Youth Sports Parents are Awful People #10,783

[PilotMan]

I played soccer in the fall, swam in the winter and played golf in the spring.

You couldn't convince me to do any of them more than that to get better. I liked them, and wanted them at that level. I wanted to do good, but I was never committed enough, and knew I wasn't good enough to be more than that. I was fine with it, but I think in the new world, I probably don't play any of them with the higher expectations.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I played soccer in the fall, swam in the winter and played golf in the spring.

You couldn't convince me to do any of them more than that to get better. I liked them, and wanted them at that level. I wanted to do good, but I was never committed enough, and knew I wasn't good enough to be more than that. I was fine with it, but I think in the new world, I probably don't play any of them with the higher expectations.

Eh, depending on where you lived (rural vs suburb vs metro really) you could just play at the HS level. The top tier in a number of sports are increasingly not playing HS in order to play club/travel level instead, so what you described kinda fits into the HS model for some of those.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

The other thing that bugs me is that if your kids want to do well in a sport, they pretty much have to play it year-round now.

Take my 14-year-old. He really wanted to make the HS soccer team (and did). But the competition is tight enough that you really need to be playing club in the winter & spring, and do camps all summer.

I don't know about the rest of you, but when I was in HS, you did a different sport each season and that seemed better.

Now, excuse me for a sec as I go yell at some kids on my lawn.

Not to go all Edward on you but define "do well". I would say doing well in a sport at the HS level is making the JV team if you are a freshman or sophomore or the varsity team as a junior or senior. There are not going to be too many Patrick Mahomes level high school athletes out there. I am not saying this what you mean by doing well, just using him as an example.

I wonder if the kids need to play a sport year round to do well in it or if the kids (or their parents) prefer to do well in sports so the kids only play the sport year round that they do well in . I think a lot of kids could play multiple sports in HS without playing those sports year round but most are not going to be great at multiple sports so they choose to stay in the sport they are the best at.

One of the kids that plays with my son on the JV baseball team also made the JV football and basketball teams. His primary sport is baseball and yes he has played baseball (mostly not exclusively travel) year round since we have known him. But he has also played other sports as well in their respective seasons. I coached him in rec basketball for a couple seasons and he played Pop Warner football as well.

He made the JV football team as a receiver but played almost exclusively on special teams and may have had two receptions all year. He has played more on the JV basketball team as a backup forward but has not started any of the team's nine games so far. If the first two weeks of practice is any sort of indicator, he will be the JV team's starting third baseman in front of a sophomore who was on the team last year when they won the district and will be one of the kids that joins the varsity team at the end of the JV season IMO. He could have easily focused on fall JV baseball and not played those other sports because baseball is the sport he is the best at. He didn't and he ended up playing three sports at the JV level instead of just one.

Could he develop into someone who could make the varsity football and the varsity basketball teams when he is a junior or senior without playing those sports year round? Yeah I think he can. Will he be a starter? Less likely but not impossible. Will he be as good in those sports as he is in baseball? Only if he stops playing baseball tomorrow. He definitely would not be alone in that regard. I guarantee most of his teammates on the football and basketball teams would be in the same boat if they played baseball.

[BishopMVP]

The biggest lie/misunderstanding in club sports/college recruiting is that "college coaches want 3 sport athletes". You need to be insanely regimented to get practice in for your main sport if you play 2 other HS varsity ones, or just a freak athlete. I've coached plenty of those - Will Shipley would be the last biggest name - and of course college coaches want them! But it's not realistic for 90%+ of even kids who are good enough to play D1 in their chosen sport. A lot can still at least play 2 "real ones" at the Varsity level, but especially down here with no hockey in schools and basketball having high talent and small rosters most kids either take a break in the winter or use it to do a sport like track/wrestling that loves extra bodies and works as cross training for spring sports. (Or just do a football lifting program - though we don't love those because then we end up in fights when the football coaches want them doing it all spring long too.)

It's why I try to start getting kids in 7th/8th grade ish to start thinking about how much time they want to put into this (and then really bring it home 9th grade when most hit a wall because they're playing a different varsity sport, or in a school lifting program, etc, all while trying to come to club practices. And also start having the conversations with parents about what they're trying to get out of this (and without putting too fine a number on it, how much they're willing to spend in this area). They're not always fun conversations but I think we have a lot fewer problems once recruiting starts Junior year with them than with kids/parents who come into our program in HS.

[flere-imsaho]

Around here, at least, and of course it depends on the sport, but "do well" would be making HS Varsity before you graduate.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

The top tier in a number of sports are increasingly not playing HS in order to play club/travel level instead

This part became abundantly clear to me this year as he was a Freshman. Around here for soccer at least, the remaining value in playing on the HS team, if you want to, say, play D1, is something like making All-State. Otherwise you're going to get a lot more exposure playing club and participating in all the various ID events (and camps).

We're navigating this with our 14-year-old right now. He probably has the natural talent and physical development to play D1 if he puts in the work, but it's not at all clear he really wants to do that. Right now it's clear he's trying to find the right balance between his academic workload, demands of soccer, and finding time to have fun with his buddies. Interestingly, the only thing he really liked about the Freshman soccer team, was more time spent with his buddies (many of whom are also on his club team).

We're not pressing him to go one way or another, just trying to help him navigate what it is that makes him the most happy. But that's a tough question for someone at any age, much less a 14-year-old.


