Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
meloserio

Six Time State Champs

Recommended Posts

This is not intended to cast dispersions on the character of a wrestler, they just want to compete. I find it interesting that some states allow middle schoolers/junior high students to compete in high school. But if the available pool of athletes is shallow, that's what you need to do in order to fill out teams.

While that may not be an issue, just an anomaly; holding your child back just because of a sport is wrong. I would ask where the parents priorities are when they do this. This sort of thing didn't happen when I was growing up, but I did see it when my younger brother was in high school. What is the rational justification for doing this? Generally it is the parents (specifically the dad) living vicariously through his child. You are public ally stating that your child winning is the most important thing to you. If high schools decide to permit a Redshirt year, then the argument against it would have to go away, because the action would be explicitly endorsed by society. However, that's not the case, this is not an action that is either explicitly or implicitly approved by society.

How many of these kids have reached the Olympic stage? I ask that because that is the ultimate goal right? It's not just about winning a state championship (or 4) is it? Doesn't that seem shallow? Maybe I'm wrong and thing that parents should have higher concerns. BTW, there are more opportunities for college scholarships through academics than athletics. Maybe parental priorities should be assessed. That's the real question here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not intended to cast dispersions on the character of a wrestler, they just want to compete. I find it interesting that some states allow middle schoolers/junior high students to compete in high school. But if the available pool of athletes is shallow, that's what you need to do in order to fill out teams.

While that may not be an issue, just an anomaly; holding your child back just because of a sport is wrong. I would ask where the parents priorities are when they do this. This sort of thing didn't happen when I was growing up, but I did see it when my younger brother was in high school. What is the rational justification for doing this? Generally it is the parents (specifically the dad) living vicariously through his child. You are public ally stating that your child winning is the most important thing to you. If high schools decide to permit a Redshirt year, then the argument against it would have to go away, because the action would be explicitly endorsed by society. However, that's not the case, this is not an action that is either explicitly or implicitly approved by society.

How many of these kids have reached the Olympic stage? I ask that because that is the ultimate goal right? It's not just about winning a state championship (or 4) is it? Doesn't that seem shallow? Maybe I'm wrong and thing that parents should have higher concerns. BTW, there are more opportunities for college scholarships through academics than athletics. Maybe parental priorities should be assessed. That's the real question here.

And maybe, just maybe, the kid could benefit BOTH academically AND physically from staying back a year.... which is ALL completely legal (but you would rather force him or her to stay in the system in the same grade because it is the RIGHT thing to do!!!).

 

Why don't we see outrage when parents put their kids into school "early"... and they end up as a young 17 year Freshman in college, and are not mature enough to hang out with young adults who are much older than them--e.g., they get into trouble.  

 

Happens all the time--kid goes to college at 17 and has "issues" socially and academically. Bad things happen. Where is the outrage?

 

I find it fascinating when people just can't deal with the fact that, regardless of their foot-stomping about, "What is RIGHT", parents, families, and children have the right to stay back a year when they feel it is appropriate for their situation. The pompous "approved by society" nonsense is quite an odd concept.

 

It is legal for kids to stay back a year--often with very, very positive results.  

 

People will do what is best for them. This is a problem when you live in a relatively free society.  

 

Sorry so many cannot deal with such freedom.

Edited by leshismore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting fanta has not been posting lately.

 

So sorry for not replying.  I've been in the intensive care ward. I had a silent heart attack, now I'm recovering, and on a long list of medications........

 

I will gladly eat my humble pie on this one....I'm a PA homer through and through, and I'm glad I was wrong!!  California will never catch up to PA!!!

 

I just wish Marstellar would get in shape and start whipping some a** like he is capable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hs sports should be just that. If you are not yet in hs, wait your turn. It's not about pure competition, you are representing your school. I see no difference between a ms kid on a hs team and a college kid on a hs team. Plenty of true and even rs freshmen are of legal age.

