Parents of College Athletes: Input needed

Parents Forum
1

<p>At our athletes parent meeting last week, our school district Athletic Director announced a plan to study specialization in our school athletes, and its pros and cons. The position the school is taking is that it is better for an athlete to try different sports/coaches in off-seasons, rather than practice their #1 sport year-round. The AD has collected some information from college coaches across all divisions that supposedly back up this position, but I have read in other posts here that specialization may be better, so what is it? To me, it looks like the main concern of the school here is fielding competitive teams (our school is pretty small for our area, @200 students per class), rather than what would be best for individual students who want to compete at a college level, scholarship or not.</p>

<p>ex: a senior competes in pole vault in outdoor track, but our school does not offer indoor track, so his choices are a) another winter sport like swim team, b) indoor track with a neighboring school district team (Board of Ed has to approve), or c) training at a facility with a private coach on his own</p>

<p>My D is in a similar position - I think a remember a parent stating here that some college coaches would not consider an XC runner unless they also had indoor track experience.</p>

<p>Sorry for the long intro, but for CC parents whose children have been or are currently college athletes, is specialization the way to go or not? I plan on serving on a student-parent committee on this issue, so your input would be much appreciated - THANKS!</p>

2

<p>interesting topic.</p>

<p>this was a huge issue at my son's small high school. it always has been an issue, but during my son's senior year, athletes were allowed to participate in two sports in the same season. so, during football, my son would also participate in golf team events--as his schedule allowed. during baseball, my son would triple jump as his schedule allowed.</p>

<p>i am not sure i'd recommend that for everyone, but it worked for him. he did not have the luxury of specializing in any one sport. he had the responsibility to practice two sports in once season....he loved it, but not everyone would.</p>

<p>coaches at our small school demand a lot of time and effort from their players. if you want kids to compete in different sports, it is imperative that coaches can work together. we've seen coaches fight over the time they can have the kids, and we've seen coaches work out a schedule.</p>

<p>my son recently decided not to return to his college sport this fall. he is planning on participating in one sport or another--he is thinking track or golf are possibilities. i think having a well-rounded athlete gives them many more opportunities.</p>

<p>my son's college coaches encouraged him to participate in as many high school sports as he wanted....that is sometimes the case, but not always.</p>

3

<p>I think others may have better advice than me on this but I'll just share what I see from personal experience. I have a daughter who is a rising senior in college. She is an athlete. She was not a recruited athlete. She is on the varsity team at an Ivy in one sport. </p>

<p>However, growing up, all the way through to senior year in high school, she was a multi-sport athlete. She played on three varsity sports, one in each season and exceled at each of them. However, my observation is that the kids who are at the top on a national or regional level in most sports, are the ones who specialize. She did not want to specialize. She exceled at a pretty high level but again, those who are the top of the sport, seem to do one sport and often year round. For instance, even if a top varsity team athlete for her school and even competing at the state level is not the same as someone competing at the higher echelons of that sport. I could go down each of her sports and explain how she exceled at a state level but definitely is not at the top of her sports and I know exactly what it would have required to be there for each sport. She made her choices and is glad she did what she did. In college, she chose one of her sports to do on the varsity level and does quite well in it. The kids at the tippy tippy top, however, did that sport year round and went to specialized high schools for that sport. She went to a regular public school. She also has played on the college club level in another sport but it is hard to fit that in with her varsity sport. </p>

<p>You may want to ask college coaches your question yourself and in particular in relation to your child's sports that he/she may wish to do in college. Some of this may matter differently per sport and also at what level of college play....Div. I, II, III, etc.</p>

4

<p>My daughter did only one HS sport, tennis. In the off season in her sport, it is typical to enter individual tournaments, in order to have/maintain/improve a state ranking.</p>

<p>She did music and theater insitead, as she didn't have enough time for those activities during the tennis season and she enjoyed them. She was still recruited (without a high ranking) and is still happily doing her sport in college (rising junior).</p>

<p>I would say, encourage your kid to do what they would most enjoy. Life is short!</p>

5

<p>I guess it comes down to how talented your child is. A kid who has the potential to be very competitive at the college level can do whatever he/she pleases and the college coaches will still come calling. If your child needs to specialize in order to build skills and gain experience (i.e. become more competitive) then I suppose playing one sport year round makes sense. In some sports, the recruiting is done mainly in the off season through exposure at club level tournaments and events, precluding participation in other sports at the high school. First, I would honestly evaluate my child's talent and potential. Look up similiar athletes who are competing at college now and see how your kid stacks up. If track, for example, look at the rosters on the school's website and compare their size and stats with your child. Also, if the school has a program, read it to see what their college athletes did while in high school. Many sports offer a summary of each athlete's accomplishments in the program given to spectators, so if HS indoor track was really impt to a particular coach, most of his athletes will probably have that listed. Get some feedback from college coaches. You will know your child is competitive if they choose to recuit her/him after becoming familiar with her/his athletic stats, academic stats, etc. The reality is though, most kids are not going to compete in college, so the best thing to do is to encourage your child to enjoy the high school experience by choosing to follow their heart. College coaches keep their jobs by WINNING. If your child can help them win and can qualify for admission to their school, they don't care about much else. Many top athletes have played more than one sport in high school, some even on college. Good luck with your decision.</p>

6

<p>First, I think that everyone agrees that it is best for children to participate in a variety of sports through middle school. Otherwise, you get real problems with wear injuries and burn out.</p>

<p>After that, it depends on the kid. If the child's primary goal is to excel in one particular sport, then generally he would be better off just specializing in that sport. But through the high school level in particular, the very best athletes can excel in a variety of sports simply on the basis of their innate abilities. Moreover, some kids just don't want to specialize, and everyone concerned needs to honor that preference.</p>

7

<p>I don't agree with specializing at all. Look at the bios of the really top athletes -- All Americans. Most wide receivers were also track stars. Tight ends were basketball stars. Etc., etc., etc. The truly extraordinary athletes are in the mold of Jim Thorpe or Bo Jackson. They can use their innate ability and be trained at any sport. Growing sports like womens lacrosse like to see cross-training. Speed is speed. It can't be taught. (Of course tiny improvements in technique & condidtioning can help, but an edurance athlete can't be turned into a sprinter.) A natural ability & agressive nature & determination can be molded by a coach to create a champion. I've noticed that the coaches who demand 100% of a kid's time aren't the most successful.</p>

8

<p>Most athletes are not the "really top." And we're not talking about "tiny" improvements in technique in sports such as basketball and baseball. We're talking about skills that can be greatly improved by repetition and proper training methods.</p>

<p>Of course, the programs for most sports will include regimens for speed and strength training. But even those programs work better when tailored to the individual sport.</p>

9

<p>One advantage of trying different sports is that it might provide different strengthening and conditioning that supports the primary sport, and possibly reduces the injury incidence. One of our high school's best swimmers, who later swam as a recruited athlete at Stanford, also was a varsity XC runner in the fall. Her mom says that the running was a tremendous help for her conditioning, yet XC put little or no stress on her shoulders, which are an oft-injured area for swimmers.</p>

<p>Lots of football players run track in the springtime to help with speed and explosiveness. On the other hand, quite a few of the XC runners chose not to run track in the spring because of the frequency with which athletes seemed to be getting knee injuries and shin splints. </p>

<p>To me it would depend on the coaches and the student. At our school as far as I can tell every one of the varsity volleyball athletes plays club volleyball, which leaves no time for anything else. The same seems to be true of the divers, but varsity swimmers seem to be split between those that are year-round swimmers and those who only compete for the school and in summer league. XC athletes often only do XC, but there are lots of informal running clubs in the area.</p>

10

<p>This is a concern of HS AD's everywhere and to be honest, it is partially self serving, not at all in the best interests of the athelete. As I read your question, it is about allowing atheletes to compete in outside activities while in a school activity and does the outside activity help or hurt the student athelete by narrowing their experiences.</p>

<p>The answer? DEPENDS. Not the diaper, the individual.</p>

<p>There is a fine line AD's should not cross and that is what a student does with their "free" or "personal" time away from HS practices. That is, as long as it is a legal activity so please no, what if they want to drink quips. </p>

<p>Some HS are faced with great atheletes who only concentrate on one sport (soccer, baseball, basketball, etc..) and may dabble in another. HS sometimes are looking to put the best atheletes, rather than players on the field. It becomes a control issue in some ways. Some states HS programs are looking at banning students from playing club sports in HS seasons. It becomes choose one or the other. </p>

<p>There are concerns of time and injury for student atheletes. However, the real problem is the HS coach and Club (or AAU) coach not respecting each other's time with the atheletes. In my experiences in HS sport there is more butting of heads rather than any attempt at co-operation and the student athelete suffers as a result. </p>

<p>Think of it as a band student and the music teacher getting angry because the kid is in the city ensemble as well. Would it be fair to ban that young musican from doing both?</p>

<p>Bottom line is it's going to depend on the athelete and his family. We had a year rounder in soccer who also did swim team. Sometimes you do homework in the car. You adjust to make it work. Did he miss out by not playing football for his HS? Not really. Were coaches and the AD a little upset that he didn't play football, yea they were. </p>

<p>As far as if a college coach will consider an athelete who does or doesn't do something, that's not a truism. IF you are talented, at that special level, they aren't going to turn you away. If they are turning you away and using that as a reason, well, it's just a nice way of telling you that you aren't good enough.</p>

11

<p>Parents need to listen to their children. Some may want to concentrate on one sport while others may prefer to participate in a different school sport each season.</p>

<p>Who cares what the AD, coaches or colleges might prefer.</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
As I read your question, it is about allowing atheletes to compete in outside activities while in a school activity and does the outside activity help or hurt the student athelete by narrowing their experiences.

[/quote]
I read it differently. I think many H.S. coaches are expecting year round participation in only one sport. I've seen coaches throw hissy fits if a cross country kid chooses to play on a club lacrosse team over the summer rather than attend a series of running camps, for example. Some coaches WANT the AAU circuit for their basketball players & will go crazy if a kid chooses to play another sport in the off season. The kid will be penalized for any independent action. That's why parents in my town hire pitching coaches to work year round with their nine year olds.</p>

<p>Coaches are probably no more prone to claim 100% of a kid's time than an orchestra director or a dance instructor or a Model UN moderator. If your kid is good, everyone wants a piece of him or her. THat's why parents have to step in & insist on sanity. Coaches & such can really put pressure on these kids.</p>

13

<p>OP wrote:</p>

<p>
[quote]
To me, it looks like the main concern of the school here is fielding competitive teams (our school is pretty small for our area, @200 students per class), rather than what would be best for individual students who want to compete at a college level, scholarship or not

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think you hit the nail on the head. A local small private high school in our area regularly recruits athletes from one of its sports to round out the teams in other sports in order to make the school appear competitive in every sport. Kids will graduate having lettered in 2,3, or 4 varsity sports. Since the school is small, however, it only competes against other small schools, and the level of competition is therefore quite low.</p>

<p>Having had kids at a larger, extremely competitive public high school, my advice would be to keep your child (at least during high school) in the sport s/he loves and excels at, if s/he has aspirations to play in college. More time in the sport gives the child more chances to excel and build an attractive resume.</p>

<p>If your child does not aspire to play in college however, participating in several sports seems like a healthy and fun way to go.</p>

14

<p>"I read it differently." That's why I said "depends". :)</p>

<p>You are absolute right, some of the time. Spot on. However, in this case it's the AD, not the coach bringing this up. I don't disagree with you at all. </p>

<p>In WA the most obvious ongoing concern is HS girls soccer and Club Soccer's main season go on at the same time. A student athelete may go from a 3 hour hs practice to a 2 hour club practice and play Monday HS, Wed HS, Friday HS, Sat club, Sun club in a week. Also the club teams can travel 1000 miles over that weekend to play as well as the highest level teams can be spread out. So a female athelete may have 15-20 hours of training and 270 minutes of game action in a week along with hundreds of miles stuck in a car. What you tend to see happen especially with girls, are alot of knee injuries. The concern is overuse. </p>

<p>The problem won't be solved because nobody wants to give an inch. Each adult feels they are the most important cog in the machine. Clubs can successfully argue that is where college's recruit and HS can argue that is where the girls are part of the school "experience". Each is right. </p>

<p>Then if the player is really good, (as some are in this area) throw in US national team and Olympic Developement experiences. Just read in Sunday's paper in OR (dropping D off) about a HS girl who concurrently plays for four teams (hs, club, OdP and regional ODP) at the same time because she's that good. Let's hope she stays healthy. </p>

<p>Anyway, there isn't an answer that anybody will address so it comes down to parents and what they feel their child can handle.</p>

15

<p>This is a pretty complex and interesting topic. My punchline is to listen to your child and what they want ... and to be wary of those asking for more time of your child (the more talented the athlete the more cynical you should be).</p>

<p>To me age is an important element to this equation. There is a lot of evidence that at younger ages, pre-HS, that playing multiple sports is the best way for most young athletes to develop ... even if they already have a favorite sport ... that playing multiple sports helps them develop. There are 2 main benefits. First changing sports from season to season helps prevent overuse injuries ... most sports have overuse injuries that tons of even young kids will get if they focus on the one sport all year. Second, playing multiple sports helps kids develop their overall level of athleticism which will help them in their main sport ... if they play one sport they may develop a subset of their athletic ability and in a lopsided fashion. I have seen research supporting these 2 bennies ... and I believe there is a third bennie although I've never seen any studies pro or con ... I believe playing different sports provides different learning environments to learn some concept that carry from sport to sport ... for example soccer, basketball, hockey, and lacrosse share very similar concepts about transitions between offense and defense, spacing, passing, etc ... and kids seeing things from different angles may learn them better.</p>

<p>When kids get HS age then if they want to specialize I think it is their call ... and I aslo believe it can help them reach their peek peformance in one sport ... while cutting off other sports and perhaps putting them at risk of burning out. Each athlete is different ...if my kids at 14 or 15 are complelled to play only one sport we'll let them but we'll try to make sure their internal drive is taking them that route and not the wishes of a biased coach.</p>

16

<p>
[quote]
...we'll try to make sure their internal drive is taking them that route and not the wishes of a biased coach.

