I agree....lots of schools play juniors on JV including X. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. In fact in Trinity's case recently it was probably a great idea to bring down many key juniors give the cancellation of the PRP game. Those second team varsity juniors benefited by getting the reps against a quality opponenet. It's just that when a JV score is reported and say Trinity beats Cincy X-- some might reach the conclusion that Trinity's sophmore class must have really improved over the course of last year's losing season...but apparently the truth of the matter is that Trinity started mostly juniors in that game, and only a handful of sophmores. I have no clue how many if any juniors Cincy X played. But the issue is at least noteworthy when comparing the development of a particular class and projecting their future success.

 

Gotcha.

I agree....lots of schools play juniors on JV including X. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. In fact in Trinity's case recently it was probably a great idea to bring down many key juniors give the cancellation of the PRP game. Those second team varsity juniors benefited by getting the reps against a quality opponenet. It's just that when a JV score is reported and say Trinity beats Cincy X-- some might reach the conclusion that Trinity's sophmore class must have really improved over the course of last year's losing season...but apparently the truth of the matter is that Trinity started mostly juniors in that game, and only a handful of sophmores. I have no clue how many if any juniors Cincy X played. But the issue is at least noteworthy when comparing the development of a particular class and projecting their future success.

 

I don't think that I could disagree with a premise more.

 

JV is JV regardless just like varsity is varsity regardless.

 

In my past life at Iroquois on varsity we would have maybe 4 seniors and usually less total players then a school like X or Trinity usually has seniors. Is it comparing apples to oranges when reporting those scores with no disclaimer? In the interest of full disclosure should a school like X be required to post a class roster when reporting varsity scores against an outmanned opponent, just for the sake of discussion?

Someone please explain this to me and why is it a big deal??

 

I understand why people would complain/make fun of a program if a kid is a junior playing JV and is also starter on the varsity. But if a junior that rarely gets PT in a varsity game why shouldn't he be able to play JV to better prepare him for future varsity games.

 

So what am I missing here? Why this such an issue?

 

If you haven't noticed, it is mostly an issue with the X faithful.

I don't think that I could disagree with a premise more.

 

JV is JV regardless just like varsity is varsity regardless.

 

In my past life at Iroquois on varsity we would have maybe 4 seniors and usually less total players then a school like X or Trinity usually has seniors. Is it comparing apples to oranges when reporting those scores with no disclaimer? In the interest of full disclosure should a school like X be required to post a class roster when reporting varsity scores against an outmanned opponent, just for the sake of discussion?

 

What premise could you not disagreee with more? Are you seriously comparing a varsity contest between Iroquois and X or T to a JV contest between T and Cincy X? I don't get your point. Are you saying Cincy X playing Trinity is like Iroquois playing St.X??? No, I don't think X needs to post a class roster when playing schools like Iroquois(whom they shouldn't play) becasue it is common knowledge to anyone who pays the least bit of attention to high school sports that Iroquois is lucky to have enough kids to field a varsity team while St.X has an abundance of players as posted on the school's web site. What's NOT common knowledge is how many juniors T or X play in a given JV contest because that information is NOT posted on T or X's web site. The number of juniors playing in a JV contest probably changes week to week given the opponent and injury situations. So, please excuse us nosy people who like to know whether one team had an advantage over the other by playing older players. BTW, if Trinity had brought down sophmores last year to play in the FRESHMEN contest against Moeller is that something that should be mentioned, or should it too be ignored as irrelevant minutia? I seriously dont' understand the sensitivity to this issue....there's nothing wrong with playing juniors on JV....X does it too!! 5 or 6 played against Lex Cath this week...I'm not ashamed to say it...in fact I told several Lex Cath parents at that game who asked. Why did they ask and why did they care---I guess they wanted to know what they were up against and what hit them after it was 44-0 at half.

If you haven't noticed, it is mostly an issue with the X faithful.

 

Always has been, always will be.

Ive heard the ridiculous comments made over and over and over again about Trinity playing juniors on the JUNIOR varisty team. I'll give you one fact that show Trinity knows what they are doing.

