What about the other guys???

Thanks Braves. There are times that I'll post and other times my schedule just allows for more reading...but thanks for your kind words.

I know it is difficult to sometimes convey meaning with the written word (so maybe I missed it), but I'll try to explain where my confusion comes from about loyalty....

In the original post, being loyal to a team was addressed, talk of finishing the job, job isn't finished until all the guys are taken care of, etc. Later after I had opened the can of worms about high school recruits or transfers, and guys leaving their high school programs, the original poster added these thoughts...

As far as the transfer deal this is how I see it. I dont want to coach any kid that does not want to play for us. He should transfer and I would have no problem with it. There are kids who transfer because they are in tough situations. The coach is a clown. The coach asks the kids to work hard but he is no where to be found unless its Feb thru May and its HS season time. He is serious about his baseball and the coach could careless and even the worse the other players he is around are the same way. I can not and will not ever blame a kid for leaving in a situation like this. If you dont want your players to leave for this reason then shape up. Its funny to me how no one ever complains about a kid who transfers into their program that cant play. Its a two way street. Who complains when a kid transfers out of a high school because of academic reasons?

It just appeared to me that these two messages were entirely different. Maybe my idea of 'finishing the job' is just different.

Anyway, that's where my confusion originated. I could be wrong..., it wouldn't be the first time (only the second...) !

 

hahaha...a personality too! Sportsmom,

I don't believe Coach27 was implying that, but I'll let him speak for himself.

 

Ok, I will respond

Two different situations quite honestly.

 

I agree with you on that coach. There is a huge difference in transferring when your not in season with that team instead of transferring during the season.

 

My confusion came because I didn't see the first post as referring to only your showcase team. It didn't specify, so I just took it as meaning team of any kind.

I had no intention of hijacking this thread...only what I thought was the original intent...team loyalty.

Really, no offense intended...I think it's basically just a difference of opinion on what finishing the job means.

 

Another thought

We seem to talk alot about a players responsibilities to his HS program here. We talk about loyalty and commitment to his team, school, coaches, community etc etc. What about the programs responsibilities to the player? Do they have any other than to just field a team? If they do what are they?

 

New Thread

That a good one. Post it. I think it will be a long one.

 

For a player, what you put into it is what you will get out of it. Programs have to give every kid a fair chance and the ones who earn a starting job have earned it fairly. Athletes should never think they have earned a starting because they were the best player on their team in high school or whatever. Coaches run their programs differently than other coaches but every player has to earn their right on and off the field. That means putting as much emphasis on academics as on athletics. We all know of a person that does nothing with academics but a gifted player and its not fair for a kid who does everything right but not as talented athlete. But with coaches at a certain level its all about winning because if you don't win then you have no job. But in the end it all comes down to a player doing things the right way.

 

Sportsmom,

Would this describe how you feel yet?
The case for transfers comes up alot in this forum, in the stands, among parents and between players. Ive heard some good and bad transfers. (there IS already another thread for this) I believe that some of what creates others opinions is situations that may have experienced that affected their own kids or kids they know, either they transferred because they want better, or they were part of a team where they lost a position because someone that was better transferred in. If people put themselves in each scenario, the first one probably feels good, the second may cause bad feelings and create some animosity. It all depends on the situation. In some cases , Maybe the whole team benefits from a transfer. I know a situation where the HS team has around 6 players that also play on a showcase team and same coach for both. There are games that other players on his HS team play against him if they are on another showcase team. Good or bad , I dont know. That is a whole other thread. Personally, Im glad not to have a kid on either.The experiences I have sheard about were not a good one and left a bad feeling about transferring. Its easy to say its great my kid or another kid transferred in so were gonna be great! That is what showcase is for, hopefully high schools will keep the focus on what they are there for, acedemics, making friends, building character, and as far as baseball, building each player to be a team player, working fairly with the whole team, not just creating a team of "studs" Thats what showcase is for. I have enjoyed your posts and in turn, understand where you are coming from.

 

Let's get real

Can we all agree on this?

Lets say there's a school team that has about 6 or 7 players who all play for the same showcase team. At this school, one of the assistant coaches is also an assistant coach on that same showcase team. So there are a handful of players who play for the same coach in both school ball, and showcase ball.

Then, lets say the six players on that school team have a couple buddies who they play showcase ball with, on the showcase team coached by their high school assistant coach.

Would it be ethical or fair for that high school to have the couple kids off the showcase team transfer in from across the state to play at that high school? What if one of the players was transferring in from a school that was only about 30 minutes away, but another player was transferring in from a school that was about 2 hours away? Is one of these any more acceptable than the other one?

What about the other schools in the area who do everything the right way without recruiting? Should they be forced to compete for conference and state championships against a team like this who commits obvious recruiting violations?

What about the other players in this particular high school program who will now be sitting the bench and be deprived of a chance to show what they can do, while these recruited players come in and steal all the limelight?

What kind of a message does the coach send to the players who are actually supposed to legally play at his school, when he goes out and brings in a few ringers from across the state? Does it not send the message "You guys arent good enough to win us a state championship, so lets bring in a few illegal players who will put us over the hump."?

I think this is the type of recruiting that everyone has a problem with. And yes, this type of stuff does exist. This is a way different scenario than a player switching schools due to his current school not having a coach, or something like that.

There are programs in this state who are recruiting ringers with the thought of stealing a state championship on their minds. They aren't taking players from programs who are "lacking coaches." They aren't being good samaritans. They're stealing players from big-time schools and big-time programs, and their only incentive is winning at all cost.