24-0 ?

Grace T. said:
Sure but that’s not what Harvard westake is doing. It’s a magnet drawing the best of the best of the best (with honors) in various activities. That’s why it’s able to punch way over its size.

on the one hand it’s a great way to get looks and attention (even in soccer) since the counselors have pathways into all the top universities. On the other hand the competition is brutal if you know you have 50 kids with grades and qualifications for Harvard college but only 20 or so get in because of the cap. The saying goes Harvard could take its entire freshman class from a handful of schools including Harvard Westlake on the west coast and philips Andover on the East. Pressure cooker.
Click to expand...
We have at least 5 club players on my DD's JV team. There is a JV and Varsity with about 40 players split between the 2 teams. Competition for playing time is tough. Hard decision to play JV and play the whole game or play varsity and hope for a couple of minutes.
 
soccer dude said:
I'm only talking soccer here. A varsity soccer team in high school should ONLY have club players. I don't even remember a time when a non-club player made our varsity team, being a D1 team. So, to answer your question. I don't care what non-club kids think. A coach's job should be to recruit(from own high school) the best players period. I would expect a good coach to recruit prior to tryouts though so that you get the best of the best at tryouts. So, the non-club kids would know pretty quick that they're not cut out for this team and perhaps make the JV team. If it were late in the season, I agree, this to be unfair to the other kids but that's what I'm saying here.
Click to expand...
It’s quite clear that you don’t care what the non-club high school kids think. I am sure many coaches think the same way.

That, in itself, is an excellent argument for cancelling varsity sports programs and using the fields for intramurals.
 
espola said:
A few years ago Oaks Christian in Thousand Oaks was mentioned in Ventura County newspaper reports when some young football player bragged about his scholarship, apparently not realizing it was supposed to be kept quiet. Football and basketball recruiting makes sense -- I can't see much motive for soccer scholarships, except perhaps for small private schools looking for a gem to brag about.
Click to expand...
I know a few girls on scholarship at high caliber private schools in LA. Just because you can’t see it (likely because your kid(s) aged out decades ago) doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
 
dad4 said:
It’s quite clear that you don’t care what the non-club high school kids think. I am sure many coaches think the same way.

That, in itself, is an excellent argument for cancelling varsity sports programs and using the fields for intramurals.
Click to expand...
Why? Since some kids can’t make the cut (typically non club players) than those who can should suffer? Is this more of your, “punish the majority for the benefit of the minority, everyone should get a trophy” wokeness principles?
 
soccer dude said:
I'm only talking soccer here. A varsity soccer team in high school should ONLY have club players. I don't even remember a time when a non-club player made our varsity team, being a D1 team. So, to answer your question. I don't care what non-club kids think. A coach's job should be to recruit(from own high school) the best players period. I would expect a good coach to recruit prior to tryouts though so that you get the best of the best at tryouts. So, the non-club kids would know pretty quick that they're not cut out for this team and perhaps make the JV team. If it were late in the season, I agree, this to be unfair to the other kids but that's what I'm saying here.
Click to expand...
It must be nice to have thousands of students to choose from each year. Little Laguna Beach was moved up to D1 girls soccer this year for some reason that has my head still scratched. Not fair is understatement but life is not always fair. We play with school pride and make no excuses. Our coach recruits hard to find any girl athlete willing to ball for a few months and club is not required. We had a player two years ago that was a star at track and she just played soccer for school spirit and boy was she good. On a side note, I think all private schools should play in their own league and have their own CIF Private School Playoffs. I know many players that get "financial full rides" and then go beat up on public schools and act like their the champs. Ya right, totally unfair and total bullshit, moo!!! Bring it on Goliath....lol....
 
Kicker 2.0 said:
Why? Since some kids can’t make the cut (typically non club players) than those who can should suffer? Is this more of your, “punish the majority for the benefit of the minority, everyone should get a trophy” wokeness principles?
Click to expand...
Since when are club soccer athletes a majority?

All of varsity athletics combined are perhaps 10% of the school. You're asking the school to dedicate 90% of a scarce resource to 10% of kids.

If it comes down to a vote, good luck. The AYSO parents have you outnumbered ten to one.
 
At least on the boys side, an unintended benefit of MLS Next's policy against its players participating in high school soccer is that it has opened up some slots on the HS teams for regular club players to get a chance to be major contributors and for players who just want to play in HS to get a chance to make the roster. It probably hasn't had as much effect in Orange County or the South Bay because most of the club programs are not MLS Next (although Strikers move to MLS Next certainly took out some players), but it is definitely evident in LA and the City Section. This is true in LA private schools as well. There are definitely strong MLS Next players at Loyola and other good private school soccer programs in the area that aren't playing HS and that has opened spots for other kids.
 
