I don't agree with kids who are not in HS (grades 9-12) playing HS sports. I may be old fashioned but having gone to HS in Ohio where this is not permitted, and having coached Basketball in Ky I still feel that HS sports are for HS student-athletes. Yes the kid may have the physical talent to compete with older athletes at their school, but what about the talent at their opponents school? And I don't think it is just about talent. You have the emotional side to deal with as well, and as a society pushing kids to grow up earlier than they should.

 

I don't want my middle school daughter being forced into the teenage world any sooner than she needs to be. Let them enjoy being kids, there is still 4 years of HS to be exposed to the play and social side. I would be very surprised if there were any kid out there that missed out on a scholarship or chance to go to the next level because they only played 4 years of HS sports and not 5-8!

 

I respect your opinion, but here in Ky, your in a very small percentage of people that feel this way.

I respect your opinion, but here in Ky, your in a very small percentage of people that feel this way.

 

Maybe it has to do with a younger player taking the spot of someone close to your heart. If you are good enough to play up then let it happen and quit crying about the situation that you have no control of.

I think what upset me is the fact you have relatives or parent coaching the frosh,jv,or varsity team pulling up their 7th grader which is taking away playing time from a high schooler with just equal or better talent. I do not want to mention the schools that come to mind but I think it is unfair.

It is pretty evident of which school you are talking about firestorm.

A common point in several of the posts is how playing up benefits the school, the coach, the program and the community. What is the priority? Shouldn't it be the kid? Winning trophys and added experience does not outweigh the risk of injury, hearing conversations from older girls they aren't ready to hear, and the pressure to prove they can compete nightly at the JV or varsity level. If they want to play up, playing freshman ball lets them get experience and keeps them with kids closer to their age.

A common point in several of the posts is how playing up benefits the school, the coach, the program and the community. What is the priority? Shouldn't it be the kid? Winning trophys and added experience does not outweigh the risk of injury, hearing conversations from older girls they aren't ready to hear, and the pressure to prove they can compete nightly at the JV or varsity level. If they want to play up, playing freshman ball lets them get experience and keeps them with kids closer to their age.

 

Very well said. Give the kids time to grow up.

Hard work should be rewarded regardless of age.

I think what upset me is the fact you have relatives or parent coaching the frosh,jv,or varsity team pulling up their 7th grader which is taking away playing time from a high schooler with just equal or better talent. I do not want to mention the schools that come to mind but I think it is unfair.

 

That is also an opinion if the high schoolers are better, the head coach must not think so, if it is equal talent then you play the kid that is in the lesser grade(JMO). I know the school that comes to mind for me and it is the right thing to do by pulling the middle school kid up to play. Not sure we are talking about same school.:popcorn::banana:

This has been already covered in multiple revious threads, but I'll weigh in anyway...

 

For the sake of argument, let's assume that either the girl in question IS that good or the program is that bad where a seventh or eight grader will play varsity.

Point: In a school such as Beechwood or Holmes where the High School extends below 9th grade ( 7th at BW and 8th at HHS), I have no problem with those students who are in that high school playing on Freshmen, JV or Varsity teams. In other schools, where the middle school is offsite or totally separate on another part of the campus (ie Connor or Ryle), I am absolutely against it.

 

Here is my reasoning:

1)Social Ramifications:

By allowing a student up to 6 years younger than the senior class, who doesn't deal with older kids on the same scale, to spend significant time with older students, you've exposed the younger to things they may not or should not be ready for. We all know that things happen in the high school setting that do not in Jr High.

Additionally, you're taking time away from the younger's normal social development with friends ther own age. It is hard enought to make it when you spend the normal extra curricular hours with your peers, but when you change that to travel to another team right after school, its a stress these youngsters do not need.

Finally (on this point) the younger student may (will) face increased resentment from the other Frosh / Soph / Juniors that she will pass up. This will not help with normal social interaction once that child reached high school.

 

2) Academic Problems:

While it is not practice in most schools to give homework breaks for big games, students are expected to have developed the necessary study skills to handle the job. An eight grader at Turkeyfoot may not have the teacher's understanding when Dixie travells to Pendleton County for a game that night. In fact, if the students are travelling together, The younger cannot even work with the traditional athlete as they have differring work. Most middle school teams do not travel as far as high school teams.

 

3) Physical Problems:

Especially with girls, teen athletes' bodies are being taxed too much already. It is a shame to see the number of girls on the floor each night with ankle braces, knee problems and shin splints. Allowing young women to wait another year or two before enduring the more stressful routines will allow their bone and joint structures to catch up with the (typical) weight gain from puberty. It has been written over and over that over involvement at younger ages is leading to these chornic injuries in young women.

 

I welcome any other opinions, but this is why I feel the way I do.:thumb:

 

 

I will say that your reasonings are understandable, but I will have to disagree. I have been able to deal with these issues first hand and thus far has not affected any issues with the child. I believe that if the student has the ability to play at a Varsity level, then so be it. The five best players should be gracing the floor. I can't understand how parents can be upset if a seventh or eighth grader play above a junior or senior. If that seventh or eighth grader is better than that junior or senior they should play period. Varsity sports are not to put in your oldest players but your best.

The problem is that parents and players think that because they are juniors and seniors that they are entitled to play instead of earning it. I am sick and tired of hearing that it is our senior year and we deserve this or that. Go out and earn what you get. Its the real world people. Nobody is going to give you everything on a silver platter. Play the kids who deserve to play.

The problem is that parents and players think that because they are juniors and seniors that they are entitled to play instead of earning it. I am sick and tired of hearing that it is our senior year and we deserve this or that. Go out and earn what you get. Its the real world people. Nobody is going to give you everything on a silver platter. Play the kids who deserve to play.

 

NOw tell us what you really think!!!:lol: I agree 100%, and yes, well said!!

No. especially in a private school where the younger player (not enrolled in that school)is taking time from a student who is paying tuition.

 

Paying tuition has nothing to do with it, you make it sounds as though the students tuition includes their right to playing time. Wouldn't the younger player be paying the same tuition?

Paying tuition has nothing to do with it, you make it sounds as though the students tuition includes their right to playing time. Wouldn't the younger player be paying the same tuition?

 

Not if they are not attending that particular school.

Not if they are not attending that particular school.

 

Then how would be they allowed to participate, if they're not a part of that school system?

Then how would be they allowed to participate, if they're not a part of that school system?

 

I'd say they are more part of a Diocese than a school system. And I will assume that the tuition is less at let's say St. Therese than NCC. So the student playing for NCC, but attending St. Therese, as an 8th grader will be paying less tuition than a frosh. Just a guess though.