[/quote]
That's very wise. Some coaches can be experts at brainwashing impressionable kids.</p>

17

<p>
[quote]
At our athletes parent meeting last week, our school district Athletic Director announced a plan to study specialization in our school athletes, and its pros and cons. The position the school is taking is that it is better for an athlete to try different sports/coaches in off-seasons, rather than practice their #1 sport year-round.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why can't the school system just put the single-sport participation information, pro and con, before student athletes and their parents and let them decide what's best in their particular case? A prescriptive, over-managed solution to an optional activity is a sure loser.</p>

18

<p>I can tell you that many of the top D1 lacrosse coaches are looking for multi sport athletes. My son plays on one of the those top teams and was recruited by a bunch of others ... so I have heard this many times.</p>

<p>The rationale is that playing at a competitive level is what the coaches want -- because it's the work ethic they're after. Now -- they hope that you pick up a lacrosse stick in your spare time in the fall and winter, but they are pretty happy to see you doing seasonal sports in season.</p>

19

<p>"Why can't the school system just put the single-sport participation information, pro and con, before student athletes and their parents and let them decide what's best in their particular case? A prescriptive, over-managed solution to an optional activity is a sure loser."</p>

<p>I agree 100%. No one should be allowed to make that decision for any athlete. It should be up to them to decide in concert with their parents.</p>

20

<p>I see two questions here: Is sport specialization best for the student?
And
Is sport specialization best for being a recruited athlete?</p>

<p>First question depends on the student and his/her individual and family priorities and goals. Second one depends on student, sport and college goals.</p>

<p>My experience has been that Division I college coaches will not appreciate multi-sport focus unless the student is achieving at a national or at least strong regional level in at least one sport. Some sports -- say lacrosse/football may lend themselves more to crossover. Some -- like swimming or water polo -- do not. </p>

<p>The star quarterback at a Plano, Texas high school may have coaches all over him. But if your student is the star quarterback at a small Division IV high school, don't expect him to be recruited by a Division I college, and understand that Div III coaches recruit differently than Div I coaches.</p>

<p>Div I coaches have budgets that allow them to invite athletes for official visits where the candidate and the team and coach have a chance to determine "fit". I don't think most Div III coaches have this option, but since we've dealt more with Div I schools, I'm hazy on that process, and also have no exposure to schools that recruit solely for athletics without a concommitant focus on academics. The Ivies have very different standards than the Big Ten schools.</p>

<p>It's important to realize that each coach in each sport at each school recruits differently. Our experience was night and day different from that of a student we knew who went through the recruiting process at one of the same schools but in a different sport and with a different coach. It is VERY important to determine where your student ranks on a coach's "list" when considering applying to a school. While coaches would no doubt love to have every student on their radar screen, they have limited and varying degrees of understanding with the Admissions office. </p>

<p>My kids participated in seasonal sports until 8th and 6th grade, respectively. In their sport, this is unusual - kids usually start at age 5. Even with the later start, our family, and particularly our kids, have made enormous sacrifices to manage a 25-30 hour year-round athletic commitment while also making academic achievement a priority.</p>

<p>Oldest S very happy with his outcome. We are told he would have likely been admitted to the college of his choice just for grades/test scores, but will never know for sure. He is loving the team experience and the college experience. Younger S going through the process now, and what I've learned so far is that even within the same sport, recruitment varies tremendously from one student to another. </p>

<p>The downsides of committing to a single sport are multitudinous. Parents cannot always trust a coach to understand academic priorities or prevent repetitive-use injuries that can end a career. Family time takes a backseat to the sport. Time management skills are crucial. The question we have often asked ourselves is "if we took the sport out of the equation, how would our S spend his time, what would he lose and what would he gain?" </p>

<p>Bottom line, no child, however talented, should be forced to participate in a sport if he/she is not enjoying it. There will be ups and downs, of course, but if they tell you they want to quit and still feel that way 3 or 6 months later, it's time to let it go.</p>