Dargle said:
At least on the boys side, an unintended benefit of MLS Next's policy against its players participating in high school soccer is that it has opened up some slots on the HS teams for regular club players to get a chance to be major contributors and for players who just want to play in HS to get a chance to make the roster. It probably hasn't had as much effect in Orange County or the South Bay because most of the club programs are not MLS Next (although Strikers move to MLS Next certainly took out some players), but it is definitely evident in LA and the City Section. This is true in LA private schools as well. There are definitely strong MLS Next players at Loyola and other good private school soccer programs in the area that aren't playing HS and that has opened spots for other kids.
Click to expand...
Here in AZ, you see a lot of seniors who are on MLS Next teams quit them once HS soccer tryouts start (Nov). Its spread across multiple schools and they are quitting multiple teams, i.e. it seems to be pervasive. Basically they want to play HS ball with their buddies.
 
dad4 said:
Since when are club soccer athletes a majority?

All of varsity athletics combined are perhaps 10% of the school. You're asking the school to dedicate 90% of a scarce resource to 10% of kids.

If it comes down to a vote, good luck. The AYSO parents have you outnumbered ten to one.
Click to expand...

No coach will hold an election to select his roster.
 
whatithink said:
Here in AZ, you see a lot of seniors who are on MLS Next teams quit them once HS soccer tryouts start (Nov). Its spread across multiple schools and they are quitting multiple teams, i.e. it seems to be pervasive. Basically they want to play HS ball with their buddies.
Click to expand...

That used to happen with players in the boys DA program in San Diego County. Once a player has set up his college plans and it becomes obvious that there is no pro or national team in his future, there is little incentive to give up playing his Senior year in HS where he will probably be a starting stud.
 
dad4 said:
Since when are club soccer athletes a majority?

All of varsity athletics combined are perhaps 10% of the school. You're asking the school to dedicate 90% of a scarce resource to 10% of kids.

If it comes down to a vote, good luck. The AYSO parents have you outnumbered ten to one.
Click to expand...
It won’t even get that far.
 
Kicker 2.0 said:
It won’t even get that far.
Click to expand...
No, probably not.

The vote happens when it’s time to decide whether to build sports fields at all. When that happens, you’re going to need the intramural and AYSO people on your side. If all those kids quit sports because they fail at trouts, don’t expect their parents to help lobby for stadium lights.
 
dad4 said:
No, probably not.

The vote happens when it’s time to decide whether to build sports fields at all. When that happens, you’re going to need the intramural and AYSO people on your side. If all those kids quit sports because they fail at trouts, don’t expect their parents to help lobby for stadium lights.
Click to expand...
For that matter, you also have a vote when it’s time to build the new science wing by expanding into the sports fields.

If 30% of the school thinks of the grass as the intramural space, you might save it. If everyone thinks of it as the varsity practice field, say goodbye to your grass.
 
dad4 said:
No, probably not.

The vote happens when it’s time to decide whether to build sports fields at all. When that happens, you’re going to need the intramural and AYSO people on your side. If all those kids quit sports because they fail at trouts, don’t expect their parents to help lobby for stadium lights.
Click to expand...
Your viewpoint is narrow and self serving.
 
Kicker 2.0 said:
Your viewpoint is narrow and self serving.
Click to expand...
Your viewpoint falls short of being self-serving. Long term, it is self-defeating.

You can’t maintain public support for sports by excluding 90% of students. Eventually, someone is going to propose putting buildings on that grass. Teacher housing, or portable classrooms. If only 10% of kids ever get to use the grass, who is going to be on your side?
 
dad4 said:
Your viewpoint falls short of being self-serving. Long term, it is self-defeating.

You can’t maintain public support for sports by excluding 90% of students. Eventually, someone is going to propose putting buildings on that grass. Teacher housing, or portable classrooms. If only 10% of kids ever get to use the grass, who is going to be on your side?
Click to expand...
Do you grade your students work or does everyone pass because you don’t want anyone to be left out?
 
dad4 said:
No, probably not.

The vote happens when it’s time to decide whether to build sports fields at all. When that happens, you’re going to need the intramural and AYSO people on your side. If all those kids quit sports because they fail at trouts, don’t expect their parents to help lobby for stadium lights.
Click to expand...
Just to verify. Your talking about AYSO parents whose children are in high school, right?
 
Kicker 2.0 said:
Do you grade your students work or does everyone pass because you don’t want anyone to be left out?
Click to expand...
We re discussing access, not honors. You should be asking whether I allow bad math students into my room.

Poor mathematicians are welcome in my room, and I teach them.

Can you say the same about poor athletes being welcome on school sports fields?
 
dad4 said:
We re discussing access, not honors. You should be asking whether I allow bad math students into my room.

Poor mathematicians are welcome in my room, and I teach them.

Can you say the same about poor athletes being welcome on school sports fields?
Click to expand...

Soccer PE
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top