Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My public high school had tons of people try ott it for golf team. Why? Free golf and driving range time and instruction.
So they had to make a skills matrix and take the top 16 people only. Half were natural athletes and half had been golfing since age 7 w dad and private coaching.

16 players on the golf team, Seriously?

McLean and Langley HS on has 10 players on varsity golf team, and all of them are from either UMC or UC families. If I have to guess, all of them have been playing golf at a young age.

Anonymous wrote:My public high school had tons of people try ott it for golf team. Why? Free golf and driving range time and instruction.
So they had to make a skills matrix and take the top 16 people only. Half were natural athletes and half had been golfing since age 7 w dad and private coaching.

Anonymous wrote:Everyone here makes everything about wealth. There is no correlation between wealth and athleticism. Quite a few private schools require students to participate in a sport after school. That doesn’t make them all athletes but it’s a great idea.

Sports like basketball can only take a very few kids. That would be the tall kids who have coordination, hand eye coordination, endurance, fast rubbers, skills necessary to play. This happens in every town.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kids are both on varsity teams and it was not hard to get on for kids who showed up to tryouts and are reasonably athletic (and even that varies, cross country they are happy you are there even if very slow). It's sad if schools rule out kids from participating and expect excellence only or you can't join. We never paid for travel/expensive lessons, and I am glad kids can be active and invested in sports at school without spending a fortune.

Where is this and how big is a grade at your high school?

Anonymous wrote:My kids are both on varsity teams and it was not hard to get on for kids who showed up to tryouts and are reasonably athletic (and even that varies, cross country they are happy you are there even if very slow). It's sad if schools rule out kids from participating and expect excellence only or you can't join. We never paid for travel/expensive lessons, and I am glad kids can be active and invested in sports at school without spending a fortune.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends. My DS made the varsity tennis team at Langley HS as a freshman.

My kid also made the tennis team as a freshman. There is only varsity tennis in fcps. No JV. For your kid and my kid, it doesn’t seem so competitive. For the other 40 kids who came to tryouts and didn’t make the team, they will say it is extremely difficult to make the tennis team.

There is no JV in either golf or tennis in FCPS. They are probably the two most difficult sports due to the small roster size. It is even more difficult in HS such as Langley, Mclean, and Oakton because just about every kid in the tryouts is either from UMC or UC families. Those kids are trained at a very young age, since money is not an issue. The competition to be in the golf or tennis team is ten times worse than the competition in academics.

Wut. As long as you play some tournaments you can make high school team.

Not if you attend any of the schools in a wealthy neighborhood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never understood this obsession with high performing athletics, like travel sports as a normal thing people "should" do or even relevant for college applications unless the kid has some special talents. I value recreational sports as something kids can do to enjoy and also with no strings attached, something you don't have to schedule your life around. Same is true for other extracurriculars too like music and art for kids who are simply ok and aren't super talented.

The truth is vast majority of kids who do these consuming activities will never benefit from them, make any money on it, have it as a career or even get a scholarship. Surely they won't be playing when they are adult as teams are hard to come by and life, job, family will become priority. Why do people waste so much energy, time and money on this rat race? Is it just a thing to do that others are doing and is accepted as a standard of "success" or a good college "resume"?

Some people don’t raise their children solely to be future college students. They therefore do not decide their children’s’ activities based on what will theoretically look best on college applications.

Anonymous wrote:My kids are both on varsity teams and it was not hard to get on for kids who showed up to tryouts and are reasonably athletic (and even that varies, cross country they are happy you are there even if very slow). It's sad if schools rule out kids from participating and expect excellence only or you can't join. We never paid for travel/expensive lessons, and I am glad kids can be active and invested in sports at school without spending a fortune.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never understood this obsession with high performing athletics, like travel sports as a normal thing people "should" do or even relevant for college applications unless the kid has some special talents. I value recreational sports as something kids can do to enjoy and also with no strings attached, something you don't have to schedule your life around. Same is true for other extracurriculars too like music and art for kids who are simply ok and aren't super talented.

The truth is vast majority of kids who do these consuming activities will never benefit from them, make any money on it, have it as a career or even get a scholarship. Surely they won't be playing when they are adult as teams are hard to come by and life, job, family will become priority. Why do people waste so much energy, time and money on this rat race? Is it just a thing to do that others are doing and is accepted as a standard of "success" or a good college "resume"?