Related, and back to the topic of the thread, it seems based on my experience, that the worst parents are the ones who didn't quite make it as HS athletes and are trying to push their kids to do what they couldn't do. The parents (like me, not to sound arrogant) who had a successful HS career, are generally more even-keeled about it, as a) they know the sacrifice it takes and b) don't feel a need to live vicariously through their children.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I wonder if the kids need to play a sport year round to do well in it or if the kids (or their parents) prefer to do well in sports so the kids only play the sport year round that they do well in . I think a lot of kids could play multiple sports in HS without playing those sports year round but most are not going to be great at multiple sports so they choose to stay in the sport they are the best at.

It's possible my experience is pretty narrow, but it seems that at the high schools around here if you want to make varsity before you graduate in a sport like soccer, baseball, basketball, maybe others, you pretty much need to do club the rest of the year unless you're outrageously naturally gifted.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Around here, at least, and of course it depends on the sport, but "do well" would be making HS Varsity before you graduate.

Which is a little weird to me since I've watched freshmen play meaningful roles my whole life. I started to write that off as being a combination of seeing more small schools and/or low end programs but then I realized that wasn't really all of it. I've seen future pros (Jonathan Sullivan, UGA/Saints) play almost every snap of four seasons at a very large school. I've seen flashes in the pan whose bubble burst (one that's now doing double-digits for manslaughter in the state pen, was out of sports by end of 10th grade). I've seen future DIII athletes do it in multiple sports, but also some that never really sniffed a scholly, they were just good HS athletes.

While it's usually true that the best thing about freshmen is that they eventually become sophomores, I think their impact is more common in Georgia than maybe some other places for whatever reason. I know what you said is true in a lot of other places, Texas is one in particular where I've heard similar things said, I just think we're an outlier for some reason.

[Mota]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

The other thing that bugs me is that if your kids want to do well in a sport, they pretty much have to play it year-round now.

Take my 14-year-old. He really wanted to make the HS soccer team (and did). But the competition is tight enough that you really need to be playing club in the winter & spring, and do camps all summer.

I don't know about the rest of you, but when I was in HS, you did a different sport each season and that seemed better.

Now, excuse me for a sec as I go yell at some kids on my lawn.

I've read that they encourage multi-sports for kids until the age of 12-13, and then to start specializing.

The one kid from my son's age that I can picture making the pros was a hockey player all his life, also played baseball in the summer, and he shifted to baseball as his hockey career kind of stalled (he was drafted into Jr. hockey, but not in an NHL friendly draft slot). But no matter what sport he would play, within a few practices, he was always the best one at it. It was pretty crazy to see.

[BYU 14]

My perspective on this is you don't need to specialize and we have always encouraged our Football players to do other sports. Quite honestly, it is not healthy to focus on one sport all year round in many cases because of repetitive motion injuries and the fact different sports engage and develop different muscle groups, which can lead to disproportionate strength/weakness.

In Arizona there is now year round youth Football, which is absolutely insane. As kids approach teenage years they need downtime, especially in contact sports, to recover. In addition, related specifically to Football, you need time to lift and build off season or you are going to fall behind.

We had a kid that is a good hooper, 6'3, super athletic, come out for Football the first time as a senior. Played receiver and free safety and his Mom almost stopped him from playing because she thought he would get hurt and ruin his basketball schollie chances.

Well, 6'3 athletic hoopers are plentiful and as of now, he has 1 basketball offer and 4 football offers, which would be more if he had played all 4 years of high school, incluidng some like FCS, low tier G5 offers.

[Ghost Econ]

Not saying this definitely qualifies, but this is the mom of 3x National champ after he got beat in the semis.

I get being upset, but id be crazy embarrassed if I acted like this after my kid lost at something.

Iowa wrestler Spencer Lee went for his 4th national championship tonight but unfortunately got upset.

His mom was not happy and it looks like she’ll need some new glasses as wellpic.twitter.com/yoTNN6gPQy

— Barstool Sports (@barstoolsports) March 18, 2023

[sovereignstar v2]

If she got Lasik would she rip her eyeballs out I wonder.

Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk

[flere-imsaho]

On one hand, I understand the time and effort the parent has put in to support their child getting to that level, to say nothing of the time and effort the child has put in and thus the empathy (hopefully) that the parent has for that child and his/her effort. It's understandable to be emotional and dismayed. Sports is emotional, after all.

On the other hand, you're supposed to be an adult, setting an example, and also being the support your child needs especially when something like this happens. Maybe grow the fuck up.

I think a lot about this when reffing or watching my boys play and see parents of the losing team absolutely losing it on the sidelines. You know what those kids want when they walk off the field after a loss? Comfort, understanding, support. Not a deranged lunatic who can't handle their emotions.

[miami_fan]

Youth sports question of the week.

What is the main purpose of JV sports in high school? Winning games or developing players for varsity?

This has been a discussion amongst a few parents of kids on my son's JV baseball team. Obviously, the goal is to do both but which side should a coach lean more on? First a bit of background info. We have twenty six players on the current team, I believe there are five pitchers only and another 5 or 6 who can also pitch at various levels but mostly play other positions. We have a twenty one game schedule and then the district tournament. Last year, they had the same number of players including nine players who are now sophomores on this year's team. Last year's team won the district title but under a different coach. The new JV coach is an alumnus of the school who played and coached under the varsity coach. Most of the current sophomores did not play a lot last year. One of the PO's pitched one inning. An outfielder had three at bats. On the other hand, our current shortstop started about half the games last year as a freshman. I went to two or three games last year and the players on the field were dominant in those games. I don't know if it was explicitly stated that the sophomores were being developed for the varsity and thus were given more playing time or if that is what was assumed to justify the lack of playing time.

