To Cut or Not to Cut, ...

Here in southeastern Pennsylvania, the miserable winter has been followed by an equally miserable start to spring. Thousands of local fields across the region are closed until April 1, at the earliest, in hopes that they dry out in time for spring sports to actually begin.

And as registrations are processed and tryouts are held, an age-old question reoccurs: Should teams cut players? It's an especially relevant topic for spring sports because the teams are larger and the numbers are not always favorable. What do you do with a baseball team that has 19 kids registered to play? Do you try to find 6 or 7 more players, who weren't interested enough to register in the first place and whose commitment to the team's activities might not be all that great, just so you can field another team? Can you satisfy 19 kids on one team, getting them all enough playing time so that they aren't discouraged or their parents aren't upset with you? Or do you cut 5 of the kids so that the numbers are manageable, figuring it's easier to have that discussion with those 5 families once, rather than multiple times throughout the season?

Proponents on both sides of the debate present compelling reasons why their position is justified. The "no cut" camp cites the effects that getting cut from a team have on a child. It's certainly a blow to the self-esteem, and done improperly can lead to rifts between kids who make the team and those who don't. Brooke de Lench, the founder of MomsTeam.com, cites a number of reasons why the practice of cutting kids from school teams should be abolished. Many of the reasons she cites are centered around the self-esteem and social issues children face when they do not make a team. But much of the information she presents is anecdotal, and there are few if any large-scale studies that show a correlation between getting cut from a sports team and long-term effects on a child's psyche. That's not to say that these aren't valid concerns. As a parent who's had to deal with a child being cut from a team, I know the anguish that event causes. And as a coach who's had to make those cuts, I have most certainly lost hours of sleep over not only the process, but knowing that I was going to have to deliver potentially devastating news to some really good kids.

Those who argue in favor of cuts cite financial concerns and "life lessons" among their reasons for supporting the practice. Many organizations, particularly school-sponsored programs, argue that a no-cut policy would lead to significant cost increases in having to field multiple teams to accommodate all interested athletes. The cost of supporting those teams has led many schools to cut out entire sports programs, or to institute "pay to play" fees to subsidize the programs. Others say that having to compete for roster spots teaches children that they'll need to be prepared to compete in other aspects of their lives, and that getting cut helps them develop mechanisms that will prepare them to cope with challenges later in life. Many argue that athletics are being unfairly singled out. Very few people argue that the "honors mathematics" program lower its acceptance criteria so more kids can be admitted. So why should sports be any different? Furthermore, is it better to have a kid repeatedly embarrassed game after game by sitting on the bench and not playing? Or is that child better served by suffering that embarrassment once at tryouts?

As long as our kids are involved there will be emotional and passionate arguments by adults on both sides. But the reality is that most kids who continue to play sports well into their teens will eventually be faced with the prospect of getting cut from a competitive team. There are always those kids whose dedication, hard work, commitment, and practice will help them overcome any physical limitations or skill deficiencies they have. And we should applaud those kids and hold them up as examples to our own. However, there are some kids who are athletically more naturally gifted than others, just as there are some kids who are better at math than others. And no amount of practice (or study) will change that fact.

There's no doubt that a child's learning that they're not part of a team is an emotional situation. If that child has truly worked hard to improve his or her skills in hopes of making a team, and then been told that all that work wasn't enough, that's going to be a blow to anyone's ego. But what I've tried to instill in my own kids, and to those that I have the privilege to coach, is that as long as they give their best effort, they'll be able to live with the result. If that child can honestly say that they did everything they could to prepare themselves, then they can be proud of their effort, even if the end result was not what they wanted. That's true in sports as well as in life.

Posted By: Jim Roynan

Comments: