it's a parents responsibility to protect their kids outside of the game, not the coach's...when a coach says" I better not hear of anybody playing for $&@" he has overstepped his bounds, set himself up to supersede parents wishes... and I know the whole story, so didn't need the recap...All I'm saying is we pay a pretty hefty tuition to these schools, they in turn pay the coach to do just that, coach. Not legislate who the players can play for,regardless of his personal feeling on the subject. We'll protect our kids, Coach's coach the team...it's the outside interests that muddle the picture and make being objective impossible. Parents who didn't agree with the travel teams handling of the situation can take it up with them or switch teams, no need to have that parental control ripped away. And, your delusional if you think best players always end up on top, we need not have that conversation. For the record, I didn't agree with the severity oftravel teams decision, but I respect the people involved. They had EVERY players interests in mind, not just the few.
Players were disciplined for their HS coaches decision to have them play in a tournament. Overall I believe a players commitment is to their High School. So why discipline the kids? I don't think anyone was deceptive about where they were going to play on that particular weekend. So I think that's a bit misleading. The fact that kids were disciplined because their coach from Chaminade required them to play for him is what twisted the Chaminade Coach.
Reply
Quote