Fast forward to this year. We have played ten games so far and are undefeated. Six players have played every game, three sophomores and three freshmen. The top ten in plate appearances have four sophomores and six freshmen. As far as production stats, the class breakdown is similar. I went back and looked at the starting lineup from the first game. Six sophomores started that game and there was one sub due to injury with a freshman replacing a freshman. To my unrefined baseball eye, I only see an argument for one kid to get more playing time and he is married up with the third pitcher in the rotation. Not saying he can't catch the other pitchers but that is the way things are setup.

The parents of sophomores who are not playing are now complaining that the coach should be developing the kids for the varsity. They are not alone. We have a few freshman who began the season as starters who have been moved out of the starting lineup. Unfortunately for both groups, those kids are not playing well in one phase of the game(mostly hitting) right now and the kids that took their place are and the team is winning.

One thing that is becoming more and more obvious that I had not given any thought to is the kids and parents are struggling with the change from travel ball to high school ball. I think most kids and parents know that when they go to travel ball game/games, the player is going to play and more than likely going to start if they are a position player. The idea of going to a single game and not playing is not something most of them are use to. For me, winning the game is more of a priority. The unique nature of baseball subs being permanent makes it more difficult from what I can tell. As a basketball coach, I can get anyone five minutes in a game. Time at second base seems a bit harder. I told my kid that as a coach, I believed that you earn game-time in practice. If you are not doing it in practice, I don't know why the coach would expect you to do it in the field. The other issue has been four of our games have ended with us mercy ruling the other team with three games ending in the fifth, one game ending in the fourth and three of the four being at home. So we are not playing complete games to get players in the game. Maybe I am just sympathetic to a fellow coach. I just don't remember having coaches sacrifice games for to develop players or being asked to sacrifice games in lieu of player development as a coach.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

You know what those kids want when they walk off the field after a loss? Comfort, understanding, support. Not a deranged lunatic who can't handle their emotions.

Actually they want a slushie from the snack shack.

This had to be explained to one of the coaches in my daughters softball league when they were 8 because he called another coach and said he didn't want to coach with him, that he doesn't know what he is doing, that his daughter doesn't listen, and that wining is most important.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Youth sports question of the week.

What is the main purpose of JV sports in high school? Winning games or developing players for varsity?

This has been a discussion amongst a few parents of kids on my son's JV baseball team. Obviously, the goal is to do both but which side should a coach lean more on? First a bit of background info. We have twenty six players on the current team, I believe there are five pitchers only and another 5 or 6 who can also pitch at various levels but mostly play other positions. We have a twenty one game schedule and then the district tournament. Last year, they had the same number of players including nine players who are now sophomores on this year's team. Last year's team won the district title but under a different coach. The new JV coach is an alumnus of the school who played and coached under the varsity coach. Most of the current sophomores did not play a lot last year. One of the PO's pitched one inning. An outfielder had three at bats. On the other hand, our current shortstop started about half the games last year as a freshman. I went to two or three games last year and the players on the field were dominant in those games. I don't know if it was explicitly stated that the sophomores were being developed for the varsity and thus were given more playing time or if that is what was assumed to justify the lack of playing time.

Fast forward to this year. We have played ten games so far and are undefeated. Six players have played every game, three sophomores and three freshmen. The top ten in plate appearances have four sophomores and six freshmen. As far as production stats, the class breakdown is similar. I went back and looked at the starting lineup from the first game. Six sophomores started that game and there was one sub due to injury with a freshman replacing a freshman. To my unrefined baseball eye, I only see an argument for one kid to get more playing time and he is married up with the third pitcher in the rotation. Not saying he can't catch the other pitchers but that is the way things are setup.

The parents of sophomores who are not playing are now complaining that the coach should be developing the kids for the varsity. They are not alone. We have a few freshman who began the season as starters who have been moved out of the starting lineup. Unfortunately for both groups, those kids are not playing well in one phase of the game(mostly hitting) right now and the kids that took their place are and the team is winning.

One thing that is becoming more and more obvious that I had not given any thought to is the kids and parents are struggling with the change from travel ball to high school ball. I think most kids and parents know that when they go to travel ball game/games, the player is going to play and more than likely going to start if they are a position player. The idea of going to a single game and not playing is not something most of them are use to. For me, winning the game is more of a priority. The unique nature of baseball subs being permanent makes it more difficult from what I can tell. As a basketball coach, I can get anyone five minutes in a game. Time at second base seems a bit harder. I told my kid that as a coach, I believed that you earn game-time in practice. If you are not doing it in practice, I don't know why the coach would expect you to do it in the field. The other issue has been four of our games have ended with us mercy ruling the other team with three games ending in the fifth, one game ending in the fourth and three of the four being at home. So we are not playing complete games to get players in the game. Maybe I am just sympathetic to a fellow coach. I just don't remember having coaches sacrifice games for to develop players or being asked to sacrifice games in lieu of player development as a coach.

I think they go hand in hand.

Like I said earlier, my daughter is 9 and they are very much in the "everyone plays and has fun" mode, although transitioning from that. When you hit a certain age, high school for sure, it is time to learn not everyone gets to start or even play. If you are trying to win then by nature you're playing the best players, which you should be at that stage.

