Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

Really? None at atll? Not XC or track? Bc it seems like its so different by school; we have a lot of options for girls. We are in MD, in a school of around 2,200 kids.

In the fall:

Football was no cut.
Field Hockey was no cut.
Girls Flag Football had the MOST cuts (but that may be because this is such a new sport & some kids just know enough about themselves to not even try out for the soccer teams?)
XC was no cut.

In the spring
Baseball made approximately 50 cuts
Lax was cut for both girls and boys
Softball only cut 2-3 girls
Track is no cut

So, at at our school, we have at least 3-4 options for girls that are no cut (they could join the wrestling team as well, which is also no cut, even if you don't get any matches). A girl could tie up her sneaks and make a XC team, or grab a stick and join the FH team

And essentially the same number of no cut teams for boys.

Meanwhile, the competitive sports have to cut a TON of kids. Basically, your kid has to be open-minded to trying new sports if they want to play a HS sport but there is an option for them

You listed one team sport with no cuts. At our school field hockey has cuts leave no team sports for girls that are no cut.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

Really? None at atll? Not XC or track? Bc it seems like its so different by school; we have a lot of options for girls. We are in MD, in a school of around 2,200 kids.

In the fall:

Football was no cut.
Field Hockey was no cut.
Girls Flag Football had the MOST cuts (but that may be because this is such a new sport & some kids just know enough about themselves to not even try out for the soccer teams?)
XC was no cut.

In the spring
Baseball made approximately 50 cuts
Lax was cut for both girls and boys
Softball only cut 2-3 girls
Track is no cut

So, at at our school, we have at least 3-4 options for girls that are no cut (they could join the wrestling team as well, which is also no cut, even if you don't get any matches). A girl could tie up her sneaks and make a XC team, or grab a stick and join the FH team

And essentially the same number of no cut teams for boys.

Meanwhile, the competitive sports have to cut a TON of kids. Basically, your kid has to be open-minded to trying new sports if they want to play a HS sport but there is an option for them

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

What about girls cross country, ultimate frisbee (APS), or pickleball (MCPS)? In the winter there’s no cut swim and dive and indoor track. In the spring there’s no cut track, rowing (crew), etc. It seems like the number of no cut varsity sports keeps increasing every year due to parent pressure.

FCPS, so no frisbee or pickleball. Cross country, swim, and track are not team sports. Crew is a club not a sport

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes you think more boys want to play sports than girls?

So many girls are cut every year from soccer at our school, same thing happens with tennis, basketball, softball,lacrosse, now flag football … it goes on and on.

What’s especially frustrating at our school is when coaches decide to take less than the allowed roster size “to make it easier on them.”

The corollary is how “it’s so hard for them” (the coaches) to make cuts.

When you are literally hurting kids’ self esteem and self worth and taking away an identity they have had since kindergarten in many cases, don’t make it about you and how hard it is for you to make cuts or how much easier it is for you to take a smaller roster.

And please don’t cut kids in front of other kids. It’s not a reality show.

I understand that smaller rosters may be more streamlined and easier to coach and understand that cuts must be made. I only wish the coaches had just an ounce of emotional intelligence.

Or how about some new policies?

Or, you're literally teaching kids life lessons about success and failure, how to deal with it, and adapt and move on.

Yes, you are also teaching that when you cut a kid. But it’s not about YOU (the coach). It’s not about how hard it is for you, or how bad you feel about it, or how you just really prefer the smaller roster.

Keep in mind you are hurting a child and don’t make it about YOU. Even in high school, they are still kids.

Man up when making cuts. This is literally part of your job. Do it privately, not in front of other kids or parents, be respectful and honest. And at no point should the conversation be about you or how difficult it is for you.

Let the kids know what they need to do to make the team next year but be honest in saying it still might not be enough or they may only be a practice player or bench player.

Try to give them something that they have done that is positive. (You are in fact shattering them after all.). But if there is no real chance they will ever make the team, be honest about that too. Do not lie. Kids can smell that a mile away.

If there are club teams or other opportunities you can let them know about, do that too.

Don’t make jokes. None of this is funny for the athletes you are cutting. Don’t compare to other athletes.

Document objective standards for why they didn’t make the team in case you need to follow up with leadership, the athlete, or parents. Hopefully, you’re not one of those coaches who is picking kids based on favorites or their parents or who attended your camp or who knows what - if so, you should be ashamed of yourself and find some integrity. News flash: every kid knows when you do this and it creates terrible culture.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

What about girls cross country, ultimate frisbee (APS), or pickleball (MCPS)? In the winter there’s no cut swim and dive and indoor track. In the spring there’s no cut track, rowing (crew), etc. It seems like the number of no cut varsity sports keeps increasing every year due to parent pressure.

