Telling the coach to take a hike...or burning bridges?

[Eric F]

Yeah, those other girls just suck and should be happy to just be on the team with their clearly and demonstrably inferior skills.

Even though the team signed them and took their money.

I've seen this as a parent issue a lot more often than I have as a coach issue.

 

[livingontheroad]

Our coaches were upfront with girls when offering a spot. I know because one of them's mother was upset and forwarded the email to my wife asking what she should do...... My wife pretended she never got that email. Anyway it offered the girl a place but said she would not see much playing time....she had been on the team from 10 years old and second year of 14 on a team that was top 10 ASA , she simply wasn't good enough anymore. They made a decision, she stayed with team. That was her last year playing travel ball she still played high school and she focused on her barrel racing.

The only thing my daughter ever got was a call saying how much he enjoyed coaching her and offering her a place again.

my daughter broke her thumb in a tournament that year and was out for six weeks.... She came back in Colorado, but by that time had lost her starting position at 2B. She finished the year as a utility player.

Now this is an important thing. You don't want to be a utility player. when you get to 16 you need to be settled in a position and play that position full-time.... And become very good at it. College coaches are looking for position players not utility players. if you're one of the extra players on the team you're not in a good position to start with. Unless you got blistering speed or a hell of a bat.

 

[whiporee]

Each family has a choice to make.
Everyone deals with the same choices, however have dd's with different talents and goals.
The social aspect gets seperated by the sports goal over the social.
Some dont see the seperation.
Do you?

Sure.

But let's remember how this current part of this thread began, with someone saying winning is always important, and it's important enough to sacrifice player development over (upset because the coach had given a substandard player PT in order to develop them, and that cost them games), and that was the obligation of a coach and a team. I disagree with that idea. Everything since has morphed off that position, whether it is more important to let girls play or to win games.

I think winning should be important to the girls and to no one else involved. But even to the girls, what is more important is the lessons the game teaches, and those don't come from stacking teams or only playing your best players all the time. There are lessons to be learned from giving a struggling girl a chance to come through; there are lessons to be learned from comforting her when it doesn't work out. There are lessons to be learned from failing on your own, and lessons to be learned from failing because someone else wasn't perfect, either.

And there are plenty to be learned from winning, too. Just not as many. And the best lessons from winning come not from being the best, or even better than who you are playing, but in digging deep and coming up with something you didn't know you had. From believing in someone and having them know you believe in them, and then having them come through. Of making friends -- of actually caring -- about the girls you're playing with. Not just the ones that help you out all the time.

But that didn't seem to be the argument. That argument was that winning is an end and of itself. And that's a fundamental idea i just disagree with. There's also an inherent idea of meritocracy applying to certain girls on a team -- the reason they play is ONLY because they are that much better than the girls who don't. We all have seen enough examples of that not being the case.

 

[livingontheroad]

Sure.

But let's remember how this current part of this thread began, with someone saying winning is always important, and it's important enough to sacrifice player development over (upset because the coach had given a substandard player PT in order to develop them, and that cost them games), and that was the obligation of a coach and a team. I disagree with that idea. Everything since has morphed off that position, whether it is more important to let girls play or to win games.

I think winning should be important to the girls and to no one else involved. But even to the girls, what is more important is the lessons the game teaches, and those don't come from stacking teams or only playing your best players all the time. There are lessons to be learned from giving a struggling girl a chance to come through; there are lessons to be learned from comforting her when it doesn't work out. There are lessons to be learned from failing on your own, and lessons to be learned from failing because someone else wasn't perfect, either.

And there are plenty to be learned from winning, too. Just not as many. And the best lessons from winning come not from being the best, or even better than who you are playing, but in digging deep and coming up with something you didn't know you had. From believing in someone and having them know you believe in them, and then having them come through. Of making friends -- of actually caring -- about the girls you're playing with. Not just the ones that help you out all the time.

But that didn't seem to be the argument. That argument was that winning is an end and of itself. And that's a fundamental idea i just disagree with. There's also an inherent idea of meritocracy applying to certain girls on a team -- the reason they play is ONLY because they are that much better than the girls who don't. We all have seen enough examples of that not being the case.

Never said to sacrifice player development

Said had a girl on team that didnt belong there, because asst. Was her hs Coach.

It's not the function of an elite team to remediate players who did not earn a spot on that team.......just to help a dorky assistant coaches high School

Development is actually the key to winning..... But you're not going to get there unless you start with the right raw materials.

 

[Pitcher's DadCoach]

On another thread, Razor011 detailed frustration over how DD's team had a favorite 9 and 3 bench players. Part of the coach's "criteria" for getting playing time was game performance. How do you get game performance when coach doesn't put you in the game? Many respondents agreed it was a bad situation and time to move on.
As I read through it, my blood started to boil a little bit and it made me want to tell the coach off, and not be very polite about it. For those of you who have been through an experience like this and left a team, have you explained why you were leaving or even had a few choice words for the coach? Did any listen to what you were saying? Did it get ugly? Do you regret the approach you took? Did it feel great to get it off your chest?