Cue the parents who will come in to justify that little Brayden absolutely had to be on a travel team because even though he isn’t good enough to play in college the competition of rec teams just wasn’t enough for his immense talent and skill.

It’s not the competition that’s not enough, it’s that the kids keep moving to travel so the rec teams have constant change and turnover. My child moved to a mid-level travel team, and he had so much fun. But the system stinks. All those kids should’ve been rec. Tbh, all those kids should’ve just been playing at the park.

Agree.

My bball girl hated rec when it was half uncoordinated kids who never played and half 3rd year players. They all had to go find a 2x a week programz

Playing once a week with a parent or team rec coach, you really won’t learn much at all. Plus it’s “for fun”.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never understood this obsession with high performing athletics, like travel sports as a normal thing people "should" do or even relevant for college applications unless the kid has some special talents. I value recreational sports as something kids can do to enjoy and also with no strings attached, something you don't have to schedule your life around. Same is true for other extracurriculars too like music and art for kids who are simply ok and aren't super talented.

The truth is vast majority of kids who do these consuming activities will never benefit from them, make any money on it, have it as a career or even get a scholarship. Surely they won't be playing when they are adult as teams are hard to come by and life, job, family will become priority. Why do people waste so much energy, time and money on this rat race? Is it just a thing to do that others are doing and is accepted as a standard of "success" or a good college "resume"?

Cue the parents who will come in to justify that little Brayden absolutely had to be on a travel team because even though he isn’t good enough to play in college the competition of rec teams just wasn’t enough for his immense talent and skill.

Anonymous wrote:Never understood this obsession with high performing athletics, like travel sports as a normal thing people "should" do or even relevant for college applications unless the kid has some special talents. I value recreational sports as something kids can do to enjoy and also with no strings attached, something you don't have to schedule your life around. Same is true for other extracurriculars too like music and art for kids who are simply ok and aren't super talented.

The truth is vast majority of kids who do these consuming activities will never benefit from them, make any money on it, have it as a career or even get a scholarship. Surely they won't be playing when they are adult as teams are hard to come by and life, job, family will become priority. Why do people waste so much energy, time and money on this rat race? Is it just a thing to do that others are doing and is accepted as a standard of "success" or a good college "resume"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It depends. My DS made the varsity tennis team at Langley HS as a freshman.

My kid also made the tennis team as a freshman. There is only varsity tennis in fcps. No JV. For your kid and my kid, it doesn’t seem so competitive. For the other 40 kids who came to tryouts and didn’t make the team, they will say it is extremely difficult to make the tennis team.

There is no JV in either golf or tennis in FCPS. They are probably the two most difficult sports due to the small roster size. It is even more difficult in HS such as Langley, Mclean, and Oakton because just about every kid in the tryouts is either from UMC or UC families. Those kids are trained at a very young age, since money is not an issue. The competition to be in the golf or tennis team is ten times worse than the competition in academics.

Wut. As long as you play some tournaments you can make high school team.

Not if you attend any of the schools in a wealthy neighborhood.

So maybe don't attend that school. Most schools allow you to join teams.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never understood this obsession with high performing athletics, like travel sports as a normal thing people "should" do or even relevant for college applications unless the kid has some special talents. I value recreational sports as something kids can do to enjoy and also with no strings attached, something you don't have to schedule your life around. Same is true for other extracurriculars too like music and art for kids who are simply ok and aren't super talented.

The truth is vast majority of kids who do these consuming activities will never benefit from them, make any money on it, have it as a career or even get a scholarship. Surely they won't be playing when they are adult as teams are hard to come by and life, job, family will become priority. Why do people waste so much energy, time and money on this rat race? Is it just a thing to do that others are doing and is accepted as a standard of "success" or a good college "resume"?

Cue the parents who will come in to justify that little Brayden absolutely had to be on a travel team because even though he isn’t good enough to play in college the competition of rec teams just wasn’t enough for his immense talent and skill.

It’s not the competition that’s not enough, it’s that the kids keep moving to travel so the rec teams have constant change and turnover. My child moved to a mid-level travel team, and he had so much fun. But the system stinks. All those kids should’ve been rec. Tbh, all those kids should’ve just been playing at the park.