Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:20:06 again and I’m referring to when he actually applies to college. He gets 10 spots to list all extra curricular activities combined for all of HS. That’s it. So don’t worry.
Thank you. Really helpful.
Anonymous wrote:20:06 again and I’m referring to when he actually applies to college. He gets 10 spots to list all extra curricular activities combined for all of HS. That’s it. So don’t worry.
Anonymous wrote:I don't see this the same way some the PPs do.
I think making a team should be based on skill. If you're a freshman, but you are more skilled than a junior, you should make the varsity team over the junior. That's the way most coaches choose teams.
My niece was a varsity starter all four years of high school and was All-District (for four years), All-Region (for four years), and All-State (for three years). There were seniors on the team who had far less playing time. That's life.
My other niece didn't make varsity her freshman year, but did her sophomore year. However, she didn't become a starter until her senior year. That's life.
Not everyone makes the team. Not everyone gets a trophy. Not everyone wins.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:OP, there's a clear answer here: so far as colleges are concerned, participation in high school athletics matter no more and no less than any other kind of high school extracurricular activity UNLESS you're a recruited athlete. In that case it matters a great deal more.
So if your kid can't make the varsity team he wasn't going to get recruited anyway.
My frustration isn't about student athletes and being recruited. A 9th grader shouldn't have to compete at the Varsity level to be able to play for their school, have the chance to grow by being a part of a team sport, etc. Fewer teams = fewer extracurricular opportunities for our students.
Why isn’t your kid going out for track? They don’t have cuts and you can do field events if you don’t like running. You have opportunities you just need to use them.