[Mota]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Actually they want a slushie from the snack shack.

This had to be explained to one of the coaches in my daughters softball league when they were 8 because he called another coach and said he didn't want to coach with him, that he doesn't know what he is doing, that his daughter doesn't listen, and that wining is most important.

With my son now 19 years old and a few years out of youth sports, he remembers the friends he played with and the fun times at tournaments at the pool and playing mini-sticks in the hallways. He doesn't remember anything about the games.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Mota

With my son now 19 years old and a few years out of youth sports, he remembers the friends he played with and the fun times at tournaments at the pool and playing mini-sticks in the hallways. He doesn't remember anything about the games.

This was what we tried to explain. It was a whole big thing. A few parents complained about him as a coach. He was put on probation for calling another volunteer and being a dick. What we told him was at that age kids won't remember who won or lost, just that they had fun with their teammates.

He has an older kid that got a D1 basketball scholarship, so thats his mentality.

[flere-imsaho]

I think if I'm a varsity HC, I'd want JV to maximize development time so that I have a pipeline to replace my seniors. I take the point about proving it in practice, but I also think that game reps are important to development. I'd hate to miss some kid suddenly taking a big step forward (as kids tend to do randomly) because the JV coach pigeonholed him as a bench warmer and never revisited it.

But who knows. My opinion of HS coaches has dropped dramatically with my older son being a Freshman this year. For instance, the soccer setup at his HS makes no sense along these lines. For context, there are 5 teams: Varsity, Sophomore, JV, Freshman A, Freshman B. Sophomore is considered "better" than JV as its where, more than JV, they expect to get the next Varsity players from. JV is just backup.

In theory, the program is set up to provide a development pipeline for Varsity. I basing this off of the fact that all 5 teams rigidly run the exact same formation, even when said formation makes no sense whatsoever for a particular team (because of a lack of personnel).

But conversely the Freshman A coach and JV coach both pretty much only play their starters, while the Sophomore coach and Freshman B coach play everyone as equally as possible (unlimited substitutions).

I just ended up coming to the conclusion that we have to accept that the HS coaches are doing this part-time and just may not be really good at what they're doing.

By way of example, the HC set up his varsity team in a rigid 4-3-3 setup. In attack he had at his disposal two good wingers and what looked to be a good target man. Well, he had both wingers taped to the sideline and the target man playing more like a deep-lying forward. So, there was no one to cross to, and he never considered having the wingers swap sides and be inside forwards instead (utilizing the deep-lying forward). All this compounded by the fact that the 3 midfielders did not appear to have defined roles. None of the 3 were rushing forward to support the attack or, better, running past the deep-lying forward, and worse none were operating as a shield for the back four. Speaking of the back four, he had both fullbacks going aggressively forward which meant a) they were often occupying the same space as the wingers and b) the backline was often exposed. Last but not least, he had the two center backs (who were slow) play as deep as possible despite the fact that their GK was a decent sweeper and they'd often not be able to handle 3 or 4v2 breakaways that came through the porous midfield.

Anyway, they won 4 games.

[Swaggs]

At the high school level and beyond, I feel like practice and camps are the best way to improve. There is obviously value in playing games with that pressure to perform, but repetition and drills are how you improve the most at baseball. I think the games should reward the best players and those that are working the hardest.

I obviously feel much different about rec leagues and most travel teams (where families are sacrificing the time and paying for the opportunity). It sounds like the squeaky wheel parents are probably the same ones that paid for their kids to be on travel teams and for private instruction, so they feel entitled to playing time.

[miked]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Youth sports question of the week.

What is the main purpose of JV sports in high school? Winning games or developing players for varsity?

This has been a discussion amongst a few parents of kids on my son's JV baseball team. Obviously, the goal is to do both but which side should a coach lean more on? First a bit of background info. We have twenty six players on the current team, I believe there are five pitchers only and another 5 or 6 who can also pitch at various levels but mostly play other positions. We have a twenty one game schedule and then the district tournament. Last year, they had the same number of players including nine players who are now sophomores on this year's team. Last year's team won the district title but under a different coach. The new JV coach is an alumnus of the school who played and coached under the varsity coach. Most of the current sophomores did not play a lot last year. One of the PO's pitched one inning. An outfielder had three at bats. On the other hand, our current shortstop started about half the games last year as a freshman. I went to two or three games last year and the players on the field were dominant in those games. I don't know if it was explicitly stated that the sophomores were being developed for the varsity and thus were given more playing time or if that is what was assumed to justify the lack of playing time.

Fast forward to this year. We have played ten games so far and are undefeated. Six players have played every game, three sophomores and three freshmen. The top ten in plate appearances have four sophomores and six freshmen. As far as production stats, the class breakdown is similar. I went back and looked at the starting lineup from the first game. Six sophomores started that game and there was one sub due to injury with a freshman replacing a freshman. To my unrefined baseball eye, I only see an argument for one kid to get more playing time and he is married up with the third pitcher in the rotation. Not saying he can't catch the other pitchers but that is the way things are setup.

The parents of sophomores who are not playing are now complaining that the coach should be developing the kids for the varsity. They are not alone. We have a few freshman who began the season as starters who have been moved out of the starting lineup. Unfortunately for both groups, those kids are not playing well in one phase of the game(mostly hitting) right now and the kids that took their place are and the team is winning.