BEST ADVICE EVER!!!
I took the low road 2 years ago and hindsight being what it is, not a good idea. Ends up that the organization takes coaches more seriously than pissed off parents. Just made me more angry. My case wasn't playing time though.

 

[livingontheroad]

Unfortunately...its the coaches team.
You arent going to convince them your daughter is better with words. And it's a safe bet you're not the first upset parent they'd ever had to listen to air grievances either. So honestly.....what does anyone expect to accomplish, besides putting their daughter in a bad spot?

It doesnt take that many to play softball. I recall playing a top CA team at nationals one yr..... they stayed in the same hotel as us and so our girls all got to be friends........they brought 1 pitcher, and only a few parents. Too many girls on team would be a red flag. Lotief at ULL used to carry 30+......2/3 never saw field.... They were there to carry balls at practice and cheer.. he even wrote a blogpost about it once. But how proud those girls were on signing day...... not realizing their playing days were over

 

[whiporee]

Unfortunately...its the coaches team.

I guess that's the core of our disagreement. I think it's the players' team. I think they -- every one of them who shows up, practices, gives her all and effort -- are the central figures in this. Not the coach, not the organization. The coach and the organization are there to guide, help, support, teach. But the team belongs to the girls who are actually playing, and I find it sad when those in charge lose sight of that.

 

[radness]

I guess that's the core of our disagreement. I think it's the players' team. I think they -- every one of them who shows up, practices, gives her all and effort -- are the central figures in this. Not the coach, not the organization. The coach and the organization are there to guide, help, support, teach. But the team belongs to the girls who are actually playing, and I find it sad when those in charge lose sight of that.

Can understand the reasonings your expressing. Do agree about pretty much all of it...on one hand.
On the other hand do recognize not everyone takes the same perspectives to reach goals.

Who's team? Well yes the players make up the team. Parents afford it ...however coaches put in there time effort and afford the cost also. Its a team effort.

This example itself explains how diverse people can be.
Sometimes people have a horrendous situation on a team and the parents will still say to dd, you're staying on the team no matter what! we made a commitment to this team. But other people will see a horrendous situation and say you need to leave immediately.
Even the debate on loyalty and commitment has lines that people do not draw the same conclusions.

Cannot conclude everyone will
think the same!
____________________
I like having fun. However i am also an intense softball player.
Even at a very young age in rec.
it was clear to me if teammates were running around being silly or not trying hard. I would have preferred the coach let them go to the plaground toys, and then hit me some serious grounders....
This is perhaps a main reason as a young softball player...
I went and trained on my own.
Creating my own drills for catching and hitting.
By 12 yrs old my goal was to beat the best. Maybe thats competitive? Or i already set my own standard?
Finally at the time travel ball started, and became an opportunity. ( yes the beginning of travel ball)
Teams then were ONLY top players! No low level teams. No friendlies. All competition with a goal to win. Woohoo!
*That changed over the years now different playing levels.
Now I am glad to see softball has grown with multiple levels for everyone!
Even in travel ball ~ levels.
However it is absolutely clear that because of the mixture of goals and talent it created this conundrum of diversity trying to figure eachother out to share a spot on the same roster.
Its not always going to work because people are often still figuring out there own goals.
Often in the same age brackets at a different place mentally or physically in the journey.

Thankfully there is a place for everybody,...
it just may not be on the same team.

 

[clarity]

Only left a team during season once. Daughter wanted to be a pitcher. Only had limited opportunities with 11u team. Coach would regularly bring in subs to pitch, and other parents on the team would always say things to us like our daughter was clearly better than the sub, they didn't understand why she wasn't pitching, etc. So, after the season we join another team that is clearly inferior, but where we knew she would be the top pitcher. I had a long discussion with the coach about why we were leaving the prior team, what our goals were, and asked if he would ever use sub pitchers. He assured us if his pitchers were available he would never use a sub. Lo and behold, the first 2 tournaments of the fall he brought in a sub pitcher who was an absolute stud. She pitched most of the innings both weekends, even though our team's 3 pitchers were available. And it wasn't a matter of trying to recruit her either, as she was locked into a top regional team already. We had a long, cordial talk the next week. He tried to rationalize it to me. We told him we would be moving on immediately. No big blow up or anything though.

I always try to tell people, yes, loyalty and honoring your commitments are important, but if you've been lied to, sold a bill of goods, etc., there is no reason to suffer through an entire season. Time's too short. Cut your losses, chalk it up to a learning opportunity, and move on.

 

[nikkilugi]

Thankfully there is a place for everybody,...
it just may not be on the same team.

Exactly!! My DD wants to play at a high level and compete with girls as good or better than she is to keep growing in her sport. That’s why we are seeking a high level national team for her. She was on a team that did a lot of losing (developing) and where girls were projects for the coach to develop - she loves those girls but that doesn’t match her goals. It’s all about the right fit and an honest coach who tells the players up front what to expect.