Made a decision--going to 14U

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Oct 27, 2009
41
0
Yes that's something I'm concerned about. There is big difference in the maturity level of her new team and her old 12U team.

Something else we encountered tonight at her pactice was the fact that her new coach is keeping 16 girls on the team. I asked the coach why so many and he let me know that only the 9 best would play. He assured me that my daughter had the potential to be a starter both as a pitcher or as first base. It would be up to her to earn it. This was a cold welcome to the world of really competitive softball for me. She's never had to compete for playing time like this before. My daughter and I discussed it and she is unconcerened about it. Her only concern was for how the other girls would feel sitting on the bench. Well at least her confidence is there! Time will tell, I guess it's time to find out how good she really is?
 

Coach-n-Dad

Crazy Daddy
Oct 31, 2008
1,010
0
Sounds like your DD will be playing at the level that you were planning. Good for her and good luck to you both (to her that she plays a lot of softball and to you that you keep your sense of humor).

Our DD is a 95 pitcher and made the change to a higher level and age group in fall last year - from 14U NSA B to 16U ASA A. We are encountering some of the things that you mention here.
1) DD must actually fight to get playing time and with 3 pitchers I was concerned. She wasn't and isn't
2) After tryouts for the summer 2010 team there were 16 girls on the roster and the staff was still looking at players. I shouldn't have worried about it because the current roster is already down to 13.

Coach has assured DD that she has the potential to be a starter. Like you, I guess it is time to find out how good she really is.
 
Sep 6, 2009
393
0
State of Confusion
16 is too many. I would say 14 is the standard upper end. When you exchange gift bags at national tournaments, usually make only 14 or 15 gift bags. Someone wont get one with 16 kids.

Everyone should play, everyone should start sometimes. There are times when you will have to play the best, but unless only 9 pay money, its the wrong approach to do so all the time. No one is there to sit the bench a disproportionate amount of time. If there are girls on the team that cannot play on the same level as others, there are problems. Why were those girls taken in the first place? Were better ones recruited afterwards to replace them? Strong teams have all girls playing on very close to same level, so that they can be interchanged and rotated frequently. This is accomplished by practice and teaching, not recruiting replacements. Some are a year younger, etc and are being developed for next year, but they normally still can hang with the rest just fine in all areas.


You have a whole season to play, much of it is pool games that dont count for squat either. In the end, the only thing that does matter is Nationals at the end of the season, if you qualify. If you dont qualify for ASA USA nationals, then nothing still counts for squat is it is all second tier.

The rest of the season is actually a training tool to prepare for that, if you are serious about winning . If you are seeking out the strongest competition to play all season, you dont expect to win all the time anyway, the goal is to improve the team and players and coaches. Always remember that the best teams in any age group arent even playing in that group, they are playing in the next one up, except at Nationals.

Keep things in perspective. You might win a tournament, but its always only because better teams werent there! Its nice to win lots of tournaments along the way, but dont let the trees obscure the forest.
 
Last edited:
May 22, 2008
351
0
NW Pennsylvania
Personally, If my dd had that choice, I would be in favor of playing on the team without 16 players. She is allready playing up in age level, & fun is probably most important unless you have a REALLY special DD.
 
Sep 6, 2009
393
0
State of Confusion
I beat around the bush a lot, and hint at things, so Ill just say it.

The top teams in the country do not just play the best 9. So why would a lesser team most of the time? Why would winning meaningless tournaments be so important to someone?

Qualifiers and Nationals can be different in tough situations where you have to, especially for very good teams that can truly compete for a National championship, butthat is still only a small part of the season for even the best teams.

A team is only as strong as its weakest players, they must all be developed, and want to play and work hard for each other, its their team. Creating cliques, and groups, and starters and benchwarmers is damaging.

IMO , the reason a coach would do that is if they feel they need to win at all costs in order to prove themselves. Or maybe they want some kids to quit after having paid their money. My gut instinct says that people like that arent usually much of a coach at all, rather they sponge off of what their player have been taught by others. This is from my own experiences in several different sports with both kids of both sexes. For your sake I hope that is not the case.

Find a coach that has won hundreds or even thousands of games, with sucess on the national level, and that wont be the way they operate. They are secure in their ability to coach, teach, and win, while still being fair to all their players and parents.

It certainly is about winning, but not at all costs.
 
