So you're saying a senior won't make errors? Again experience means NOTHING when considering who to play. If in the coaches opinion the best player is a freshman then the freshamn should play. End of story.

I don't know if I have ever seen or heard anyone argue that experience means NOTHING when it comes to sports or anything else for that matter. But that is the topic of another thread.

 

I do agree that if the best player is a freshman, play the freshman.

I don't know if I have ever seen or heard anyone argue that experience means NOTHING when it comes to sports or anything else for that matter. But that is the topic of another thread.

 

I do agree that if the best player is a freshman, play the freshman.

 

This has been an interesting discussion, but I think that developing a program is a little bit more complicated that strictly saying “let the freshman play” if he is better. The coach has to be wise in developing talent and a program. A particular freshman or sophomore, for instance, with experience and training may be better at the end of the season than an upper classman but would not be if not played or developed. The younger player may need “different” or more “extensive” preparation to increase his chances of success when given the opportunity. Some schools, like Ballard last year, keep younger players and give them time initially against the weaker varsity teams. They are part of the varsity roster, practice with the varsity, and also play J.V. games. Schools like Trinity and St. X have historically let grade level determine playing time. Some people feel that if freshmen plays on the freshman team, sophomores on the J.V. team, and juniors and seniors on the varsity that it decreases conflict in the program. Say if a sophomore or freshman is played up to a higher level, a parent might come back and say “why isn’t my Johnny not moved up as well?” Also, there is the challenge possibly by the player that the younger person replaces. I had heard that at PRP some seniors did not like it when Brad Corley started as a freshman. After not making the trip to Florida with the varsity team, I had heard that he started after 10 games and ended up leading the team in hitting in certain areas as a freshman. PRP made it to the state final that year. I wonder what the senior felt like that Corley replaced? I had heard that the player Corly replaced really wanted to be in the line-up in the state final. Yet Corley ended up being Mr. Baseball his senior year, made All-American at Mississippi State, and is now playing AA baseball in the pros. Do you think that someone established in the high school coaching ranks, like a Bill Miller, may be able to do that and withstand the political fallout but not other coaches? Do you think that is also relates to Bill Miller’s evaluation of talent and his ability to develop it that might help a program like PRP? There have been gripes about Trinity having the talent and not winning. Could part of this relate to the fallout that a coach like Tompkins may receive if he does something different than in the past? If a coach tries something, then loses games in the short-term; he could be “done” as a coach because he has challenged the way things were done in the past and then lost baseball games? Now, does it make it all better if Trinity wins the 7th region this year after taking some lumps early? Wonder if they lose this year, but win the region next year? Would Tompkins still be criticized harshly?