 

6 state titles in 8 years. Trinity seems to know what they are doing, huh?

Maybe the best way to come to grips with Trinity's JV games is to view them as a practice session or a scrimmage. I think that is the way T's coaching looks at them. Lord knows, they don't do much to prepare for the actual games, from what I have been told.

What premise could you not disagreee with more? Are you seriously comparing a varsity contest between Iroquois and X or T to a JV contest between T and Cincy X? I don't get your point. Are you saying Cincy X playing Trinity is like Iroquois playing St.X??? No, I don't think X needs to post a class roster when playing schools like Iroquois(whom they shouldn't play) becasue it is common knowledge to anyone who pays the least bit of attention to high school sports that Iroquois is lucky to have enough kids to field a varsity team while St.X has an abundance of players as posted on the school's web site. What's NOT common knowledge is how many juniors T or X play in a given JV contest because that information is NOT posted on T or X's web site. The number of juniors playing in a JV contest probably changes week to week given the opponent and injury situations. So, please excuse us nosy people who like to know whether one team had an advantage over the other by playing older players. BTW, if Trinity had brought down sophmores last year to play in the FRESHMEN contest against Moeller is that something that should be mentioned, or should it too be ignored as irrelevant minutia? I seriously dont' understand the sensitivity to this issue....there's nothing wrong with playing juniors on JV....X does it too!! 5 or 6 played against Lex Cath this week...I'm not ashamed to say it...in fact I told several Lex Cath parents at that game who asked. Why did they ask and why did they care---I guess they wanted to know what they were up against and what hit them after it was 44-0 at half.

 

Do you feel better?

 

I don't get your point either. As you say it is 100% legal to play juniors at the JV level and certain coaches CHOOSE not to or not to use as many as others. There is no need to justify it nor is there a need to put an asterisk by the results of a game because one of the teams opted not to use their juniors.

 

The sensativity comes from the Xaviarians that made a huge issue out of it a few years ago when Trinity swept at all levels.

Ive heard the ridiculous comments made over and over and over again about Trinity playing juniors on the JUNIOR varisty team. I'll give you one fact that show Trinity knows what they are doing.

 

6 state titles in 8 years. Trinity seems to know what they are doing, huh?

 

What "riduculous commensts" were posted on this thread about juniors playing JV?

Do you feel better?

 

I don't get your point either. As you say it is 100% legal to play juniors at the JV level and certain coaches CHOOSE not to or not to use as many as others. There is no need to justify it nor is there a need to put an asterisk by the results of a game because one of the teams opted not to use their juniors.

 

The sensativity comes from the Xaviarians that made a huge issue out of it a few years ago when Trinity swept at all levels.

 

Okay, you win...I'll never mention the word "junior" again...or the fact that a ______ dominated team should beat a sophmore dominated team 90% of the time. I'll pretend _______ don't exist in the fantasy world of Shamrocks.

Okay, you win...I'll never mention the word "junior" again...or the fact that a ______ dominated team should beat a sophmore dominated team 90% of the time. I'll pretend _______ don't exist in the fantasy world of Shamrocks.

 

Funny:jump:

Lord help us during the week before the T-X game in October, if this is any indication.

I should have known when I started this thread that it would be threadjacked to diminish the win over a very good Cincy St. X JV team. We have and will continue to play within the rules. Our coaching staff obviously knows a lot more about preparing a team for December than the ones always crying and whinning. It makes me wonder what would happen if they spent as much time figuring out why they are so far behind (18-11) as they do worrying about who plays in our JV games.

And maybe all of T's juniors were held back a year so really they are seniors. That is noteworthy when comparing green apples to bannanas. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say maybe T's teams are just better. If there is a 5 year age difference let's talk, otherwise, in the spirit of the Ryder Cup, quiet please. I wonder if Europe is playing juniors????

Edited September 12, 200818 yr by Ram
Rule 13

That dredded word- Juniors.

 

Dreaded? I embrace this...you know why? 18-11...our system tends to work.