Collectively, A Thread To Celebrate Our Kids Athletic Accomplishments (2 Viewers)

[Chadstroma]

6-yr-old has Jr Golf World Championships in 3 weeks…since baseball ended in early June…I’ve been focused on getting to the range 2 times/week and playing 18 2 times/week…to ramp up his consistency, focus, golf stamina, etc.

Well…yesterday he shot 37-33 = 70. Par 72…played it at 2800 yards.

Previous best was 75…it’s amazing how quickly these kids can improve!

A question out of ignorance as I do not play Golf.... what exactly is golf stamina?

Staying focused and strong thru 9 or 18 hole tournaments. My son had a habit of fading at the end of tournaments. The more we play 18 now, the stronger he is finishing 9. And the more we play a week, the stronger he is when playing multi-day tournaments.

So it is more of mental stamina than physical, am I understanding that correctly?

 

[belljr]

6-yr-old has Jr Golf World Championships in 3 weeks…since baseball ended in early June…I’ve been focused on getting to the range 2 times/week and playing 18 2 times/week…to ramp up his consistency, focus, golf stamina, etc.

Well…yesterday he shot 37-33 = 70. Par 72…played it at 2800 yards.

Previous best was 75…it’s amazing how quickly these kids can improve!

A question out of ignorance as I do not play Golf.... what exactly is golf stamina?

Staying focused and strong thru 9 or 18 hole tournaments. My son had a habit of fading at the end of tournaments. The more we play 18 now, the stronger he is finishing 9. And the more we play a week, the stronger he is when playing multi-day tournaments.

So it is more of mental stamina than physical, am I understanding that correctly?

Both

For an average golfer. You will walk 5-7 miles carrying your bad, hitting shots, walking around. Then you also lose focus.

Obviously adjust for a 6 year old smaller course

 

[Chadstroma]

Both

For an average golfer. You will walk 5-7 miles carrying your bad, hitting shots, walking around. Then you also lose focus.

Obviously adjust for a 6 year old smaller course

Oh, I forgot he was 6 too!

 

[gump]

Both

For an average golfer. You will walk 5-7 miles carrying your bad, hitting shots, walking around. Then you also lose focus.

Obviously adjust for a 6 year old smaller course

Oh, I forgot he was 6 too!

Oh yea...the hills are steeper for little kid...traps bigger...etc. We play a pretty hilly course also, with a lot of elevated greens, so hoping I have him prepared for the Donald Ross experience.

 

[El Floppo]

Both

For an average golfer. You will walk 5-7 miles carrying your bad, hitting shots, walking around. Then you also lose focus.

Obviously adjust for a 6 year old smaller course

Oh, I forgot he was 6 too!

Oh yea...the hills are steeper for little kid...traps bigger...etc. We play a pretty hilly course also, with a lot of elevated greens, so hoping I have him prepared for the Donald Ross experience.

Tennis is like this too. Mental focus and stamina just as important as physical, even though they're tied together.

 

[Gally]

Mental focus and stamina just as important as physical, even though they're tied together.

This is true of every sport.

 

[El Floppo]

Mental focus and stamina just as important as physical, even though they're tied together.

This is true of every sport.

I think there's a difference between technical sports like Golf (especially) or tennis, where you're out there for hours over multiple days in somewhat open-ended timelines where it's easier to lose your mental focus, which is ultimately tied to your technical ability. I can see baseball to a lesser degree. But other team sports are generally go, go, go and then you're done... The physical exertion can tax the mental, sure- but it starts with that physical fitness more than the mental. If that makes sense...

 

[Gally]

Mental focus and stamina just as important as physical, even though they're tied together.

This is true of every sport.

I think there's a difference between technical sports like Golf (especially) or tennis, where you're out there for hours over multiple days in somewhat open-ended timelines where it's easier to lose your mental focus, which is ultimately tied to your technical ability. I can see baseball to a lesser degree. But other team sports are generally go, go, go and then you're done... The physical exertion can tax the mental, sure- but it starts with that physical fitness more than the mental. If that makes sense...

I get what you are saying but I would put baseball up there with golf and tennis with regards to mental focus. There is a ton of standing around and getting no action during any given game but you must be focused for that one instance you need to make a play. It is the toughest aspect of baseball by far.

Football/basketball type sports I see where physical tiredness leads to mental mistakes because being physically exhausted affects your mental approach/stamina/acuity but in the end having mental stamina is still vitally important to overcome the physical tiredness.

It may be a different type of mental stamina but equally important. The mindset of the athlete is the most critical aspect to playing any sport.

 

[El Floppo]

Mental focus and stamina just as important as physical, even though they're tied together.

This is true of every sport.

I think there's a difference between technical sports like Golf (especially) or tennis, where you're out there for hours over multiple days in somewhat open-ended timelines where it's easier to lose your mental focus, which is ultimately tied to your technical ability. I can see baseball to a lesser degree. But other team sports are generally go, go, go and then you're done... The physical exertion can tax the mental, sure- but it starts with that physical fitness more than the mental. If that makes sense...

I get what you are saying but I would put baseball up there with golf and tennis with regards to mental focus. There is a ton of standing around and getting no action during any given game but you must be focused for that one instance you need to make a play. It is the toughest aspect of baseball by far.

Football/basketball type sports I see where physical tiredness leads to mental mistakes because being physically exhausted affects your mental approach/stamina/acuity but in the end having mental stamina is still vitally important to overcome the physical tiredness.

It may be a different type of mental stamina but equally important. The mindset of the athlete is the most critical aspect to playing any sport.

I said baseball to a lesser degree. :

I know what you're saying, and I think we're in agreement about it all. I just feel like the sports that lean more heavily on technique like golf and tennis that also involve longer game time means risking that technique drifting badly over time due to mental exhaustion.

My memory of playing baseball was just getting bored and risking not paying attention, as you say, when the spotlight finally is on you. The technique never felt at risk in the field IME. And at bats never faced the risk imo, because everybody is dialed in for that.

 

[Gally]

The technique never felt at risk in the field IME

The technique is totally at risk by mental laziness. When you aren't ready and the ball comes it's real easy to get lazy and not use proper technique. It happens all the time and leads to most errors.

ETA: Yes we are on the same page for sure.

 

[El Floppo]

The technique never felt at risk in the field IME

The technique is totally at risk by mental laziness. When you aren't ready and the ball comes it's real easy to get lazy and not use proper technique. It happens all the time and leads to most errors.

ETA: Yes we are on the same page for sure.

I guess I don't see catching or fielding a ball as something "technical" per se. Get there, open your mitt, throw the ball, and you're done. It's all essentially hand-eye more than specific technique.

 

[Gally]

The technique never felt at risk in the field IME

The technique is totally at risk by mental laziness. When you aren't ready and the ball comes it's real easy to get lazy and not use proper technique. It happens all the time and leads to most errors.

ETA: Yes we are on the same page for sure.

I guess I don't see catching or fielding a ball as something "technical" per se. Get there, open your mitt, throw the ball, and you're done. It's all essentially hand-eye more than specific technique.

Not even close. Footwork, balance, and movement into the throw all play huge roles in making the play (especially on groundballs). This is especially true on balls that give you time over just reacting. Balls scorched at you all you have is reaction time and technique is not as critical but on the routine play technique is king.

Fly balls with nobody on base it's not as critical because there is no follow on play. But with a guy on technique to get behind the ball and move into the throw from the catch is the difference between an out and an overthrow.

 

[El Floppo]

I said "more than" intentionally because I knew you'd come back with your comment . But yes- obviously lots of technique... and I'm sure it's gotten far more so since my days playing.


I'm just remembering my last game. Babe Ruth all stars and we had progressed pretty far, playing a team upstate that were all farm boy killers. I came in to pitch relief after we were already getting blown out, and even though I usually relief on my fast ball, I had seen the kids crushing every fastball thrown at them, so decided to throw a couple breaking balls to the 8' tall lefty I came in to face with runners on.

It was one of those multi use fields and lacked a fence in center/right... Just kept going. He hit that second curve ball so deep into that empty space, in the split second after contact I was thinking where to cover (our tactic/technique combo just made me remember this) I found myself actually doubled over laughing instead... Because it didn't matter what base I covered- the CF was going to be running chasing the ball until the next year.

 

[El Floppo]

I hope that didn't come across as dismissing your point about the technical side of baseball... I appreciate hearing it and see what you're saying.

 

[belljr]

The technique never felt at risk in the field IME

The technique is totally at risk by mental laziness. When you aren't ready and the ball comes it's real easy to get lazy and not use proper technique. It happens all the time and leads to most errors.

ETA: Yes we are on the same page for sure.

I guess I don't see catching or fielding a ball as something "technical" per se. Get there, open your mitt, throw the ball, and you're done. It's all essentially hand-eye more than specific technique.

Top Pros work on just glove work and just footwork!@!#!#!#!# not technical, come on now

I know this was already addressed in subsequent posts I just haven't been up in arms in awhile

 

[Chadstroma]

Every sport is technical really.... sure you can get by with athleticism in some sports but unless you are an absolute freak of nature athletically- to be good there is a ton of technique involved. You could debate all day long about which sport takes more technique to master than others but generally I think those who are more familiar with a particular sport will see more technique involved in that sport than other sports that they are not as familiar with.

If I was asked, the sports that come to mind with the most technique involved versus athleticism is golf and bowling. In both, you can be an absolute trainwreck for athleticism but dominate with your technique at an elite level.

 

[El Floppo]

The technique never felt at risk in the field IME

The technique is totally at risk by mental laziness. When you aren't ready and the ball comes it's real easy to get lazy and not use proper technique. It happens all the time and leads to most errors.

ETA: Yes we are on the same page for sure.

I guess I don't see catching or fielding a ball as something "technical" per se. Get there, open your mitt, throw the ball, and you're done. It's all essentially hand-eye more than specific technique.

Top Pros work on just glove work and just footwork!@!#!#!#!# not technical, come on now

I know this was already addressed in subsequent posts I just haven't been up in arms in awhile

WRONG!





I'm just here for the argument.

Argument - Monty Python

EDIT: OMG ELON MUSK TWEETED THIS VIDEO. I spent A LOT of time in undergrad and have tons of loans. I would basically procrastinate more than you can imagine ...

youtu.be

 

[El Floppo]

Every sport is technical really.... sure you can get by with athleticism in some sports but unless you are an absolute freak of nature athletically- to be good there is a ton of technique involved. You could debate all day long about which sport takes more technique to master than others but generally I think those who are more familiar with a particular sport will see more technique involved in that sport than other sports that they are not as familiar with.

If I was asked, the sports that come to mind with the most technique involved versus athleticism is golf and bowling. In both, you can be an absolute trainwreck for athleticism but dominate with your technique at an elite level.

Curling

 

[Chadstroma]

Every sport is technical really.... sure you can get by with athleticism in some sports but unless you are an absolute freak of nature athletically- to be good there is a ton of technique involved. You could debate all day long about which sport takes more technique to master than others but generally I think those who are more familiar with a particular sport will see more technique involved in that sport than other sports that they are not as familiar with.

If I was asked, the sports that come to mind with the most technique involved versus athleticism is golf and bowling. In both, you can be an absolute trainwreck for athleticism but dominate with your technique at an elite level.

Curling

Touche.... though you do have to shuffle down that ice which is more than Golf (assuming you ride a cart) and bowling which is a couple of steps of effort.

 

[Chadstroma]

State Meet. 50 Fly.

Finished 2nd in his heat and placed 17th overall dropping 6.44 from his time (THIS IS A HUGE DROP from the same event two weeks ago)

My kid is officially the 17th fastest 10U boy in the entire state of Illinois for the 50 Fly.

 

[Kanil]

State Meet. 50 Fly.

Finished 2nd in his heat and placed 17th overall dropping 6.44 from his time (THIS IS A HUGE DROP from the same event two weeks ago)

My kid is officially the 17th fastest 10U boy in the entire state of Illinois for the 50 Fly.

Can he get me tickets to watch him in the Olympics in 8 years?

 

[Chadstroma]

State Meet. 50 Fly.

Finished 2nd in his heat and placed 17th overall dropping 6.44 from his time (THIS IS A HUGE DROP from the same event two weeks ago)

My kid is officially the 17th fastest 10U boy in the entire state of Illinois for the 50 Fly.

Can he get me tickets to watch him in the Olympics in 8 years?

I honestly wonder if he focused on swim whether that would be within his ability... as is, I can guarantee that the kid put in the least amount of work among those 16 other kids and still performed at this level. Other people that know swim a lot have said things like how much natural talent he has that could be unleashed and that he could easily get to a D1 school in swim. He basically swam a half a season this season with the entire first half being basically MIA due to basketball and then his attitude. The previous season was the same thing where he missed more practices than he went to. One thing changed this season where he got real buddy buddy with one of the boys on the team. And then he he didn't fight to go to practice etc anymore plus a few other things we worked out. His buddy went to practice and swam with him the last two weeks when his buddy was done but the coaches let his buddy come because they knew it would help him be happy and motivated. Thankfully they are likely going to graduate his buddy to his level (the top level) of the club, largely because it will help both of them to swim with each other next season. His buddy showed that he could keep up with the pace of practice at the higher level and I had.... well, let's say that I suggested it to the head coach that his buddy was 'close' to that level as is and each of them would propel the other to do better.

I was talking to the coach of his football camp this week and mentioned the different possibilities of what High School he would go to (either our public HS or a handful of Catholic privates around us). I mentioned one school which is very popular for his elementary/Jr High school which is basically a feeder school for this HS and they are one of the better football programs in the area too BUT they do not have a swim program. My son immediately spoke up "I don't have to swim in HS do I?"



I know he rather play basketball for winter season but he likely will be a bench player if he made the team. Though he is an excellent defender (I honestly think he was the best defender in the league last season of 20 teams in two divisions, though we didn't play all 39 other teams, I know most and at least seen most play if not played them. I would put him on the other teams best offensive player almost every game except really one.... where I put him on the second biggest threat because he was a taller kid that was quick/fast and my big would be way to slow to keep up with. I put another kid one their top threat at PG and my son on their Center. He shut him down for the game and we won) and a very good rebounder but very mediocre for offense.

I asked him before "would you rather be a bench player for basketball or a star in swim?" and he answered star in swim and I think that very much may be his choice. Perhaps they let him play both as I know it isn't totally unheard of to allow it. I am sure the swim coach would agree but who knows if the basketball coach would.

 

[Chadstroma]

Not my kid and he doesn't have a clue who I am but I was good friends with his Mom and knew his Dad (long time Pirate SS Jack Wilson) so I have tracked his career from a far.... Jacob Wilson has been called up by the A's to play his first game in the show! Very happy for his Mom and Uncle as well as Father and of course him.

 

[Chadstroma]

Probably the most appropriate thread....

NCAA EXPECTED TO ELIMINATE SCHOLARSHIP LIMITS ACROSS ALL SPORTS​

After we reported yesterday how the SEC and Big Ten were discussing new roster limits, the NCAA is now reportedly set to eliminate scholarship limits across all sports beginning in the 2025-26 season.

According to Yahoo Sports, the new revenue-sharing model will see by-sport scholarship restrictions eliminated, allowing schools to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

New roster limits won’t be final until the approval of settlement terms in the House case, but in swimming & diving, the limits are expected to be 23 men and 35 women, at least in the SEC and Big Ten.

The elimination of scholarship limits comes as the House case settlement opens the door for schools to pay student-athletes NIL money, and therefore, it wouldn’t make sense for there to be only a certain number of scholarships available when the other athletes could still earn money through NIL.

During a meeting on Tuesday involving the power conference commissioners, new roster limits for football were reportedly set at 105, meaning there will be a 20-scholarship increase compared to the current limit which is 85.

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

Another change is that all sports will now be considered “equivalency sports,” meaning partial scholarships can be distributed to all athletes. Previously, sports such as football and basketball were considered “head-count sports” requiring players on scholarship to receive a full grant.

Schools won’t be required to use scholarships for all of their roster spots, leaving room for walk-on opportunities.

Yahoo Sports reports that power conference programs are expecting to spend an additional $3 million to $7 million in additional scholarships annually.

Settlement terms in the House v. NCAA case are expected to be filed Friday with details on the distribution of the $2.77 billion in back pay to former athletes along with specifics of the new revenue-sharing model.

 

[El Floppo]

My daughter got to play on the Grandstand stadium court at the US Open complex (where she used to take classes) in a tournament over the weekend. 3rd biggest stadium there... It was absolutely amazing.

 

[Chadstroma]

Probably the most appropriate thread....

NCAA EXPECTED TO ELIMINATE SCHOLARSHIP LIMITS ACROSS ALL SPORTS​

After we reported yesterday how the SEC and Big Ten were discussing new roster limits, the NCAA is now reportedly set to eliminate scholarship limits across all sports beginning in the 2025-26 season.

According to Yahoo Sports, the new revenue-sharing model will see by-sport scholarship restrictions eliminated, allowing schools to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

New roster limits won’t be final until the approval of settlement terms in the House case, but in swimming & diving, the limits are expected to be 23 men and 35 women, at least in the SEC and Big Ten.

The elimination of scholarship limits comes as the House case settlement opens the door for schools to pay student-athletes NIL money, and therefore, it wouldn’t make sense for there to be only a certain number of scholarships available when the other athletes could still earn money through NIL.

During a meeting on Tuesday involving the power conference commissioners, new roster limits for football were reportedly set at 105, meaning there will be a 20-scholarship increase compared to the current limit which is 85.

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

Another change is that all sports will now be considered “equivalency sports,” meaning partial scholarships can be distributed to all athletes. Previously, sports such as football and basketball were considered “head-count sports” requiring players on scholarship to receive a full grant.

Schools won’t be required to use scholarships for all of their roster spots, leaving room for walk-on opportunities.

Yahoo Sports reports that power conference programs are expecting to spend an additional $3 million to $7 million in additional scholarships annually.

Settlement terms in the House v. NCAA case are expected to be filed Friday with details on the distribution of the $2.77 billion in back pay to former athletes along with specifics of the new revenue-sharing model.

I got this from a swimming college recruiting group (just curious about the recruiting process..... I have serious doubts my son will continue swim to college). The comment section on this was that a lot of people think it will be all focused on the money sports and other programs will suffer. I am not sure I agree with that or disagree with it. I think most D1 schools will invest in their sports programs because it is the best advertising they can ever get even outside the money sports. For example, University of Chicago is one of the best schools in the country up there with the Ivy League schools, Stanford, ND, Northwestern, etc. But the name recognition for it versus other schools that are more sports oriented is much less. Now, UofC is not hurting for enrollment or anything but just using an extreme example to make my point.

 

[belljr]

I predict this ends badly for a lot of small schools.

 

[Gally]

I predict this ends badly for a lot of small schools.

yeah, sounds bad for small schools and non-primary sports.

 

[Gally]

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

These seems like a small roster size. Most of the schools we were looking into and being recruited by had rosters around 40-45 players. Lowering this will make it a lot more competitive.

 

[Chadstroma]

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

These seems like a small roster size. Most of the schools we were looking into and being recruited by had rosters around 40-45 players. Lowering this will make it a lot more competitive.

Is there a roster limit at all now?

 

[Gally]

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

These seems like a small roster size. Most of the schools we were looking into and being recruited by had rosters around 40-45 players. Lowering this will make it a lot more competitive.

Is there a roster limit at all now?

Doesn't seem to be but since they are doing away with scholarship limits they have moved to roster limits which is setting scholarship limits.

 

[Chadstroma]

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

These seems like a small roster size. Most of the schools we were looking into and being recruited by had rosters around 40-45 players. Lowering this will make it a lot more competitive.

Is there a roster limit at all now?

Doesn't seem to be but since they are doing away with scholarship limits they have moved to roster limits which is setting scholarship limits.

Yea, so I would see that as a huge positive for baseball since from my understanding, it was rare to get a full ride scholarship and the teams would divvy up that 11 scholarships up..... now, they could, if they wanted to, give full rides to all 34.

 

[belljr]

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

These seems like a small roster size. Most of the schools we were looking into and being recruited by had rosters around 40-45 players. Lowering this will make it a lot more competitive.

Is there a roster limit at all now?

Doesn't seem to be but since they are doing away with scholarship limits they have moved to roster limits which is setting scholarship limits.

Yea, so I would see that as a huge positive for baseball since from my understanding, it was rare to get a full ride scholarship and the teams would divvy up that 11 scholarships up..... now, they could, if they wanted to, give full rides to all 34.

Sure...... I doubt most schools will have money set aside for 34 baseball scholarships plus all the others.

 

[Gally]

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

These seems like a small roster size. Most of the schools we were looking into and being recruited by had rosters around 40-45 players. Lowering this will make it a lot more competitive.

Is there a roster limit at all now?

Doesn't seem to be but since they are doing away with scholarship limits they have moved to roster limits which is setting scholarship limits.

Yea, so I would see that as a huge positive for baseball since from my understanding, it was rare to get a full ride scholarship and the teams would divvy up that 11 scholarships up..... now, they could, if they wanted to, give full rides to all 34.

just not sure how the money works. The money has to come from some where. Even though they can give out that many scholarships doesn't mean there is money to do so......especially at smaller schools. Granted, I am not all that familiar with how athletic scholarships actually get funded so I may be way off base but my intuition is that the money will be going to the bigger sports and that the smaller sports will be left out to some degree. But I could be way off.

 

[belljr]

This will just create more haves vs have nots but I could be way off base

 

[Chadstroma]

This will just create more haves vs have nots but I could be way off base

Oh, I see this for sure. When I was saying more scholarships, I am thinking D1 programs really. Lower end D1's and D2's that don't get a lot of money from sports will likely not be able to invest much more than they are now. That would create a huge discrepancy as the top programs can offer the best players full rides and the not so best will not.

 

[Gally]

I honestly wonder if he focused on swim whether that would be within his ability... as is, I can guarantee that the kid put in the least amount of work among those 16 other kids and still performed at this level.

I know you have said he is on the bigger/stronger side of his age group. Do you think that has a lot to do with his success without putting in much work at this point in his career? I have seen kids in the 10 and under landscape dominate without doing much in various sports due to just being bigger/faster/stronger than everyone else and it gives a bit of false sense of how good they are and they end up not working very hard or developing their skills to keep up with those that need the technique/skills to compete while smaller. Then when those kids grow up they have developed the skills and they blow by the early maturing kids.

Not saying this is the case at all. Just wondering what your thoughts on that aspect and if you think that has something to do with his success without much work as you described.

ETA: I know one of the biggest benefits to my kid was being overweight and slower as a freshman (hadn't had the growth spurt yet). He had breezed by most of his athletic career as a younger kid as he was very talented and smart in knowing the games but having that year of frustration of not being able to move the way he wanted or do what he used to do it made him work a lot harder to get better and then when his growth spurt happened he really blossomed. I am not sure if that would have happened without the early wake up call.

 

[msudaisy26]

Not my child, but my niece is one of the top setters in the country of the 2026 class and after 40 plus offers she has committed to NC State.

Adding to this she was also invited to the US National development program this week, which selects the best players across the country and trains them for a future in volleyball. So Olympics, professional volleyball, both beach and hard court.

 

[nirad3]

Not my child, but my niece is one of the top setters in the country of the 2026 class and after 40 plus offers she has committed to NC State.

Adding to this she was also invited to the US National development program this week, which selects the best players across the country and trains them for a future in volleyball. So Olympics, professional volleyball, both beach and hard court.

My daughter is REALLY improving right now. We are between a couple of club teams to join. Hoping I get myself a promotion/raise 'cuz I'll need it.

She's trying out for the 15U team (at 13) for one of the clubs on Saturday and we're hoping she makes it. Otherwise she'll certainly make the 14U.

 

[Chadstroma]

I honestly wonder if he focused on swim whether that would be within his ability... as is, I can guarantee that the kid put in the least amount of work among those 16 other kids and still performed at this level.

I know you have said he is on the bigger/stronger side of his age group. Do you think that has a lot to do with his success without putting in much work at this point in his career? I have seen kids in the 10 and under landscape dominate without doing much in various sports due to just being bigger/faster/stronger than everyone else and it gives a bit of false sense of how good they are and they end up not working very hard or developing their skills to keep up with those that need the technique/skills to compete while smaller. Then when those kids grow up they have developed the skills and they blow by the early maturing kids.

Not saying this is the case at all. Just wondering what your thoughts on that aspect and if you think that has something to do with his success without much work as you described.

ETA: I know one of the biggest benefits to my kid was being overweight and slower as a freshman (hadn't had the growth spurt yet). He had breezed by most of his athletic career as a younger kid as he was very talented and smart in knowing the games but having that year of frustration of not being able to move the way he wanted or do what he used to do it made him work a lot harder to get better and then when his growth spurt happened he really blossomed. I am not sure if that would have happened without the early wake up call.

In swim, there are benefits to being taller and stronger (but a lot of his strength has come from swimming) but without technique it is absolutely useless. No athlete without any competitive swimming background is going to come in and smoke a good swimmer no matter how much physical advantage they may have. In swim, my son has good form and the technique down. Of course there is much to improve on but it is all detail things.... for example, his tendency to lift his head up on his starts rather than keep tucked down inline with his body (creating drag in the water) or his tendency to open his fingers and thus lose power on his strokes. His swim at state is a beautiful example of how technique is a win or loss for you.,,, he swam the same event (50 fly) two weeks before state and finished with a 45.16 then at state dropped 6.44 to 38.72 which is a HUGE time drop for a two week time difference. A big reason for that was the practice time he got during those two weeks. The first week was about 7 swimmers including him practicing for regionals and then the second week was just him all week long (he was the only one to have made a state cut). So, especially that second week, he got 100% attention from the HC and her top assistant coach. Since it was just him, I invited myself to the deck as well. I let them coach but did offer an observation or two to them. We spent a lot of time working on his starts and he cleaned up a lot of small details about the starts and I am convinced that the majority of his time drop came from that. Another anecdotal story along the lines of physical ability- I noticed one of the podium awards that the top swimmer was significantly shorter than the rest. #2 and #3 even though they were much lower on the podium were actually taller than #1 in height. The munchkin kicked their butts.

From what I have observed (limited in scope) it seems most of the swimmers at the level he is swimming at are only swimmers or maybe have one other sport (often something like Cross Country). While he has 5 including swim. Just that takes time and focus away but then I mentioned before we were having some major issues with him and going to practice etc. So, he missed so much practice time this season and as par for course misses a decent amount each season by default. Since we don't have a pool it isn't like he can practice on his own (though I doubt he would if we did though he would go swimming) but funny enough, he is at the local pool right now as I type this with his buddy from the swim team.

That all being said, I absolutely know what you are talking about and it is my biggest fear for him and sports. As is, he is often doing something sports related so I don't bug him about working on sports skills on his own and let him play his video games but I feel like he is getting in the habit of just going to practice- work hard there and then I get better versus working on the skills on your own where the elite players do that. Then again, he is only going into 6th grade.

I mentioned in the football thread that we have a new transfer student who is basically a bigger, taller, stronger version of my son. The kid is a beast and I haven't even seen him play football yet which is his main sport. My son mentioned something to me about how big his muscles were, even bigger than any 7th graders. The kid is a hard worker (can tell watching him in basketball along with his physique) and puts in maximum effort all the time. I am hoping that he might challenge my son more and see how working on your game improves you as this kid is likely better than my son overall in football.

One thing that I am very pleased with my son on is that he is coachable. It has been a focus for me to basically coach my kids to be coachable. Watching him interact with his coaches in football and swim he listens and tries to do exactly what they say.... and then even with me, where he mostly listens to even me now, which we all know when it comes to father/son dynamics isn't always the case. And he seems to be the same regardless of coaching styles.... swim is much more nicer and talking and football is much more rough and yelling, for example.

Basketball is the sport that I think the falling behind those kids who work on their game more is going to happen for him. Which is why I asked him "would you rather be a bench player in basketball or a star in swim?" and he said he would want to be the star swimmer. We shall see.

 

[Charlie Steiner]

My son is enjoying his post-college career in men's league baseball, and tonight he got to exorcise a demon.

While most of the teams in his league are full of players around and above 30, he occasionally crosses paths with peers that he played against in travel ball and/or high school. Tonight, the team he faced had one kid that had played Fall ball with my son 15 years ago (!), and they stayed friendly with each other through college; he went on to play baseball at LaSalle, though their program got closed down due to Covid. Anyway, there were two other kids who stood out in our memories because one was a beast of a hitter and got poached from a pretty good team to an even better team, and the other was a pitcher who always seemed to be the hardest thrower every year through high school, and during the Summer between my son's sophomore and junior years, he showed up at Virginia Tech on a recruiting visit while my son's showcase team was there laboring away under the scorching Sumer sun. The kid ended up at Maryland instead, but while he had terrific velocity, his control was lacking. He left Maryland and wound up in community college before dropping off our radar.

He's a nice enough kid, but my son's batting record against him over the years was abysmal.

If anyone remembers, my son hurt his throwing shoulder at the end of his college career and from age 12, didn't want to pitch. Now that his serious playing days are over, he's willing to close out games if needed, and today, they 'needed' him. Taking the mound in the last inning with a 1-run lead, he gave up an infield single, then came back and struck out the next two batters. The next batter was the kid I've been describing above. Now, there's never been any bad blood between them; my son became quite the joker as his high school career progressed, and he never held grudges. So this kid comes up with two outs, and my son tells him: "I'm going to pay you back for all the times you struck me out!" The coach of my son's team actually has a working speed gun, so they put it on him for this at-bat. His pitches went strike-strike-strike, 88, 89, 91, with the last two pitches accompanied by Monica Seles-level grunts, probably just for effect. While I would have preferred he hit 91 about 7 years ago, he got there nonetheless and in the least expected way.

 

[Gally]

His pitches went strike-strike-strike, 88, 89, 91,

Don't fool around Ricky.....give him the heater!

 

[Gally]

Probably the most appropriate thread....

NCAA EXPECTED TO ELIMINATE SCHOLARSHIP LIMITS ACROSS ALL SPORTS​

After we reported yesterday how the SEC and Big Ten were discussing new roster limits, the NCAA is now reportedly set to eliminate scholarship limits across all sports beginning in the 2025-26 season.

According to Yahoo Sports, the new revenue-sharing model will see by-sport scholarship restrictions eliminated, allowing schools to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

New roster limits won’t be final until the approval of settlement terms in the House case, but in swimming & diving, the limits are expected to be 23 men and 35 women, at least in the SEC and Big Ten.

The elimination of scholarship limits comes as the House case settlement opens the door for schools to pay student-athletes NIL money, and therefore, it wouldn’t make sense for there to be only a certain number of scholarships available when the other athletes could still earn money through NIL.

During a meeting on Tuesday involving the power conference commissioners, new roster limits for football were reportedly set at 105, meaning there will be a 20-scholarship increase compared to the current limit which is 85.

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

Another change is that all sports will now be considered “equivalency sports,” meaning partial scholarships can be distributed to all athletes. Previously, sports such as football and basketball were considered “head-count sports” requiring players on scholarship to receive a full grant.

Schools won’t be required to use scholarships for all of their roster spots, leaving room for walk-on opportunities.

Yahoo Sports reports that power conference programs are expecting to spend an additional $3 million to $7 million in additional scholarships annually.

Settlement terms in the House v. NCAA case are expected to be filed Friday with details on the distribution of the $2.77 billion in back pay to former athletes along with specifics of the new revenue-sharing model.

I have been trying to find out when this is supposed to go into affect and whether or not it affects all NCAA divisions or just D1. Does anybody have that info?

 

[Charlie Steiner]

His pitches went strike-strike-strike, 88, 89, 91,

Don't fool around Ricky.....give him the heater!

He's ready for the California Penal League.

Seriously, though, the fastest he was ever clocked at before was 88 even before he hurt his shoulder, so 91 with a probably torn labrum is at least noteworthy if not just outright cosmically cruel.

 

[nirad3]

Super proud of my 13-year old daughter, who made a 15U club volleyball team yesterday. She has worked really hard.

She's real hard on herself, and after playing fairly "meh" yesterday, was a little emotional at the end of the tryouts but she played outstanding the day before, which was good enough to get her through.

Real glad that she made the team with a couple of friends that she's made over the past year or so off a Rec League team.

Now I gotta hope that I get a promotion/raise 'cuz I'm gonna need it. Already know of tournaments in Utah, Vegas and Phoenix over the next year or so.

 

[Peak]

Probably the most appropriate thread....

NCAA EXPECTED TO ELIMINATE SCHOLARSHIP LIMITS ACROSS ALL SPORTS​

After we reported yesterday how the SEC and Big Ten were discussing new roster limits, the NCAA is now reportedly set to eliminate scholarship limits across all sports beginning in the 2025-26 season.

According to Yahoo Sports, the new revenue-sharing model will see by-sport scholarship restrictions eliminated, allowing schools to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

New roster limits won’t be final until the approval of settlement terms in the House case, but in swimming & diving, the limits are expected to be 23 men and 35 women, at least in the SEC and Big Ten.

The elimination of scholarship limits comes as the House case settlement opens the door for schools to pay student-athletes NIL money, and therefore, it wouldn’t make sense for there to be only a certain number of scholarships available when the other athletes could still earn money through NIL.

During a meeting on Tuesday involving the power conference commissioners, new roster limits for football were reportedly set at 105, meaning there will be a 20-scholarship increase compared to the current limit which is 85.

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

Another change is that all sports will now be considered “equivalency sports,” meaning partial scholarships can be distributed to all athletes. Previously, sports such as football and basketball were considered “head-count sports” requiring players on scholarship to receive a full grant.

Schools won’t be required to use scholarships for all of their roster spots, leaving room for walk-on opportunities.

Yahoo Sports reports that power conference programs are expecting to spend an additional $3 million to $7 million in additional scholarships annually.

Settlement terms in the House v. NCAA case are expected to be filed Friday with details on the distribution of the $2.77 billion in back pay to former athletes along with specifics of the new revenue-sharing model.

I have been trying to find out when this is supposed to go into affect and whether or not it affects all NCAA divisions or just D1. Does anybody have that info?

I asked one of the guys I follow on Twitter who seems to be in the know on all of this - access to B1G offices. He said to expect it to go into play 2025. He felt pretty confident in that happening. With my son entering college this year and baseball scholarships at a premium, I'm hoping this is true. He got a little bit, but this school took the 11.7 and split it out among 20 student athletes. There were still main players on the team who are considered "walk-ons", even though they were recruited to play there. Small school with Basketball and Soccer as the main athletic programs - no football, and Baseball is tied at 3rd with LAX in regards to generating revenue.

 

[Gally]

Probably the most appropriate thread....

NCAA EXPECTED TO ELIMINATE SCHOLARSHIP LIMITS ACROSS ALL SPORTS​

After we reported yesterday how the SEC and Big Ten were discussing new roster limits, the NCAA is now reportedly set to eliminate scholarship limits across all sports beginning in the 2025-26 season.

According to Yahoo Sports, the new revenue-sharing model will see by-sport scholarship restrictions eliminated, allowing schools to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

New roster limits won’t be final until the approval of settlement terms in the House case, but in swimming & diving, the limits are expected to be 23 men and 35 women, at least in the SEC and Big Ten.

The elimination of scholarship limits comes as the House case settlement opens the door for schools to pay student-athletes NIL money, and therefore, it wouldn’t make sense for there to be only a certain number of scholarships available when the other athletes could still earn money through NIL.

During a meeting on Tuesday involving the power conference commissioners, new roster limits for football were reportedly set at 105, meaning there will be a 20-scholarship increase compared to the current limit which is 85.

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

Another change is that all sports will now be considered “equivalency sports,” meaning partial scholarships can be distributed to all athletes. Previously, sports such as football and basketball were considered “head-count sports” requiring players on scholarship to receive a full grant.

Schools won’t be required to use scholarships for all of their roster spots, leaving room for walk-on opportunities.

Yahoo Sports reports that power conference programs are expecting to spend an additional $3 million to $7 million in additional scholarships annually.

Settlement terms in the House v. NCAA case are expected to be filed Friday with details on the distribution of the $2.77 billion in back pay to former athletes along with specifics of the new revenue-sharing model.

I have been trying to find out when this is supposed to go into affect and whether or not it affects all NCAA divisions or just D1. Does anybody have that info?

I asked one of the guys I follow on Twitter who seems to be in the know on all of this - access to B1G offices. He said to expect it to go into play 2025. He felt pretty confident in that happening. With my son entering college this year and baseball scholarships at a premium, I'm hoping this is true. He got a little bit, but this school took the 11.7 and split it out among 20 student athletes. There were still main players on the team who are considered "walk-ons", even though they were recruited to play there. Small school with Basketball and Soccer as the main athletic programs - no football, and Baseball is tied at 3rd with LAX in regards to generating revenue.

Did he say if it was only for D1 or does it trickle to D2 as well (roster limits/scholarship numbers)?

 

[Chadstroma]

Probably the most appropriate thread....

NCAA EXPECTED TO ELIMINATE SCHOLARSHIP LIMITS ACROSS ALL SPORTS​

After we reported yesterday how the SEC and Big Ten were discussing new roster limits, the NCAA is now reportedly set to eliminate scholarship limits across all sports beginning in the 2025-26 season.

According to Yahoo Sports, the new revenue-sharing model will see by-sport scholarship restrictions eliminated, allowing schools to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

New roster limits won’t be final until the approval of settlement terms in the House case, but in swimming & diving, the limits are expected to be 23 men and 35 women, at least in the SEC and Big Ten.

The elimination of scholarship limits comes as the House case settlement opens the door for schools to pay student-athletes NIL money, and therefore, it wouldn’t make sense for there to be only a certain number of scholarships available when the other athletes could still earn money through NIL.

During a meeting on Tuesday involving the power conference commissioners, new roster limits for football were reportedly set at 105, meaning there will be a 20-scholarship increase compared to the current limit which is 85.

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

Another change is that all sports will now be considered “equivalency sports,” meaning partial scholarships can be distributed to all athletes. Previously, sports such as football and basketball were considered “head-count sports” requiring players on scholarship to receive a full grant.

Schools won’t be required to use scholarships for all of their roster spots, leaving room for walk-on opportunities.

Yahoo Sports reports that power conference programs are expecting to spend an additional $3 million to $7 million in additional scholarships annually.

Settlement terms in the House v. NCAA case are expected to be filed Friday with details on the distribution of the $2.77 billion in back pay to former athletes along with specifics of the new revenue-sharing model.

I have been trying to find out when this is supposed to go into affect and whether or not it affects all NCAA divisions or just D1. Does anybody have that info?

It is a NCAA proposal so it would be all schools under them. I have not seen anything for NCIA regarding this.... though I kind of expect them to follow suit as this is a class action lawsuit settlement and I would think NCIA would want to head off having to go to court for the same. I don't think the settlement has been finalized so it is hard to say when it would start but I would expect 2025.

 

[Peak]

Probably the most appropriate thread....

NCAA EXPECTED TO ELIMINATE SCHOLARSHIP LIMITS ACROSS ALL SPORTS​

After we reported yesterday how the SEC and Big Ten were discussing new roster limits, the NCAA is now reportedly set to eliminate scholarship limits across all sports beginning in the 2025-26 season.

According to Yahoo Sports, the new revenue-sharing model will see by-sport scholarship restrictions eliminated, allowing schools to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

New roster limits won’t be final until the approval of settlement terms in the House case, but in swimming & diving, the limits are expected to be 23 men and 35 women, at least in the SEC and Big Ten.

The elimination of scholarship limits comes as the House case settlement opens the door for schools to pay student-athletes NIL money, and therefore, it wouldn’t make sense for there to be only a certain number of scholarships available when the other athletes could still earn money through NIL.

During a meeting on Tuesday involving the power conference commissioners, new roster limits for football were reportedly set at 105, meaning there will be a 20-scholarship increase compared to the current limit which is 85.

Baseball, which has a scholarship restriction of 11.7, is expected to have a roster cap of 34, while softball and volleyball are expected to have roster limits of 25 and 18, respectively, a stark increase from their current scholarship limit of 12.

Another change is that all sports will now be considered “equivalency sports,” meaning partial scholarships can be distributed to all athletes. Previously, sports such as football and basketball were considered “head-count sports” requiring players on scholarship to receive a full grant.

Schools won’t be required to use scholarships for all of their roster spots, leaving room for walk-on opportunities.

Yahoo Sports reports that power conference programs are expecting to spend an additional $3 million to $7 million in additional scholarships annually.

Settlement terms in the House v. NCAA case are expected to be filed Friday with details on the distribution of the $2.77 billion in back pay to former athletes along with specifics of the new revenue-sharing model.

I have been trying to find out when this is supposed to go into affect and whether or not it affects all NCAA divisions or just D1. Does anybody have that info?

I asked one of the guys I follow on Twitter who seems to be in the know on all of this - access to B1G offices. He said to expect it to go into play 2025. He felt pretty confident in that happening. With my son entering college this year and baseball scholarships at a premium, I'm hoping this is true. He got a little bit, but this school took the 11.7 and split it out among 20 student athletes. There were still main players on the team who are considered "walk-ons", even though they were recruited to play there. Small school with Basketball and Soccer as the main athletic programs - no football, and Baseball is tied at 3rd with LAX in regards to generating revenue.

Did he say if it was only for D1 or does it trickle to D2 as well (roster limits/scholarship numbers)?

Everything he's reported on has been at a D1 level. Just scrolled through his feed and I haven't seen anything outside of D1. Not to say it won't, but haven't seen/heard anything yet.

 

[Gally]

I have not seen anything for NCIA regarding this

Do you mean NAIA? If so, they are run totally different than NCAA and didn't have scholarship limits like the NCAA. I don't think they would be in the same situation and don't see them doing anything with it.