Politics in High School Baseball

remember the sr is at his athletic ceiling and is probably not going to get while the underclassmen is that good now but is nowhere near his athletic ceiling. if you play the sr you retard the growth of the younger kid so you hurt your program in the long run or should the sr play just because he was born a year or 2 earlier?

Its a pretty simple point made hard....Seniority has to mean something and the coaches know more than the parents do about the kids inside the chalk....What happens if there are a ton of real good ballplayers the underclassmens first 3 years and he don't play much and by the time he is a senior he gets a shot and he has matured, gotten stronger, competetive, improved and ready and worked his tail off to start...Is he done because he was born 2 yrs. earlier?

 

yes

YES.

 

so you're saying "underclassman you will start when you're a sr until then wait your turn"? is that correct if so then sr's should always expect to play due to the fact that they're sr's? there should be a caste system is that what you mean?does this mean srs>jr>soph>freshman?

 

equal

what I'm saying is the best players (that will give the TEAM the best chance at success) should play regardless of their class. IF 2 players are basically EQUAL in skills / talent/ what they bring to the table (the TEAM again), then the sr should play above the underclassmen. I wouldn't call it a caste system, I would call it doing the right thing.

 

The only way you will ever be a consistant coach, is to play your best players regardless of year classification. I use to coach basketball, and if I had a sophomore and he was just as good as the senior, then I would play the sophomore more than I would the senior, simply because I would have the soph. two more years. That is how you build a winning program. I am a true believer, you play your best players period. Never showing any favortism to any player.

 

a touchy situation. there are many train of thoughts to this question. my thought (and .65 cents will get you a canned coke) if everything is equal then the senior should get the benefit of the doubt. but if that senior doesn't perform then you go with the younger gyuy. if the younger guy is straight out better then you go wtih him. loyalty and hard work has to mean something, that is why you give the benefit of the doubt to the senior. the underclassman can still develop with some spot starts and practice. this is probably one of the hardest decisions for a coach ( to sit a loyal senior who has worked for 4 years, and play an underclassmen) to make. i have done it, i hated to do it, but i thought it had to be done. it was a decision that probably gave me more ulcers than any other one i have made. either way 1/2 the parents are going to disagree with you (about like all the rest of your decisions).

 

My view on this

When players feel that they are going to be handed a spot in the lineup or a spot on the team because they have "paid their dues" they are in trouble and your program is in trouble. You earn your spot from practice to practice , game to game. When players believe just because they have been around for awhile they have already earned the right to start or play a significant role you create an environment that is not competitive. The bottom line is you play the best players , period. The players need to understand that you as a coach are going to give them the best chance to win. And that means you put the guys on the field that give you and them the best chance to win. If you do have two players that are equal in talent there will always be something that will separate them. If the underclass guy is the best option you play him over the upperclassman. What message are you sending your players when you play an upperclassman over a better player? You are saying that you are not going to give your team the best chance to win. I hope everybody we play sits their best underclass players and plays the guys that have paid their dues. We will play our best players regardless of what grade they are in. If you put on a uniform then you should have already paid the dues necessary to help your team win.

 

agreed

 

sr's

is this a reason when I look at rosters of many HS sports and see a minimal # of sr's?

& aren't you actually showing favoritism to the soph?

 

if

if the 2 players are equal and you play the sr and make it known to him (actually he should know w/o being told) that the underclassman will being pushing him right on his heels throughout the season everyday at practice & the games, shouldn't that take care of any problems with thinking he has "paid his dues"? & will make it a competitive situation? best player for team wins out and win/ win for team? then it would truly not matter what class a kid is in.