Anonymous wrote:OP here. For us it’s softball, I’d rather not say where specifically but in Nova.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see the sport is softball. At 12, all the girls should be seeing significant playing time on a low level travel team. I’d keep an eye out for a new team as they are not all like this.

Do you have any idea why she doesn’t play, skill wise? Has the coach said anything? Some batting or pitching lessons, or learning a new position to fill a defensive hole can be helpful. In terms of getting playing time.

Also, some of the teams at this age are straight up daddyball, or are simply an established group that has been playing together for years already (nearly impossible to break into the starting lineup).

I think the challenge is that even at the C level, its normal for coaches to just play 9 (or 10)on elimination day, and 2-3 girls sit.

So, OP's daughter may play on Saturday, but depending on where she bats in the line-up, may only get 1-2 plate appearances when the games when the games are capped at 80 minutes or the mercy rule ends the game early.

So from OP's perspective, they played 2 games on Saturday (and probably spent 8 hours at the field) for 3 at-bats, and then daughter may not have played at all on Sunday. But the coach's perspective is that she played in 2 out of the 3 (or 4) games of the weekend.

I get that frustration, even though its a part of the game

OP here. Yes, this is pretty much it. Since we are new to travel, it was a complete shock to us. Overall we like the team, girls, coaches, parents, etc. So we will probably let the year play out and then decide.

Fall ball is also kind of weird, as coaches are trying things out but there are usually fewer games to be played.

Depending on the team, she may play 40-50 games in the spring, and she'll still get a TON more at bats than she would have had she stayed in rec.

Also, early in the spring, hopefully your coach schedules some scrimmages. And in my opinion, a good coach maximizes scrimmages by playing with the line-up and getting those girls more ABs by putting them at the top of the line up.

wut? good lord, how long is the spring season?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see the sport is softball. At 12, all the girls should be seeing significant playing time on a low level travel team. I’d keep an eye out for a new team as they are not all like this.

Do you have any idea why she doesn’t play, skill wise? Has the coach said anything? Some batting or pitching lessons, or learning a new position to fill a defensive hole can be helpful. In terms of getting playing time.

Also, some of the teams at this age are straight up daddyball, or are simply an established group that has been playing together for years already (nearly impossible to break into the starting lineup).

I think the challenge is that even at the C level, its normal for coaches to just play 9 (or 10)on elimination day, and 2-3 girls sit.

So, OP's daughter may play on Saturday, but depending on where she bats in the line-up, may only get 1-2 plate appearances when the games when the games are capped at 80 minutes or the mercy rule ends the game early.

So from OP's perspective, they played 2 games on Saturday (and probably spent 8 hours at the field) for 3 at-bats, and then daughter may not have played at all on Sunday. But the coach's perspective is that she played in 2 out of the 3 (or 4) games of the weekend.

I get that frustration, even though its a part of the game

OP here. Yes, this is pretty much it. Since we are new to travel, it was a complete shock to us. Overall we like the team, girls, coaches, parents, etc. So we will probably let the year play out and then decide.

Fall ball is also kind of weird, as coaches are trying things out but there are usually fewer games to be played.

Depending on the team, she may play 40-50 games in the spring, and she'll still get a TON more at bats than she would have had she stayed in rec.

Also, early in the spring, hopefully your coach schedules some scrimmages. And in my opinion, a good coach maximizes scrimmages by playing with the line-up and getting those girls more ABs by putting them at the top of the line up.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. For us it’s softball, I’d rather not say where specifically but in Nova.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. Often those filler kids end up not seeing much playing time, and then the parents get (rightfully, perhaps) upset.

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.

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

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

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

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. Often those filler kids end up not seeing much playing time, and then the parents get (rightfully, perhaps) upset.

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.

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

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

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. Often those filler kids end up not seeing much playing time, and then the parents get (rightfully, perhaps) upset.

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.

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

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. Often those filler kids end up not seeing much playing time, and then the parents get (rightfully, perhaps) upset.

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.