Anonymous wrote:My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Football is no cut at our school. There are zero girls team sports that are no cut. Any boy who wants to play a team sport can play football. Even field hockey has cuts at our school, so not every girl who wants to play a team sport can play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What makes you think more boys want to play sports than girls?

So many girls are cut every year from soccer at our school, same thing happens with tennis, basketball, softball,lacrosse, now flag football … it goes on and on.

What’s especially frustrating at our school is when coaches decide to take less than the allowed roster size “to make it easier on them.”

The corollary is how “it’s so hard for them” (the coaches) to make cuts.

When you are literally hurting kids’ self esteem and self worth and taking away an identity they have had since kindergarten in many cases, don’t make it about you and how hard it is for you to make cuts or how much easier it is for you to take a smaller roster.

And please don’t cut kids in front of other kids. It’s not a reality show.

I understand that smaller rosters may be more streamlined and easier to coach and understand that cuts must be made. I only wish the coaches had just an ounce of emotional intelligence.

Or how about some new policies?

Or, you're literally teaching kids life lessons about success and failure, how to deal with it, and adapt and move on.

Yes, you are also teaching that when you cut a kid. But it’s not about YOU (the coach). It’s not about how hard it is for you, or how bad you feel about it, or how you just really prefer the smaller roster.

Keep in mind you are hurting a child and don’t make it about YOU. Even in high school, they are still kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want my kid to play a team sport in high school and that’s starting to feel like a big maybe given the competition in our area. He’s an above average athlete who works hard and puts in extra reps outside of team but isn’t hyper driven in the sense that he has no expectations around being recruited to play in college. So, despite years of playing multiple sports at a fairly demanding level, love for the game, natural athleticism, and coachability he’s a bubble player and may find himself “retired” from his favorite sport(s) at 14. His athletic female friends are having far more success playing into HS than many of his male friends given the sheer numbers.

The number of girls and boys playing is the same thanks to title IX. It's not great for a boy who doesn't play football because football teams are needlessly and laughably large. If you're in FCPS, have him try volleyball. Our school was desperate enough that the boys team was no cut this year

The football teams are large because it allows the students who don’t have the skill to be able to train everyday and to learn everything they can about football. Maybe next year…

I just have to add serious female ballet students who take hours of classes six days a week on top of rehearsals are in excellent shape and it takes more strength and stamina than any girls sport. Most people just know girls who take an hour or two class a couple of times a week. No comparison.

The football teams are definitely large, but there is also some reason for it.

There are 22 players on the field on every play. So to have a first team offense, and then a scout defense, you need at least 22 players on the team.

Then, add in the fact that as you get in HS, fewer players play on both sides of the ball. So you have a first team defense, and a first team offense. That could be up to 22 players (in reality, probably less, since 3-4 will play both ways). And then certain packages require extra TE, or extra WR, and certain defenses may require extra line-men or extra DBs, and you're easily looking at 30 players.

Then add in special teams and very skill specific positions. A team may have a kid that is only their to punt. Or only their to be the long-snapper.

So, its not hard to get to 40 players on the roster. I do know that some teams carry upwards of 50 and that seems excessive, for sure, but a football team rostering 40 isn't that crazy when you think about the needs of the sport.

50 is closer to the norm and as long as schools indulge football coaches with bloated rosters, the are required to find opportunities for a similar number of girls

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want my kid to play a team sport in high school and that’s starting to feel like a big maybe given the competition in our area. He’s an above average athlete who works hard and puts in extra reps outside of team but isn’t hyper driven in the sense that he has no expectations around being recruited to play in college. So, despite years of playing multiple sports at a fairly demanding level, love for the game, natural athleticism, and coachability he’s a bubble player and may find himself “retired” from his favorite sport(s) at 14. His athletic female friends are having far more success playing into HS than many of his male friends given the sheer numbers.

The number of girls and boys playing is the same thanks to title IX. It's not great for a boy who doesn't play football because football teams are needlessly and laughably large. If you're in FCPS, have him try volleyball. Our school was desperate enough that the boys team was no cut this year

The football teams are large because it allows the students who don’t have the skill to be able to train everyday and to learn everything they can about football. Maybe next year…

I just have to add serious female ballet students who take hours of classes six days a week on top of rehearsals are in excellent shape and it takes more strength and stamina than any girls sport. Most people just know girls who take an hour or two class a couple of times a week. No comparison.

The football teams are definitely large, but there is also some reason for it.

There are 22 players on the field on every play. So to have a first team offense, and then a scout defense, you need at least 22 players on the team.

