There were some unusual things that went on back then. The Glasgow incident is the most infamous.

 

I remember Evarts getting into some trouble for playing some players who had already graduated against Corbin back in 1976.

I was 16 entering my Senior Year and it sucked. I turned 17 in late October. I wish my parents would not have started me soo early. I could have 2 more years of HS, at least one.

 

With that said, my girl has a August birthday and we are going to wait to start her. I think it is better to hold them back before they start school and not wait until they are in MS and have established their identity in school.

Good question. Anyone from elliot Co out there? Just out of curiosity, are those sophs all pretty much the right age or are they a little older? Whatever the case, they can play

 

They are all the "right" age. The holdbacks would have all graduated at 17 had they not been held back. I really do not understand the purpose of the discussion. Who better than the parents know what is right for their kids. I held one back and it worked out great. Another graduated at 17 and that was best for him due to his maturity level. I know all of those parents and much more went into the process than athletics. The rules have been followed. What was done was in the best interests of each individual child and that should be the end of discussion.:flame:

They are all the "right" age. The holdbacks would have all graduated at 17 had they not been held back. I really do not understand the purpose of the discussion. Who better than the parents know what is right for their kids. I held one back and it worked out great. Another graduated at 17 and that was best for him due to his maturity level. I know all of those parents and much more went into the process than athletics. The rules have been followed. What was done was in the best interests of each individual child and that should be the end of discussion.:flame:

 

Excellent post--I agree 100%. This thread was only started for one reason and has no purpose and should be shut down.

If a parent holds back a child for emotional, social or educational reasons I have zero problem with that and I applaude them for doing what is right for the child/children. However, I have seen parents hold kids back that had "B" averages just to give them a physical edge in sports. That is wrong. I think a great rule that would discourage a lot of this would be that any player that reaches the age of 19 before a season starts cannot play that sport. For example, if a player turned 19 in October he/she could play football or run cross country but not play any of the other sports that started after that. Or a player that turned 19 in February could play all the fall sports and basketball but would not be able to participate in baseball, softball or track. It may not solve all of the problems but it would help with some. A very well known basketball player this year turned 19 in September, that is just too old and he has a big advantage over any freshmen or sophomores that he played against, maturity and physically. I know that I am not going to change many minds if any but there is a reason why 18 is considered a legal adult age and anyone over 18 is an adult for sure.

Originally Posted by BogeyMan

They are all the "right" age. The holdbacks would have all graduated at 17 had they not been held back. I really do not understand the purpose of the discussion. Who better than the parents know what is right for their kids. I held one back and it worked out great. Another graduated at 17 and that was best for him due to his maturity level. I know all of those parents and much more went into the process than athletics. The rules have been followed. What was done was in the best interests of each individual child and that should be the end of discussion.

 

That is true of some but many of these holdbacks would have been 18, as my example above points out.

///

That's why they have freshman and j.v. team's is for people who are not physically or mentally ready at that age!!!! I was 18 month's before I graduated, and wasn't held back. Should I have been penalized some how?

 

You were 18 months before you graduated?No, you probably should not be penalized, you should have graduated from college by three or four years I guess. Ok, I don't understand that but let me go on to something else. The guys I am specifically talking about that were held back would have been 18 years old if they would have graduated on time. One of the players I am talking about will be 20 less than three months after he graduates from high school. Yes, JV ball is for people who need additional experience before they may be able to contribute to varsity, and freshman ball is for freshman. But the fact remains that a 19 year old adult has an advantage physically over a 16 or 17 year old most of the time.

You were 18 months before you graduated?No, you probably should not be penalized, you should have graduated from college by three or four years I guess. Ok, I don't understand that but let me go on to something else. The guys I am specifically talking about that were held back would have been 18 years old if they would have graduated on time. One of the players I am talking about will be 20 less than three months after he graduates from high school. Yes, JV ball is for people who need additional experience before they may be able to contribute to varsity, and freshman ball is for freshman. But the fact remains that a 19 year old adult has an advantage physically over a 16 or 17 year old most of the time.

I retracted my post , because I didn't want to get into an argument over this, but I guess you quoted it before I got finished. I don't really know about the advantage thing I handled more than one 19 or 20 year old when I was 16.

I have a kid who is 16 and play's against 18 and 19 year old's and doe's decent. I think a lot of it has to do with heart more than size or age!! I personally don't think any kid should graduate untill they are 18!! I know that doesn't make it right for everyone else but that is my thought's on it.

And that is the great thing about the good ole' USA, we can have our opinons. And you know what, it is great that you held your own at 16 and your son does the same but maybe that is not the case for everyone when they are that age going against an adult. I truly believe that may proposal would be very fair to all parties. I was only 17 when I graduated and at that time it was unusual to see someone 19 still in high school, let alone playing sports. Maybe someday the situation will be evaluated and corrections will be made, who knows. It is still impressive that you were 18 months old when you graduated, :thumb:

I was 17 when I graduated as well, and the only problem I have with kids held back is that I see more and more parents doing for the sole purpose of athletic achievement. It's almost as if all parents have to do it now for it to be a truly level playing field for all involved. I have no problem at all if it is beneficial for the kid's development, but more and more you see it being done for an athletic advantage, not necessarily development. I think that's where the discussion turns tense. There are so many loopholes in the rules that nowadays it's common to see a 2nd and 3rd grade AAU basketball team that has 9 and 10 year olds all through the lineup. I think that's where a lot of resentment toward the whole kids held back discussion get started.

Okay here we go!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you actually thought I meant I was 18 month's old,

then I would suggest that you should not have graduated at 17 and stayed a couple more year's. You probably could have gleaned the true meaning of what I said!!!!!!!! :D Now you have given us solid proof that kid's should stay at least one extra year!!:ylsuper:

Like I said earlier, if a parent holds back a child for academic, social or emotional developement then I think that those are all valid reasons. I helped coach an elementary team this year and we played a team from Ohio, a sixth grade team. They have at least two or three kids who looked like ninth graders. One of our players asked them about being held back and two said they had been held back one year and a third said he had been held back two years. That is just wrong. In my earlier post, number 35 I think, I spoke about a rule that I thought would be fair all the way around. Everyone has a right to their own opinion, thank God and our troops for that, but I think anyone being totally honest will admit that a 19 year old a vast majority of the time will have a physical advantage over a 16 year old.

Okay here we go!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you actually thought I meant I was 18 month's old,

then I would suggest that you should not have graduated at 17 and stayed a couple more year's. You probably could have gleaned the true meaning of what I said!!!!!!!! :D Now you have given us solid proof that kid's should stay at least one extra year!!:ylsuper:

 

I wish I could have stayed another year. That would have meant at least one more win over Elliott County.

As I stated before , this thread should be closed down because it's going nowhere. Just started out to be sour grapes.:argue: