Youth Sports

You all seem to be missing my point. It should be left up to the parents in the case of little league, etc. But parents don't seem to care about that. Parents should be the monitors with that. But, when it comes to playing sports for the schools, ie., seventh grade and up, then the schools should be the monitors of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by centennialdawg

You all seem to be missing my point. It should be left up to the parents in the case of little league, etc. But parents don't seem to care about that. Parents should be the monitors with that. But, when it comes to playing sports for the schools, ie., seventh grade and up, then the schools should be the monitors of that.

---

I've got your point. I'm talking about if I ran a youth league what it would be like. That's the premise I started with and (just as I suspected), it's controversial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoeburnCane

I've got your point. I'm talking about if I ran a youth league what it would be like. That's the premise I started with and (just as I suspected), it's controversial.

---

i dont see why it would be so controversial, if you dont want your kids to play then dont bring them into the league. no fuss, no worries. more emphasis needs to be put on schoolwork than if jonny mysonthefuturebadass can throw a 45 MPH fastball anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoeburnCane

Saying a kid is only "capable" of something sells them short, and it gives them an excuse all at the same time.

Eff excuses, eff selling kids short and accepting less than what one person thinks they're "capable" of. That's enabling someone to accept less than what they should be striving for. It allows them to settle, and when people settle, they don't reach their full potential, period. That's what's being done to kids everyday in this country.

It's the same premise with youth league coaches--Little Jimmy Schoolbook is only "capable" of being my 8th batter and RF sub because he's not as gifted as Little Johnny Fivestar. Well...how do you know if you don't give him the same opportunities as Little Johnny Fivestar to pitch/bat 1st? You don't know what that kid is truly capable of if the only things you ever let him do are coach 1st base and carry the water bucket. But--hey, it's safe, and that's what he's "capable" of...so that's what we let him do.

Bullshart.

Plus, if a kid is only "capable" of making a C while participating in sports as per normal, wonder what would happen to that same kid if he were given less time on the field/court and that free time spent studying to get above that C? I'd say the motivation to play would do wonders for what he's "capable" of. Did I mention I hate that fargin word?

On top of that--I'm not even talking about a C student...I'm talking about these kids who barely scrape by on D's/F's and still play sports and look around and wonder why they're dumb as bricks when their dreams of being a star athlete go down the drain...OR why they can't qualify to go play sports at a college b/c they're not mentally able due to neglecting their studies b/c they were still allowed to play even though their grades were on par with a kid with mental retardation...OR even why when a college takes them to play a sport that they struggle to remain eligible and have their dreams dashed that way.

I'm just saying the C student wouldn't get as much PT as the A student, but they'd get more than the doofus with the excellent curveball but the crappy academic scores mired in the D's/F's. You want more PT than the kid with the A? Go make an A. Work hard, study, push your teachers and parents to give you the help you need to get you to where you want to be. Don't think you're just "capable" of one thing.

---

you arent getting it. some people are naturally born smarter than others, do you disagree with that?

some kids can try their hardest do everything possible and still only manage a C, while others can never crack a book and still make A's.

so how can you punish a kid who does his absolute best, tries his hardest, and only manages a C, while another kid does no homework, no studying,etc...and still makes A's?

at the youngest level, grades should have no bearing on the leagues, because its impossible to spend the time needed to evaluate each situation and act accordingly

Quote:

---

you arent getting it. some people are naturally born smarter than others, do you disagree with that?

some kids can try their hardest do everything possible and still only manage a C, while others can never crack a book and still make A's.

---

So since a kid is genetically predisposed (supposedly, and who it's up to make that assertion on each kid, who knows) to a particular grade, then that excuses whatever grade they make and they can't ever make any better no matter how hard they work or what you give them as motivation to do well? In that case--if Kid 1 is genetically predisposed to an A, Kid 2 to a C, and Kid 3 to an F...why in the blue hell do we have schools in the first place??? Let's abolish them all if your theory's correct...b/c it's all decided genetically anyways. Motivation and how hard someone works has NOTHING to do with it...right?

I reject that theory as BS and I think every kid has an A/B student potential IF they put in enough work and have the right motivations to do so. You don't know until you try...and no one's ever really tried the approach I'm talking about on a mass level (and likely never will b/c they don't have the marbles).

And once again--I reiterate...the C student in all of your examples wouldn't be devoid of playing time. He/she just wouldn't get as much as the A/B students. And he'd get more than the D/F students. Very simple.

Quote:

---

so how can you punish a kid who does his absolute best, tries his hardest, and only manages a C, while another kid does no homework, no studying,etc...and still makes A's?

