|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062
brace
|
brace
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 |
Then the answer is, each in its own time. When December rolls around, mine starts thinking H.S. When H.S. is over, it's time to lock in for the Academy homestretch. Which is why I have said, repeatedly, kids should be allowed to play either, neither or both, and the coaches/trainers should do their best to facilitate it happening.
It's not an either/or, until so-called "adults" get involved.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,429
hat-trick
|
|
hat-trick
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,429 |
Quote:
Answer: For the real player -- the one with the game in his heart, BOTH.
My kid played 1 year of HS.....followed by 2 years of NC Academy. Played 4 years of SC club in the Fall, last 2 R3PL.
I would agree with the above....in an ideal world, both is the right answer.
But i can tell you....that at our HS and at most of the HS's up here....that passion and support isn't there like at Clover. Fort Mill has its moments as does Northwestern. But thats about it.
Both my daughter and my son have played club with Clover kids. Its one of those places.....where they really support each other. Kids come out to a local tournament or a club match to cheer for their friends. They just support each other in a way my wife and I have kind of sadly envied.
If a kid could play Academy AND play at a Wando or an Irmo (or a Clover) thats probably the best thing holistically for the kid.
But the vast majority of schools don't have either the level of play or the environment. So sadly.....its a moot point.
My son didn't blink when he had to make the choice....and he never looked back. Would he have loved to have stepped out on the field with the Clover kids? Heck yea!! But he wouldn't have traded Academy for it.
For what its worth.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 |
And that's a perfectly legitimate and understandable position. Another variation is this: High school is to PLAY, with training environment as a bonus. Academy is to TRAIN, with playing time (presumably) as a well-earned bonus.
Top players recognize the benefits of both.
I would add that, for top players, high school gradually loses its benefit as kids age up. A talented 15-year-old H.S. freshman can really benefit from "playing up" with 18-year-old seniors. As he ages up, though, the physical challenge diminishes, and the mental challenge of leadership and self-motivation really begins.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 907
Brace
|
|
OP
Brace
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 907 |
Quote:
Quote:
Answer: For the real player -- the one with the game in his heart, BOTH.
But the vast majority of schools don't have either the level of play or the environment. So sadly.....its a moot point.
NaFo has some outstanding talent and could have an outstanding season if they all played. Commitment by all parties is the key word.
I still wonder about the true legality of telling a player what he can or can't do on his free time.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3
bench
|
|
bench
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3 |
What is to prevent rising Seniors from playing Academy in the fall and saying the heck with it, I am playing HS in the Spring? Especially at the established HS programs like Wando, Irmo, Clover, Northwestern, Ft. D (not sure all these teams have multiple kids on squad playing Academy) or other high schools that have kids playing Academy, but may want to play high school or have legitimate shot at state title.
I can see where it would be an issue for underclassman Academy kids the following year, but what recourse would the Academy clubs have with the Seniors?
If kids all over the country did this, the Academy may rethink their position? Not saying likely, but power to the people thing :-)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,429
hat-trick
|
|
hat-trick
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,429 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Answer: For the real player -- the one with the game in his heart, BOTH.
But the vast majority of schools don't have either the level of play or the environment. So sadly.....its a moot point.
NaFo has some outstanding talent and could have an outstanding season if they all played. Commitment by all parties is the key word.
I still wonder about the true legality of telling a player what he can or can't do on his free time.
Re: committment......no its not the key word. There are issues there that go beyond Academy. Multiple talented kids not playing. Again, I said level of play AND environment.
Free time....is the key phrase in your second point. With 10 month Academy the reality will be conflict, not use of free time.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,429
hat-trick
|
|
hat-trick
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,429 |
Quote:
What is to prevent rising Seniors from playing Academy in the fall and saying the heck with it, I am playing HS in the Spring? Especially at the established HS programs like Wando, Irmo, Clover, Northwestern, Ft. D (not sure all these teams have multiple kids on squad playing Academy) or other high schools that have kids playing Academy, but may want to play high school or have legitimate shot at state title.
I can see where it would be an issue for underclassman Academy kids the following year, but what recourse would the Academy clubs have with the Seniors?
If kids all over the country did this, the Academy may rethink their position? Not saying likely, but power to the people thing :-)
College coaches will tell kids to keep playing at highest level. Kids will understand that they may risk their standing as incoming freshmen by taking the high school route.
No different then a kid accepted into a premier academic school. They don't want to see 3 1/2 years of AP classes take a back seat to study halls and gym classes.
|
|
|
|
