Here is my question, and maybe need a topic board for it. By why do area high school teams play kids up say freshman up jv or soph or juniors up varsity and then when their tournament comes around they bring them down. I mean really first it takes playing time away from the kids that have been busting their rear end all year for that coach and team to have somone just come down and play for them and also what good is it doing for the kid to come down from playing up? I mean its really one of the dumbest things I think a coach and system can do. And most of the time its these teams that dont win the tourney, but I just think its sad for some kids that have been playing all year. I mean if a frosh is on the frosh team and then another kid just comes down and takes his spot win or lose that kid gets to keep playing because they will go back up to JV or what not, where as the kid that has been playing all year down there is done.

Here is my question, and maybe need a topic board for it. By why do area high school teams play kids up say freshman up jv or soph or juniors up varsity and then when their tournament comes around they bring them down. I mean really first it takes playing time away from the kids that have been busting their rear end all year for that coach and team to have somone just come down and play for them and also what good is it doing for the kid to come down from playing up? I mean its really one of the dumbest things I think a coach and system can do. And most of the time its these teams that dont win the tourney, but I just think its sad for some kids that have been playing all year. I mean if a frosh is on the frosh team and then another kid just comes down and takes his spot win or lose that kid gets to keep playing because they will go back up to JV or what not, where as the kid that has been playing all year down there is done.

 

 

Hmmm, with that mentality, the OJ Mayo should have played 7th grade basketball instead of Varsity. OK, that's and exceptional example, but the reality of it is that if a player has the talent, then he should be given the opportunity to compete at a level that does not bore him, or allow him to play at a level that will not allow him to exceed and succeed.

 

It's a parent or a player who's not that talented that will make the comlaint that "little Johnny" is busting his tail off but "LITTLER Jeremy" is taking his opportunity. Well, either little Johnny is not that good, or he needs to take up another activitie. I'm sorry, I wanted to play in the NBA and I worked my tail off for it, but my Freshman coach stopped all that when he didn't think I was very talented:thumb:

I believe that the Ryle mentality is short sighted. If a player has the talent, then he should be moved up. I guess that Maile or Farris would have been mired in JV ball until the JR. year also. Not very forward thinking to me.

I believe that the Ryle mentality is short sighted. If a player has the talent, then he should be moved up. I guess that Maile or Farris would have been mired in JV ball until the JR. year also. Not very forward thinking to me.

 

You can't use Maile as an example... these players are no where near that level. Plus, Ryle has 25+ players try out for varsity and Cov Cath has 13, big difference on who gets opportunities. Let's get right to the point here... these are talented up and coming players who are not as good, yet, as the junior or seniors playing in front of them that just happen to be struggling right now. Do they deserve an opportunity to come up once and while and faced varsity pitching to see how they do, definitely, and that will happen.

Hmmm, with that mentality, the OJ Mayo should have played 7th grade basketball instead of Varsity. OK, that's and exceptional example, but the reality of it is that if a player has the talent, then he should be given the opportunity to compete at a level that does not bore him, or allow him to play at a level that will not allow him to exceed and succeed.

 

It's a parent or a player who's not that talented that will make the comlaint that "little Johnny" is busting his tail off but "LITTLER Jeremy" is taking his opportunity. Well, either little Johnny is not that good, or he needs to take up another activitie. I'm sorry, I wanted to play in the NBA and I worked my tail off for it, but my Freshman coach stopped all that when he didn't think I was very talented:thumb:

 

I think you missed the point of "Set Em Up and Set Em Down's" posts. I don't believe he was referring to situations in which very good underclassman are forced to play at their own grade level and not allowed to play up at a level they probably belong. He was referring to situations in which an underclassman DOES play up for his school team (i.e., freshman plays up on varsity), but then is brought down only for the freshman tournament, thereby taking a spot of another freshman who had started all year on the freshman team. There are certainly valid arguments on both sides of this issue - heck, he is a freshman, so why not let him play with his own classmates, especially given these kids will be his teammates on varsity one day. On the other hand, if the freshman is so good that he plays full-time on varsity, what is the value to him to bring him down to compete is a tournament that is at a level that he apparently passed long ago.

 

So I guess in your analogy, would you have let OJ Mayo play in his school's 7th grade tournament even though he had played - and deservedly so - up on varsity the entire year? If so, what would be the point? He had arguably passed the 7th grade playing level when he was in 3rd grade.

 

Set Em Up - if I misinterpreted your post, my apologies.

No way is BW JV # 2 with 2 losses to CCHS

I think you missed the point of "Set Em Up and Set Em Down's" posts. I don't believe he was referring to situations in which very good underclassman are forced to play at their own grade level and not allowed to play up at a level they probably belong. He was referring to situations in which an underclassman DOES play up for his school team (i.e., freshman plays up on varsity), but then is brought down only for the freshman tournament, thereby taking a spot of another freshman who had started all year on the freshman team. There are certainly valid arguments on both sides of this issue - heck, he is a freshman, so why not let him play with his own classmates, especially given these kids will be his teammates on varsity one day. On the other hand, if the freshman is so good that he plays full-time on varsity, what is the value to him to bring him down to compete is a tournament that is at a level that he apparently passed long ago.

 

So I guess in your analogy, would you have let OJ Mayo play in his school's 7th grade tournament even though he had played - and deservedly so - up on varsity the entire year? If so, what would be the point? He had arguably passed the 7th grade playing level when he was in 3rd grade.

 

Set Em Up - if I misinterpreted your post, my apologies.

 

Every once in a while you have an exceptional athlete that is ready to move to varsity very youg; ie: Farris, Maile, Elliott, etc. but playing them all three levels, to me, is detrimental to your program. Baseball is a game that you have to play, a lot, to improve. If you're playing the same players at all levels you will loose depth on your bench due to lack of experience and interest and then when you get to the varsity level in a playoff situation or injury, you may not have enough depth on your bench.