One thing that is becoming more and more obvious that I had not given any thought to is the kids and parents are struggling with the change from travel ball to high school ball. I think most kids and parents know that when they go to travel ball game/games, the player is going to play and more than likely going to start if they are a position player. The idea of going to a single game and not playing is not something most of them are use to. For me, winning the game is more of a priority. The unique nature of baseball subs being permanent makes it more difficult from what I can tell. As a basketball coach, I can get anyone five minutes in a game. Time at second base seems a bit harder. I told my kid that as a coach, I believed that you earn game-time in practice. If you are not doing it in practice, I don't know why the coach would expect you to do it in the field. The other issue has been four of our games have ended with us mercy ruling the other team with three games ending in the fifth, one game ending in the fourth and three of the four being at home. So we are not playing complete games to get players in the game. Maybe I am just sympathetic to a fellow coach. I just don't remember having coaches sacrifice games for to develop players or being asked to sacrifice games in lieu of player development as a coach.

At my high school, we had 3 teams. The Freshman team, the JV team, and the varsity team. The purpose of the freshman team was to develop the players who were not quite ready to compete with 16/17/18 year olds. The purpose of the JV team was to see who was ready to make the jump and who just needed to play for the sake of being on a team. I'll say right now, 26 players on a team is silly. This is not MLB and most kids who can pitch are probably also really good at another position. To develop, these kids needs ABs and innings, you won't get that with 26 kids.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

Youth sports question of the week.

What is the main purpose of JV sports in high school? Winning games or developing players for varsity?

This has been a discussion amongst a few parents of kids on my son's JV baseball team. Obviously, the goal is to do both but which side should a coach lean more on? First a bit of background info. We have twenty six players on the current team, I believe there are five pitchers only and another 5 or 6 who can also pitch at various levels but mostly play other positions. We have a twenty one game schedule and then the district tournament. Last year, they had the same number of players including nine players who are now sophomores on this year's team. Last year's team won the district title but under a different coach. The new JV coach is an alumnus of the school who played and coached under the varsity coach. Most of the current sophomores did not play a lot last year. One of the PO's pitched one inning. An outfielder had three at bats. On the other hand, our current shortstop started about half the games last year as a freshman. I went to two or three games last year and the players on the field were dominant in those games. I don't know if it was explicitly stated that the sophomores were being developed for the varsity and thus were given more playing time or if that is what was assumed to justify the lack of playing time.

Fast forward to this year. We have played ten games so far and are undefeated. Six players have played every game, three sophomores and three freshmen. The top ten in plate appearances have four sophomores and six freshmen. As far as production stats, the class breakdown is similar. I went back and looked at the starting lineup from the first game. Six sophomores started that game and there was one sub due to injury with a freshman replacing a freshman. To my unrefined baseball eye, I only see an argument for one kid to get more playing time and he is married up with the third pitcher in the rotation. Not saying he can't catch the other pitchers but that is the way things are setup.

The parents of sophomores who are not playing are now complaining that the coach should be developing the kids for the varsity. They are not alone. We have a few freshman who began the season as starters who have been moved out of the starting lineup. Unfortunately for both groups, those kids are not playing well in one phase of the game(mostly hitting) right now and the kids that took their place are and the team is winning.

One thing that is becoming more and more obvious that I had not given any thought to is the kids and parents are struggling with the change from travel ball to high school ball. I think most kids and parents know that when they go to travel ball game/games, the player is going to play and more than likely going to start if they are a position player. The idea of going to a single game and not playing is not something most of them are use to. For me, winning the game is more of a priority. The unique nature of baseball subs being permanent makes it more difficult from what I can tell. As a basketball coach, I can get anyone five minutes in a game. Time at second base seems a bit harder. I told my kid that as a coach, I believed that you earn game-time in practice. If you are not doing it in practice, I don't know why the coach would expect you to do it in the field. The other issue has been four of our games have ended with us mercy ruling the other team with three games ending in the fifth, one game ending in the fourth and three of the four being at home. So we are not playing complete games to get players in the game. Maybe I am just sympathetic to a fellow coach. I just don't remember having coaches sacrifice games for to develop players or being asked to sacrifice games in lieu of player development as a coach.

Broadly, I'd say the answer is situational, with a number of variables.

You noted the constraints of different sports, which is definitely a factor.
The training regimen for different sports is also a factor (someone else noted, some sports are really geared for external development)

I'd say the current varsity situation in a given sport also plays a role. Is the varsity young and needs fewer replacements next season? Are they senior laden and will need a lot of replacements next season? And that drills down by position/role as well. If the varsity is loaded at RB, maybe the top JV RB spends some time at WR midweek, in order to maximize his opportunity to contribute to the varsity in another fashion.

Load management restrictions are a factor, especially with any players who might be JV starters that also double are varsity reserves on the 3-deep roster. I know the rules vary by state but, in Georgia for example, HS football has a six quarters rule (i.e. you can play in six quarters combined between JV & Varsity in a given week). JV may wanna rest starters on Wed/Thurs if the varsity has a likely blowout on Friday. If varsity has a tough game ahead, might give JV starters more playing time midweek since they likely won't see mop up duty on Friday.

The rub with the question, perhaps, is that developing players & winning aren't mutually exclusive ... not in terms of the players who developing will be most useful to the varsity in the future anyway. What IS more separate is trying to equalize playing time for everyone & winning, happily I know of very few (if any) situations where that's ever been much of a question. You win by playing your best players, those are also the players who it's most important for the varsity to have developed further. Career JV backups are more likely to be career mop up players at the next level, regardless of whether they saw equal playing time. This ain't rec ball, you play to win both short term AND long term.

In the end, I don't think there's a one size fits all answer

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miked

I'll say right now, 26 players on a team is silly. This is not MLB and most kids who can pitch are probably also really good at another position. To develop, these kids needs ABs and innings, you won't get that with 26 kids.

Well, that's kiiiiinda situational too.

Some programs are no-cut by administration rule so that's a factor sometimes. In the case of baseball, 26 is a tough number. It's way too many for one team, but not enough for two teams necessarily (depending upon schedules, position competence, innings restrictions by the state, etc)

I get where you're coming from but I'd have to know more about the particulars before I could be too critical of the roster size. YMMV.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by miked

At my high school, we had 3 teams. The Freshman team, the JV team, and the varsity team. The purpose of the freshman team was to develop the players who were not quite ready to compete with 16/17/18 year olds. The purpose of the JV team was to see who was ready to make the jump and who just needed to play for the sake of being on a team. I'll say right now, 26 players on a team is silly. This is not MLB and most kids who can pitch are probably also really good at another position. To develop, these kids needs ABs and innings, you won't get that with 26 kids.

Yeah that seemed a bit much to me as well. That is why I mentioned that they had a similar number last year so I assume that is standard. I would say that we are probably +2 in roster size compared to most of the teams that we have played so far. The major difference is we have three quality starters who are comfortably going at least five of a regulation 7 inning game so if they are on, the bullpen becomes a luxury. That being said, I also remember having 12 players on a basketball team and struggling to find minutes based on their skills.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Load management restrictions are a factor, especially with any players who might be JV starters that also double are varsity reserves on the 3-deep roster. I know the rules vary by state but, in Georgia for example, HS football has a six quarters rule (i.e. you can play in six quarters combined between JV & Varsity in a given week). JV may wanna rest starters on Wed/Thurs if the varsity has a likely blowout on Friday. If varsity has a tough game ahead, might give JV starters more playing time midweek since they likely won't see mop up duty on Friday.

The rub with the question, perhaps, is that developing players & winning aren't mutually exclusive ... not in terms of the players who developing will be most useful to the varsity in the future anyway. What IS more separate is trying to equalize playing time for everyone & winning, happily I know of very few (if any) situations where that's ever been much of a question. You win by playing your best players, those are also the players who it's most important for the varsity to have developed further. Career JV backups are more likely to be career mop up players at the next level, regardless of whether they saw equal playing time. This ain't rec ball, you play to win both short term AND long term.

In the end, I don't think there's a one size fits all answer

I had not given any thought to possible load management restrictions so that may be a factor as well particularly for the pitchers.

For a bit more context, I went through the rosters of the teams on our schedule. The lowest was 17. The highest was 29 with most between 22 and 26. Our varsity has 29 players and I also went through the rosters of the teams on their schedule as well. Low to High is 19 to 31, average is 25 to 29. So I guess that is normal for this area.

Like I said, those things are not mutually exclusive.

The more I think about it, the more Swaggs' post resonates. The kids are good ball players. Many stood out to me when I saw them play on the travel ball circuit. I think the kids and their parents are used to showing up and playing whenever they go to a baseball field. And if they play and don't perform, they know they have to play in the next game because there are only 15-17 players on the team if that many. There is no real option of not playing those players. Now they are playing on a team filled with the standouts on the travel ball circuit. Now the coaches have options they can go to if the players are not performing.

Side note: I know the hitting technique that encourage kids to get lift on the ball and get it out of the ball park is a big thing, but my god if I see another lazy pop up or lazy fly ball in a game... I know that is an oversimplification but I think you get what I mean.

[Atocep]

High school ball really has moved away from development. The season is just too short, there are practice limitations, and everyone plays on a travel ball team and is expected to have an offseason training program with said team. Most high school coaches I know have pushed that development responsibility over to those programs because they recognize they don't have the time work with a kid long enough to make any meaningful changes, especially when those changes will likely be undone by the coaches he sees for the other 8 months or so a year.

Good coaches tend to stay in touch or at least track a player's progress over the summer and fall. Whether it's just a text to check in on how a player is doing or more meaningful conversation, that should be happening.

Parents are spending shitloads of money on travel programs with the main focus usually being whether or not their kid plays every day and then those kids reach high school and they're just not prepared to fight for playing time.

The more I think about it, the more Swaggs' post resonates. The kids are good ball players. Many stood out to me when I saw them play on the travel ball circuit. I think the kids and their parents are used to showing up and playing whenever they go to a baseball field. And if they play and don't perform, they know they have to play in the next game because there are only 15-17 players on the team if that many. There is no real option of not playing those players. Now they are playing on a team filled with the standouts on the travel ball circuit. Now the coaches have options they can go to if the players are not performing.

This is 100% correct and the pressure to earn playing time is something travel ball doesn't prepare most kids for unless you're on an elite team, even then those teams are more watered down they were a few years ago so competition is still limited. Your typical travel ball team will have 18 or so players while an elite team will carry 25+ with most pitchers being POs and 2-3 options at each position.

[RainMaker]

I think it depends on the sport. For football, JV was always developmental for me. Sure they want to win, but the team used the same playbooks and schemes. The kid who they wanted to be the varsity QB someday was the starting QB. There was a preference to sophomores so they'd be ready the next season. But they also made it a point to get freshman playing time when they could.

Baseball was tricky and what I was more involved in. It was purely developmental. They moved positions around a lot and tried to mix up the at-bats. Basically a 2-year tryout to see who was good enough to play at the varsity level.

Our school also used JV to get reps for younger varsity players. I got to play varsity baseball as a sophomore, but they would have me throw in some JV games to get me more work. This was very regulated by the varsity coach. He'd tell the JV coach "he throws 3 innings or 50 pitches, whatever comes first" and that was it. Didn't matter what the score was or if I walked 5 batters in a row. I was to throw those 50 pitches and call it a day.

But this was back in an era where we didn't have as many options. There was a Summer ball league and sometimes some crappy Fall ball. But now kids have no shortage of ways to get reps so I don't even know if it matters to make it developmental.

[RainMaker]

Should add that our JV team was huge. Like 25 or so players. But that was because they'd scrimmage each other a lot. So the team would play maybe 30 games against other JV teams in the area, but they'd play another 30-40 against each other.

In retrospect, it was a pretty good system they had setup at the school. There was an old teacher who worked as an assistant coach who would ump the games behind the plate. The varsity players would have to rotate and ump the field in the scrimmages too. They really squeezed as much as they could out of JV from a developmental system.

[henry296]

I played JV mostly soccer in HS and mostly the best players played. If those sophomores aren't better than the freshman, they probably aren't going to play at Varsity when they are Juniors because the freshman would play as a sophomore. Not sure if Sophomore can play varsity or not.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by miami_fan

I had not given any thought to possible load management restrictions so that may be a factor as well particularly for the pitchers.

I did a little Googling, just to see how big a factor that might be in Florida.

Turns out, FL has traditionally been considerably different than Georgia about JV/Varsity rules.

Football only started allowing 6 quarters back in 2020. Girls basketball only started allowing it this past season. Previously players were limited strictly to one level or the other (mindboggling to me, having grown up with roughly the same system Georgia has today, so at least 40+ years of it)

Further interesting (to me anyhow) were some of the quotes in this article from Sarasota back in 2020 about the football change.

One coach mentioned playing seldom used 11th graders on JV -- that's not absolutely unheard in Georgia but it's incredibly rare in my experience. Like, only when a guy is playing for the first time (exchange student, cross country runner with long arms at WR, etc) or is absolutely near-hopeless on the field but has a lotta heart & wants to play regardless of whether it's Wednesday afternoon or Friday night. Even at smallest programs, it simply isn't typically done**

A separate article about basketball talked about how an increasing number of schools had dropped JV ball entirely due to lack of numbers.

** Now I do see it, not infrequently, at smaller academic-oriented private schools in the lower profile sports. Locally, junior/seniors often play JV tennis, golf, cross-country, etc in order to simply be able to check off the athletics box on their college applications. The general agreement is along the lines of "show up for practice regularly, be available if/when we need you to fill a roster spot, you'll be a team member in good standing"

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

High school ball really has moved away from development. The season is just too short, there are practice limitations, and everyone plays on a travel ball team and is expected to have an offseason training program with said team. Most high school coaches I know have pushed that development responsibility over to those programs because they recognize they don't have the time work with a kid long enough to make any meaningful changes, especially when those changes will likely be undone by the coaches he sees for the other 8 months or so a year.

Good coaches tend to stay in touch or at least track a player's progress over the summer and fall. Whether it's just a text to check in on how a player is doing or more meaningful conversation, that should be happening.

Parents are spending shitloads of money on travel programs with the main focus usually being whether or not their kid plays every day and then those kids reach high school and they're just not prepared to fight for playing time.




This is 100% correct and the pressure to earn playing time is something travel ball doesn't prepare most kids for unless you're on an elite team, even then those teams are more watered down they were a few years ago so competition is still limited. Your typical travel ball team will have 18 or so players while an elite team will carry 25+ with most pitchers being POs and 2-3 options at each position.

Thanks for this info. I can't say I remember seeing the 25+ travel teams all together in the dugout at one time. I have seen teams have one set of players during pool play and then have half of those players replaced by different players in the elimination round. Either way, I am looking forward to the move away from youth sports after my son graduates.

[miami_fan]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present to you... youth sports!


IMG Academy in Bradenton, Florida to be sold in $1.25 billion deal

[miami_fan]

Liberty High baseball disturbance: Parent punched umpire, sheriff says

On one hand, it is probably time to arm the umpires on the field at youth sports events. On the other hand...

As the sheriff arrested Gonzalez and walked him to a cruiser, he can be seen grinning widely in a video shared by the sheriff's office. Lopez said the parent claimed to have been simply defending his child.

Maybe we may need to see extended video of what happened before the sucker punch to see if the umpire was at fault.

#seeingbothsides

[RainMaker]

Sucker punching a 63 year old man in the back of the head is a bitch move.


Reading some other stories, it seems like the umpire was well liked. Local military veteran who was just involved in the community.

[Lathum]

yeah. No justification of that. Dude should be behind bars for a long time. Feel bad for his kid.

[dubb93]

We had a pretty bad experience last night but nothing like that. Was just a coach with a really bad attitude on the other side trying to bully our coach and the umpire (a high school kid) at an 8U game. He demanded calls for thrown bats (automatic out) in some really questionable situations as well as demanding (successfully) that swing and miss strike threes be ruled foul tips. The best part was him loudly declaring how much better his team is than every other team in the league (while acting as first base coach) because of how smart he is to make them practice defense.