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

Anonymous wrote: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. Often those filler kids end up not seeing much playing time, and then the parents get (rightfully, perhaps) upset.

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.

Anonymous wrote: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. Often those filler kids end up not seeing much playing time, and then the parents get (rightfully, perhaps) upset.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see the sport is softball. At 12, all the girls should be seeing significant playing time on a low level travel team. I’d keep an eye out for a new team as they are not all like this.

Do you have any idea why she doesn’t play, skill wise? Has the coach said anything? Some batting or pitching lessons, or learning a new position to fill a defensive hole can be helpful. In terms of getting playing time.

Also, some of the teams at this age are straight up daddyball, or are simply an established group that has been playing together for years already (nearly impossible to break into the starting lineup).

I think the challenge is that even at the C level, its normal for coaches to just play 9 (or 10)on elimination day, and 2-3 girls sit.

So, OP's daughter may play on Saturday, but depending on where she bats in the line-up, may only get 1-2 plate appearances when the games when the games are capped at 80 minutes or the mercy rule ends the game early.

So from OP's perspective, they played 2 games on Saturday (and probably spent 8 hours at the field) for 3 at-bats, and then daughter may not have played at all on Sunday. But the coach's perspective is that she played in 2 out of the 3 (or 4) games of the weekend.

I get that frustration, even though its a part of the game

OP here. Yes, this is pretty much it. Since we are new to travel, it was a complete shock to us. Overall we like the team, girls, coaches, parents, etc. So we will probably let the year play out and then decide.

Fall ball is also kind of weird, as coaches are trying things out but there are usually fewer games to be played.

Depending on the team, she may play 40-50 games in the spring, and she'll still get a TON more at bats than she would have had she stayed in rec.

Also, early in the spring, hopefully your coach schedules some scrimmages. And in my opinion, a good coach maximizes scrimmages by playing with the line-up and getting those girls more ABs by putting them at the top of the line up.

I used to just do a continuous batting order for these doubleheader scrimmages. So if Game 1 ends with the No. 6 batter, the No. 7 batter leads off the next game.

Tournaments, though? Bat the roster on Saturday. Only the best 9 bat on Sunday, although who that best 9 are may depend on the pitching we face.

This does require a fair amount of managing parent expectations and communication. IME parents all say they are on board in the beginning but then the ones whose kids ride the bench more tend to get lippy and nasty.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see the sport is softball. At 12, all the girls should be seeing significant playing time on a low level travel team. I’d keep an eye out for a new team as they are not all like this.

Do you have any idea why she doesn’t play, skill wise? Has the coach said anything? Some batting or pitching lessons, or learning a new position to fill a defensive hole can be helpful. In terms of getting playing time.

Also, some of the teams at this age are straight up daddyball, or are simply an established group that has been playing together for years already (nearly impossible to break into the starting lineup).

I think the challenge is that even at the C level, its normal for coaches to just play 9 (or 10)on elimination day, and 2-3 girls sit.

So, OP's daughter may play on Saturday, but depending on where she bats in the line-up, may only get 1-2 plate appearances when the games when the games are capped at 80 minutes or the mercy rule ends the game early.

So from OP's perspective, they played 2 games on Saturday (and probably spent 8 hours at the field) for 3 at-bats, and then daughter may not have played at all on Sunday. But the coach's perspective is that she played in 2 out of the 3 (or 4) games of the weekend.

I get that frustration, even though its a part of the game

OP here. Yes, this is pretty much it. Since we are new to travel, it was a complete shock to us. Overall we like the team, girls, coaches, parents, etc. So we will probably let the year play out and then decide.

Fall ball is also kind of weird, as coaches are trying things out but there are usually fewer games to be played.

Depending on the team, she may play 40-50 games in the spring, and she'll still get a TON more at bats than she would have had she stayed in rec.

Also, early in the spring, hopefully your coach schedules some scrimmages. And in my opinion, a good coach maximizes scrimmages by playing with the line-up and getting those girls more ABs by putting them at the top of the line up.