No I in Team but Player Wants a Scholarship

[Screwball]

I see a lot of pressure, and variance in how parents, coaches and players deal with the team concept while one or several players are also attempting to get college scholarships, starting even before HS.

In my mind, and maybe this is too idealistic, college coaches prefer--out of all the skilled athletes out there--a LOYAL team player, someone with good communication and interpersonal skills, someone who wants to work hard to build something with others, and who doesn't worry about individual accolades if they help the team win.

I came from a place where teams stayed together for years in travel, with maybe only a few players changing.

But the "scholarship" emphasis in travel ball seems to be all about "me."

Please let me (and us) know about your experiences with this.

 

[sluggers]

In my mind, and maybe this is too idealistic, college coaches prefer--out of all the skilled athletes out there--a LOYAL team player

Yes...it is too idealistic. You are getting into sports mythology--what the NCAA and the news media pretend sports are all about.

College coaches have to have players who produce and help them win games. If they don't produce, the coaches get fired. It is that simple. In college, it comes down to getting the players who can help you win games.

Take a look at NCAA basketball--the most profitable of any college sport. College coaches recruit players knowing the player will be there one or two years, tops.

The tough reality: Players with marginal skills are given the '"Rudy/win one for the Gipper" lectures. The good players aren't.

Every coach has to ask himself/herself, "Do I want to be with this player 8 hours a day for 200 days?" If the answer is, "This person is a jerk. I can't stand her for 8 minutes", then the coach isn't going to recruit her. But, beyond that, it is simply balancing.

But the "scholarship" emphasis in travel ball seems to be all about "me."

What is wrong with "all about me" in softball? Softball is barely a team sport. There is no such thing as a "ball hog" in softball.

As to pitchers, I personally would not give two hoots for a pitcher who isn't demanding to pitch every game. (Whether she should pitch every game is up to the coach.)

 

[chinamigarden]

How many parents who have a 14 YO playing softball actually understands how rare a "full ride" scholarship is?

I spoke to a Division II coach recently and he told me they like to see girls who play more sports then just softball. It gives him a better chance to see what kind of a team player they are. I don't know if they care about how loyal the kid is, but I do think the kid who jumps from one team to the next will raise a red flag concerning that player's (or her parents) ability to get along with coaches and teammates.

 

[starsnuffer]

The sad thing is that parents could pay for college twice over if they invested the money they spend in travel ball for 6 years of their daughters life.

The NCAA is a racket, but it's a racket that the vast majority of the American public has bought into and continues to support.

What I often see are families that seem to "put all their eggs in one basket" and flat out assume that their daughter is going to get an athletic scholarship, and that is her ticket to college. Very little planning outside of this seems to take place. With this mentality, of course it only makes sense for the kid to do whatever it takes to accomplish the "dream" the parent/coach has put in their head. They are indeed loyal, but that loyalty begins with family, not with the "team" that they pay gobs of money to be part of.

In my personal opinion, I have a severe distaste for any "loyalty" to something that I pay for. I think it's sad and obscene for people to be "loyal" to a particular car manufacturer. People pay for their car, the manufacturer should be loyal to them, not vice versa. Kids/families PAY to participate in a softball organization, they work and sacrifice for the organization, not the other way around. The organization is to be loyal to them (for supporting their business plan) and work to get the kids their scholarships. If my car breaks, I'm going to get a different car. . . if the kids team isn't performing, why should they be obligated to continue to pay for something that does not work properly for them?

Rethink what "loyalty" means for a moment and reconsider the OP.

-W

 

[SnocatzDad]

How many parents who have a 14 YO playing softball actually understands how rare a "full ride" scholarship is?

I spoke to a Division II coach recently and he told me they like to see girls who play more sports then just softball. It gives him a better chance to see what kind of a team player they are.

I think this falls loosely under what sluggers reffered to as mythology. Otherwise known as what coaches say as opposed to what they really do. If they do like a multisport athlete it's usually because that show's them what kind of athlete they are dealing with underneath the specific softball skills the kid has. That might give them an idea of far the kid can go, or whether they are seeing the peak of that kid's ability. From the coaches perspective they are looking for that 1 out of a 100 kids and they will excuse or explain away team hopping as what that kid did chasing their dream of college ball. College coaches rationalize all kinds of "youthful indescretions" when it comes to athletes, that's how you end up with felons with scholarships. Team hopping/loyalty doesn't make the top ten of red flags for coaches and enough athletic talent makes the coach put on those rose colored glasses so that the red flags look white.

 

[EP Dad]

I see no reason for a girl to be loyal to an association or an organization. I did the loyalty bit and the whole "company man" bit and was only hurt by it, I'm not going to let my DD be hurt by it. Loyalty is a two-way-street. I'll show as much as I am given. And in the association/team vs. player scenario the most power is with the team, not with the player.

 

[Bishop]

Again in softball boondocks (outside of West) I don't think the coaches really know or care very many of the travel teams except the "name-dropped" ones or the "name-dropped" tourneys (as was said, one game had more coaches than the others combined).

Any chance of you explaining that point? I really don't think I get what you are saying there.

 

[Sparky Guy]

I came from a place where teams stayed together for years in travel, with maybe only a few players changing.

But the "scholarship" emphasis in travel ball seems to be all about "me."

The days of staying on the same team year after year is long over. With the value of scholarships easily reaching the $125K range families are forced to do what they must to get their daughter's seen. The parents must "sell" their kids to the coaches starting when they are freshmen in HS. There are more and more college coaches looking at the younger kids then ever before. It's all about who has the best connections with the college coaches. The competition is getting harder. Athletes are specializing in one sport at younger ages. The days of the 3 sport athlete are coming to an end if they want to compete for scholarship money.

While playing for HS pride is a great thing.. The value of a scholarship can be worth many times more over the course of an athletes lifetime.

 

[rowdy]

The sad thing is that parents could pay for college twice over if they invested the money they spend in travel ball for 6 years of their daughters life.

The NCAA is a racket, but it's a racket that the vast majority of the American public has bought into and continues to support.

What I often see are families that seem to "put all their eggs in one basket" and flat out assume that their daughter is going to get an athletic scholarship, and that is her ticket to college. Very little planning outside of this seems to take place. With this mentality, of course it only makes sense for the kid to do whatever it takes to accomplish the "dream" the parent/coach has put in their head. They are indeed loyal, but that loyalty begins with family, not with the "team" that they pay gobs of money to be part of.

In my personal opinion, I have a severe distaste for any "loyalty" to something that I pay for. I think it's sad and obscene for people to be "loyal" to a particular car manufacturer. People pay for their car, the manufacturer should be loyal to them, not vice versa. Kids/families PAY to participate in a softball organization, they work and sacrifice for the organization, not the other way around. The organization is to be loyal to them (for supporting their business plan) and work to get the kids their scholarships. If my car breaks, I'm going to get a different car. . . if the kids team isn't performing, why should they be obligated to continue to pay for something that does not work properly for them?

Rethink what "loyalty" means for a moment and reconsider the OP.

-W

That is a sad commentary.

 

[rowdy]

If you want a full scholarship then softball is a bad choice. The best chance you would have is in golf where scholarships still go unfilled to this day. College coaches very definitely look for team players to fill out the roster if (a) they can find the position player they are looking for that have this quality and (b) if the coach has any integrity. One other comment I will add it specialized players. Unless they are a dominant pitcher or a catcher they better be able to do something other than the one position they specialized in.