s some mystery. It’s not a mystery - this is why. I’m fine with the not-so-great kids being on the team and having a spot. But they shouldn’t be playing catcher or first base if they can’t throw or catch. It’s not fair to the other kids.
I agree with this. Does your team have willing catchers? Our team is lucky because we have a few who love catching but some teams have to force kids into it. Our coach is excellent at balance IMO (but my son often plays catcher or 1st base)