Then, add in the fact that as you get in HS, fewer players play on both sides of the ball. So you have a first team defense, and a first team offense. That could be up to 22 players (in reality, probably less, since 3-4 will play both ways). And then certain packages require extra TE, or extra WR, and certain defenses may require extra line-men or extra DBs, and you're easily looking at 30 players.

Then add in special teams and very skill specific positions. A team may have a kid that is only their to punt. Or only their to be the long-snapper.

So, its not hard to get to 40 players on the roster. I do know that some teams carry upwards of 50 and that seems excessive, for sure, but a football team rostering 40 isn't that crazy when you think about the needs of the sport.

My son has played sports all his life because that’s what he loves to do. He has played one sport at the travel/club level for quite awhile and is a very solid athlete but like PP, he’ll be lucky to make his HS team because the number of kids trying out makes it’s insanely competitive. Yes in theory he could pivot to football but we’d like his brain to be in tack for college and beyond and have purposely avoided this and other high concussion potential sports for this reason so don’t see that as a viable option. The biggest issue is that more and more kids are playing sports at a higher level than ever before and if you attend a big school or a school that recruits for your sport, there’s a high chance your kid will not make the team despite being a really strong player. It just sucks that you have that many kids who are strong who are getting cut.

And yes, of course, there are plenty of girls who don’t make the team and some girls’ sports are wildly competitive. I think the comparison with girls having more luck in HS sports wise has to do with the numbers and there are more boys than girls who don’t land on a team. I am a product of title IX and I have a daughter who has benefitted from it, but that doesn’t mean I don’t see that there’s a downside for my son (who is a far better athlete than my daughter but she’s the one playing HS sports and his future there is uncertain).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just want my kid to play a team sport in high school and that’s starting to feel like a big maybe given the competition in our area. He’s an above average athlete who works hard and puts in extra reps outside of team but isn’t hyper driven in the sense that he has no expectations around being recruited to play in college. So, despite years of playing multiple sports at a fairly demanding level, love for the game, natural athleticism, and coachability he’s a bubble player and may find himself “retired” from his favorite sport(s) at 14. His athletic female friends are having far more success playing into HS than many of his male friends given the sheer numbers.

The number of girls and boys playing is the same thanks to title IX. It's not great for a boy who doesn't play football because football teams are needlessly and laughably large. If you're in FCPS, have him try volleyball. Our school was desperate enough that the boys team was no cut this year

The football teams are large because it allows the students who don’t have the skill to be able to train everyday and to learn everything they can about football. Maybe next year…

I just have to add serious female ballet students who take hours of classes six days a week on top of rehearsals are in excellent shape and it takes more strength and stamina than any girls sport. Most people just know girls who take an hour or two class a couple of times a week. No comparison.

In the U.S., high school students probably have the most interscholastic sports options of any developed country. (Japan might make a close second, as high schools there also have numerous competitive sports options.)

In Europe for example, schools don’t have competitive athletics. They are simply not prioritized. And schools often don’t have fields or even a blacktop. There are however very competitive youth leagues that are hard to make. And there are the occasional sports focused, state-run high schools, but they don’t compete interscholastically.

In the UK, however, the posh and very exclusive “public schools” for boarders like Rugby, Eaton, etc., do have interscholastic sports, but not the state run schools.

Maybe I don’t understand the point the Canadian PP was making, but to all of those who think the Canadians somehow do youth sports better than the US… no.

Youth ice hockey in Canada is the most competitive, taken-extremely-serious youth sport with the most outrageously insane parents I have ever seen.

Anonymous wrote:What makes you think more boys want to play sports than girls?

So many girls are cut every year from soccer at our school, same thing happens with tennis, basketball, softball,lacrosse, now flag football … it goes on and on.

What’s especially frustrating at our school is when coaches decide to take less than the allowed roster size “to make it easier on them.”

The corollary is how “it’s so hard for them” (the coaches) to make cuts.

When you are literally hurting kids’ self esteem and self worth and taking away an identity they have had since kindergarten in many cases, don’t make it about you and how hard it is for you to make cuts or how much easier it is for you to take a smaller roster.

And please don’t cut kids in front of other kids. It’s not a reality show.

I understand that smaller rosters may be more streamlined and easier to coach and understand that cuts must be made. I only wish the coaches had just an ounce of emotional intelligence.

Or how about some new policies?

Or, you're literally teaching kids life lessons about success and failure, how to deal with it, and adapt and move on.

Anonymous wrote:I think the point the Canadian PP was making was that if you don’t play travel and supplement with training you have very slim to no chance of making your HS team. Of course rec options exist here but unless your child is a very very gifted natural athlete they won’t likely make the HS team with just rec under their belt.

That is not true. My DD made the JV volleyball team at her pretty competitive HS and there are a few players with two left hands (no more than rec experience). It will be more difficult to make the Varsity though.