Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Anonymous
So you are saying a coach wont play his better kids if they dont play for him on a club/travel team. You are such an IDIOT! Why wont the coach put his best players on the field to try and WIN.He does need the $5k coaching job. You people are out of your minds.If you think this is happening instead of coming on here B1tching just go to the school AD or tell the coach straight out that you are going to bring him down for not being nice to your little Joe Joe


Good question. The varsity coach needs to win games if he wants to keep his position so why would he not play his best players regardless of who they play for during the summer?

A few of you have responded to my original question and say it is not about cost but again, go back and read this thread. The majority of the objections I see are about the cost.

It seems like many people feel the varsity coach should coach all summer for free? Why should he? If he is coaching the team he should get paid. The summer is his time.

I am sure all these high school coaches now coaching for club teams are being paid very well to coach for the summer. The clubs charge enough to pay their coaches well.

If the high school coach is willing to coach the summer at a discounted price for his community why is that a bad thing? I still am not understanding this reasoning and I would love for someone to explain it to me logically so I can make an informed decision next summer. I am new to all of this but it seems more polarized than national politics.



Forget the thread and focus for a second. Not about cost -about the threat that kid won't play unless he pays HS travel instead of 91 or express or...

For all of you that think the best will play no matter what-I agree the two or three studs will play. those are the kids that were committed long before they ever played HS ball. They get committed prior to try outs in the spring. Of course the coach will play them.

The rest of the kids (the other 30 on every HS team) are pretty much equal and we all know it. So if You have two kids that are generally equal in all respects, height, weight, athletic ability, stick skills and lax IQ.

Who plays, the kid that stayed with the coach and played on coach's summer travel team or the kid that plays school ball during the school season but plays for 91 the rest of the year?

You are really missing it if you don't see a conflict here.

The coach can't win either. If he plays the kid that played on his team every summer, the other parents are pissed. If he plays the outside travel kid, the other parents are screaming "where is the loyalty".

It is a conflict and a no win situation. HS coaches should simply be HS coaches and get out of the summer travel and training business.

they add no value to the studs getting recruited, they can add value to the rest of the population by not putting themselves in this position to begin with...



Thank you for a well worded and reasonable explanation without the verbal abuse that seems to come so easy to anonymous posters here.

I can definitely see what you are saying now about a conflict.
It seems the high school coaches are in a no win situation. Either way someone complains.

But how can you keep them from working for a club during the summer? That is their time to do as they please and I am sure the clubs pay them very well for the time they give.

So if they coach for a club parents feel pressured to play for that club. If they try to do their own community based program parents feel pressured to play for the school team. Seems like a lose-lose all around.

Things were alot simpler 25 years ago when I played. You played in the spring and that was it. Summer was for fishing, fall was for football and winter was for wrestling. I am not looking forward to my son starting middle school and high school. Ugh.....