 

 

tend to agree with Plasmodium and heelpick

 

Consider a possible scenario next year in NJ where an elite 8th grade athlete - after gaining an extra "repeat" year and all the benefits that go with it - faces a "true" freshman next year in the district, region or state tourney - is that fair?  I would say no.  My objection is not with the boy, family or school.  The fact that an athlete is a "great kid" or "works hard" should not be a determining factor in this debate.  My objection is with the NJSIAA rule(s) as they exist today because "repeating" solely for "athletic advantage" is not addressed. 

 

The state of Washington (I believe) addresses this issue by stipulating that beginning in the 7th grade students have a six-year window (6 consecutive years) of interscholastic eligibility where "such repetition is based upon documented academic deficiencies by the school principal".  Many here have repeatedly stated that this option or practice is available to all - but in reality that is not true.  When the modern Olympics were revived one of the many goals was to bring the world together to compete in sport in a "spirit of Fair Play".  Well this is not the Olympics but I believe this practice - though legal and within the rules - goes against the “spirit of fair play" IMHO.

 

http://www.wiaa.com/ConDocs/Con951/Eligibility.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of redshirting kids in middle school unless there is a legitimate academic reason.

 

However, much like everything else in life people will bend the rules to get ahead. No matter what you do or say, people will always bend the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hate that this thread has turned into a referendum on kids and their age. Most states allow you to be 19, and it is ludicrous to me that kids can't transfer or repeat for athletic reasons. I agree that kids shouldn't be 20 and competing in HS, but to me as long as you are a teenager you should be allowed to compete in HS. For whatever school you want. Obviously public schools have rules about who can go to their schools, but don't limit kids or teams from competing or growing.

 

What the heck sense does it make to force a kid to sit out a year because they transferred for athletic reasons? Karl Anthony-Towns was just the No. 1 overall pick in the NBA draft and he re-classified while going to HS in Jersey. Get over it people, kids and their parents want every edge they can find, teams want to horde talent. You have two options: give up or try harder. Don't like that some stud transferred in and took your spot? WORK HARDER. Or transfer/quit. IT. DOES. NOT. MATTER.

 

As long as they aren't pumping the kids with roids, I don't think we should have any rules whatsoever limiting transfers. I don't think we should have any rules limiting kids in grades 6-8 from trying to make their HS team. I don't think we should have any rules about repeating grades or re-classifying while in HS. "Competitive Balance" is a completely BS ideal that only hurts the greats, it doesn't make the bad teams/kids any better. Bunch of freaking crybabies. Your arguments are pointless and even more than that, they are freaking kids. Let them have their fun. 19 or under and not on roids? Do your thing kids. Go win some titles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Don't like that some stud transferred in and took your spot? WORK HARDER. Or transfer/quit. IT. DOES. NOT. MATTER."

 

Taken to it's logical conclusion, would this type of philosophy result in the elimination of high school athletics in favor of club teams? The European model.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is, the rules, as determined by either a state athletic association or the student's parents, don't determine what is morally "right" or "wrong" in this situation. Morality, the ethical thing to do in a given situation, is not black and white; it's not objective but rather, it is subjective. No one is morally correct here, nor are they necessarily wrong. People on this thread are starting from their own moral position (assuming it to be ethically "correct") and then making a judgment as to the degree to which the opinions of others align with their own. They are failing to recognize the flaw in their arguments; that the subjectivity inherent in this debate allows for everyone to be right and wrong at the same time - just depends on one's perspective.

Edited by npope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Don't like that some stud transferred in and took your spot? WORK HARDER. Or transfer/quit. IT. DOES. NOT. MATTER."

 

Taken to it's logical conclusion, would this type of philosophy result in the elimination of high school athletics in favor of club teams? The European model.

 

Honestly I think this is the only way sports do work. You can't have entities such as school and sports meld together. It will eventually fall apart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Don't like that some stud transferred in and took your spot? WORK HARDER. Or transfer/quit. IT. DOES. NOT. MATTER."

 

Taken to it's logical conclusion, would this type of philosophy result in the elimination of high school athletics in favor of club teams? The European model.

 

Hahaha! Using some of the rationale I've read on here, a sixty something Dan Gable should beat Pico, Mark Hall, hell even Metcalf...he should be in the running for a world or Olympic title... WAY older with much more experience!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...