Last edited:
Dec 12, 2009
169
0
CT
I would agree with the last two comments. I'd be worried about a 14U team with 16 players on the roster. Especially if he says only the "9 best" will play! How happy will the other 7 be?? If they are good enough for him to roster, why aren't they good enough to play!! If they are that good, are any of them going to be satisfied just practicing and riding the bench for most of the weekends? 12-13 seems like an optimum number to manage playing time fairly.

I would really start poking around to see if the players & parents have been happy with that type of arrangement. I'd also try to find out what kind of player turnover this guy has had over the last couple years, and how those kids and parents have felt about their experience.

He may be a coach that has a core group of 9-10 players that he keeps happy, and brings on an additional 5-6 to maximize his player fees, and if they get discouraged & drop off, he still has their money. By saying up-front that the "9 best will play", it gives him a ready-made excuse for dealing with unhappy players/parents. It is also appealing to each kid's competitive instincts. They all will come in feeling, as your daughter does, that they will be one of the "9 best", when maybe the 9 best have already been picked out. Even if she does crack into the "9 best", that means he is better-dealing one of his previous "9 best". Something that may happen to her in the future.

None of this even takes into account the quality of the experience for a 14yo girl. At that age, this should be fun as well as competitive, and if the team/coach is too "mercenary" in their approach, it's great for the kids that are "in" this season, but might be lousy for those that are not.
 
Sep 6, 2009
393
0
State of Confusion
I doubt it will be as extreme as only playing 9 players, regardless of what coach said. If so he would only have 9 players left pretty soon. Really not criticizing your situation either, dont mean to come across that way, you are not in control of how the team will be managed, just looking for a more competitive team for your daughter, and you have it. Just saying I dont see that coaches reasoning, and disagree with it as well if its true.

Interesting how 16 players stay around though, almost makes one think that they were all told they might be part of that 9. If several were honestly told they probably wouldnt see much playing time, would they still be there? (they might if it was better instruction than they could get elsewhere)

An honest coach will tell a kid (at 14U you should deal with the kids directly, not parents, the kids are old enough, this is part of maturing) how she stacks up when offering a spot, what her strong and weak points are, what they need to work on, and what kind of playing time she should expect if its on the lower end. This lets everyone make the best decision before committing. Saying she "has a good chance to be a starter" just doesnt cut it for me.

I harp on playing and starting everyone, but that doesnt mean everyone gets the same playing time. Some will play every game, some will play almost every inning, some will play every other game, some will bat every game, some will not bat every time they play, some will bat even when they dont play. Its all part of getting everyone playing time while minimizing weaknesses. It is also dynamic, fluid, and constantly changing depending on recent performance.
 
Last edited:
Dec 12, 2009
169
0
CT
Agree with mudbug that it's probably not "only 9 players play" but with 16 rostered, it is difficult to find enough playing time to be fair to all. At least 2 or 3 kids will end up with the short end of the stick. No doubt that in any situation, the kids that are playing better end up with more playing time, particularly in elimination play, but with a 12-13 player roster, assuming the talent level does not drop off dramatically, you can get all of them some meaningful innings.....tough to do with 16.....

It also sounds like the dad was surprised to find out about a 16 player roster. The intended size of the roster should be something that is disclosed up front to any prospective player before she commits.

Based on how it's described, I would still have my antenna up and do a little research on this teams reputation....
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2009
41
0
Upon futher disscussion I misunderstood about keeping 16 girls. There are 16 girls trying out. They will only keep 12 or 13 the rest may be offered positions as alternates. The comment about "only the best 9 players will play" was meant from game to game based on effort and results. I feel a little better about the situation.

My antenna is already up with this coach. He has a bit of a reputation and several people I spoken with warned us away from him, but they never could give us any real reasons way.

From what we've seen so far he's exactly what my DD needs. His practices are organized, his and his assistants instruction have been far better than any she has recived before. He dosen't put up with alot of whinning and excusses from the girls or the parents. I think this maybe where his reputation comes from.

Time will tell if she is where she needs to be, I guess it is all just part of the ride. I'm going to enjoy it while it lasts!
 
Sep 6, 2009
393
0
State of Confusion
Good to hear. Really, a girl is better off with very good instruction and a lot of bench time, than poor instruction and a lot of time on the field. Too many dont see it that way, thats why its hard to put together a great team sometimes. Desire for more playing time can spread talent thin, especially good pitchers.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
42,831
Messages
679,484
Members
21,445
Latest member
Bmac81802
Top