---

Easy--the same way a normal youth leage coach makes the decision that Little Johnny Fivestar gets all the playing time w/no effort, and Little Jimmy Schoolbook sits the bench but tries his darn heart out everyday.

I know, I'm heartless--that's never ever in the history of sports ever happened before ever. LOL--it's funny what people's reactions are when the shoe goes on the other foot.

Quote:

---

at the youngest level, grades should have no bearing on the leagues,

---

I disagree 1000000000%. They should have all kinds of bearing. It starts early--a kid learns the consequences early, and learns what they need to do in terms of being a responsible student-athlete earlier than Junior/Senior year of HS.

You give a kid the tools to succeed and do well...even if they're "genetically predisposed" to let you down, you might be surprised if you give them half a chance.

Quote:

---

because its impossible to spend the time needed to evaluate each situation and act accordingly

---

Not impossible--it's just not been done before.

I will give you this--in theory, I think I've got a **** good idea w/this...but in all practicality, it will never happen b/c of the logistics involved and because people don't want to upset the apple crate that is what currently goes on with youth sports.

At Norton, it isn't until 5th grade until you're placed into different groups...Group A - a book and grade ahead basically. Group B - right where you're supposed to be reading/mathematics wise. Group C - at least one year behind your grade. So what about those Group C students in K-4 before they're put into where they need to be? They're obviously struggling and have been for several years? Should they be punished because of the schools system? Answer - Absolutely not, grades shouldn't play the same factor as they do in HS sports as they do in these little leagues/p-nut programs.

I do not believe that the little league programs and etc. should be the one forcing grades for kids to play in their leagues. To me, it should fall solely on the parents of the kids themselves. Its not the league failing the kid IMO if they let him play and his grades are poor, its the parents themselves for allowing Johnny and Susie to play while they are failing instead of making their child set at the kitchen table and help go over their classwork with them.

cmon, you arent being realistic in this.

you dont think that some kids are born smarter than others? that some are born into better situations, making it easier to succeed?

how can you punish a kid, who may or may not be the best player on any team, who tries his hardest, but when he gets home, daddy is gone and mommy is out of her mind on crystal meth, and can only make a C, because he has no support at home?

At teh HS level, grades count to an extent, and EVERY kid should be pushed to accomplish all they can, but some kids are better equipped for success, and how is it fair to reward the kid who does nothing but is smart enough to get an A, has a great family support system, etc.. who doesnt even care or try, but the kid who tries his best, and only gets a C is punished??

Cane, in order for your theory to be valid, all kids would have to be born with the same IQ..and that isn't the case. A mentally slow kid or a mentally retarded kid isn't an excuse, it's a fact of life. What you propose amounts to discrimination towards kids who fall into these categories IMO.

[QUOTE=Biggin;1811038]cmon, you arent being realistic in this.

you dont think that some kids are born smarter than others? that some are born into better situations, making it easier to succeed?

how can you punish a kid, who may or may not be the best player on any team, who tries his hardest, but when he gets home, daddy is gone and mommy is out of her mind on crystal meth, and can only make a C, because he has no support at home?QUOTE]

ive seen these children go from F students to A students. if you give someone a little motivation, a little glimmer of hope, they can amaze you. Now granted some children ARE smarter than others there is no denying that, but i believe what cane is trying to get across, and nobody is getting it but me, is that if you give these kids something to work towards its going to help them in the long run. You are telling me that if a C student is told that he/she will get an award if they try harder is a bad thing? Let's say cindy lou is a C student, a LOW C student, you give her an ultimatum and she brings that LOW C up to a HIGH C, in my eyes thats great progress. That would be unspeakable progress that could or could not be directly related to the fact that she would be getting an award for doing better.

Furthermore, im telling you all, i worked with the children that had no chance, the children who had to stay after school because their parents didnt give a **** about them. After they got off school they went and stayed at a place called "the rock" which took care of them until their parents decided it was time to come get them. I worked with children who COULD NOT READ, COULD NOT DO MATH. Bad genetics?? maybe, but if that is true then i am the best geneticist in the history of the world because just the extra one hour of attention those babies got from me for a semester sure helped a **** ton.

every man and woman born into this world has a chance to better themselves or make a difference if they work at it. It may be the subtlest of changes, but there is that opportunity. If cindy works her ass off and brings her F to a D you better **** well believe that its an improvement. To some people that may not be much, but to that little girl that worked her ass off it means the world. If you give people a chance they will shock you, especially children this young. Dont give up on people, dont throw them away and say you will never make it. Ive been proven wrong many times.