Our coaching staff just wanted done with the situation so didn’t challenge him too much but the umpire ended up calling the league president down to the field. All that resulted in a 10-6 loss for us. Honestly that’s the first absolutely terrible experience I’ve had in my youth sports journey with my kids so far.

[dubb93]

We might actually win that game if not for all the “thrown bat” outs and his players getting extra strikes on the “foul tips.”

[Lathum]

No reason in an 8U league a coach like that should have a team. Thats on the league.

[dubb93]

Originally Posted by Lathum

No reason in an 8U league a coach like that should have a team. Thats on the league.

I don’t disagree. My son came off the field not even knowing if his team won or lost the game. All he wanted was ice cream.

The only things I stress are have fun, play like you practice(use your technique you have been taught), and hustle and give your best effort at all time.

[RainMaker]

Video of the guy suckerpunching the umpire from behind. Knocked him out cold. He smiled and laughed when arrested.




[Lathum]

Our local little league sent an email today saying they are updating the policy regarding alcohol. Any one caught under the influence or in possession on property will receive a ban of a year from the facilities. There was also something about protecting the coaches and umps. Can’t wait to hear the story on this one.

[RainMaker]

An e-mail like that seems like it's sent after an incident, not just a casual reminder.

It's been awhile but I don't remember alcohol ever being served at little league games. I'm sure folks snuck some beers into coolers but I don't remember anyone getting drunk and causing a scene.

[Lathum]

There for sure was an incident. We don’t serve alcohol. I know some people who will bring a yeti cup with a drink. We are all speculating someone was drunk and got into it with a coach or ump. Or both. I’m buddies with the leagues attorney so I’ll find out for sure.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

An e-mail like that seems like it's sent after an incident, not just a casual reminder.

It's been awhile but I don't remember alcohol ever being served at little league games. I'm sure folks snuck some beers into coolers but I don't remember anyone getting drunk and causing a scene.

It was rare at LL games when my son played. Of course most of his games were either on a school night or he has a showtime of 7am or 9am for a Saturday game. Now once he made the All Star team and we went to the LL tournament games, yeah lots of drinking and drunkenness went on there but even then most of that was at the hotel. Most of the scene making appeared to be mostly sober behavior.

We did have a guy "sneaking" alcoholic drinks during the game on our HS Senior Night. By "sneaking" I mean obviously pouring three drops of alcohol at a time from a mini bar sized bottle while looking around two or three times to see if anyone was looking. He did not cause a scene that night but he did passed out in the car and could not walk with his son and the rest of the family during the after game senior ceremonies.

[molson]

I went to my first little league game in about 30 years last week. A friend's kid wanted some of us to go to for his playoff game. I understand why people drink. Just kidding. It was cool that everyone was super positive and cheering everyone and nobody yelled at the umpires and the kids ate cake afterwards.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

I understand why people drink.

Pretty much captures my feelings about youth baseball (and the limited softball I've seen was even moreso).

[BYU 14]

Originally Posted by Lathum

There for sure was an incident. We don’t serve alcohol. I know some people who will bring a yeti cup with a drink. We are all speculating someone was drunk and got into it with a coach or ump. Or both. I’m buddies with the leagues attorney so I’ll find out for sure.

When we moved from Salt Lake City to Phoenix years ago, the first team my son played on had a Mom that brought a portable blender to the game and made Margaritas'. Talk about things you would never see in Utah for 500 Alex.

Thankfully they were a real chill group of parents, but I never partook, only for the reason that it didn't seem like something you should do around kids at a sporting event. I am sure some thought it was because I moved from Utah, but those people also probably wondered where my other 3 wives were too

[molson]

This thread isn't in my lane of life really but I have gotten an interesting insight into summer club teams. I can only imagine what they charge parents for this, using some kind of implied or direct pitch that their kid is "really good" and is going to punch his ticket to a scholarship someday. I have a friend whose kid is 10, and just starting to do this stuff. Went to one of the last games of their little league season and....he is not good. And he looks absolutely bored out of his mind. And they're giving up a summer of family activities to chase this baseball dream. I feel like a judgey Karen saying this, and I'll keep it to myself, but, it all feels a scam.

[albionmoonlight]

I've watched (over facebook) a former co-worker who simply would not accept that her kids were not good enough to be professional athletes. It has been morbidly fascinating. Another downside (in addition to the ones you note above) is that it looks like her kids did not have the time or opportunity or inclination to develop any other skills or interests or talents because they spent all of their time focused on being pretty good (but nowhere close to professional) athletes. So now they are leaving college and entering the real world and . . . do not seem to be really set up for success.

[miami_fan]

The Ringer just released a podcast about the decline of youth sports in America. It talks about a lot of the stuff we have talked about in this thread with some data to back up what parents are seeing anecdotally.

Why Youth Sports in America Are in Decline - The Ringer

Just a few of the "I knew it was a lot but I did not know it was that much" numbers.

- In the last five years, high school sports participation has declined for the first time ever.

- The number of boys playing high school sports now is lower than there were boys playing high school sports in 2007 despite the obvious increase of total numbers of boys in high school today.

-The Aspen Institute estimated U.S. families spend $30 to $40 billion annually on their children’s sports activities. This is based on Aspen’s analysis of parent survey and national sport participation data. The NFL's total revenue in 2022 was $18 billion. Most of this money goes to the travel costs involved.

- NCAA athletic scholarships have increased from $377 million in the early 1990s to $3.6 billion today.