Post by coachshs on Dec 15, 2008 23:03:13 GMT -6
I want to say that I appreciate all of your insight. I understand that there is a place for an outline of what we would like in each position and we tell the players and parents what this is at the start of every season. For many obvious reasons this does not include things such as a 40 time, a vertical leap test, or a bench max. We speak to them about the intangibles and close the conversation by saying that, "you will play where you best help the team."
I am confident that the basis for this request from my AD is due to an unhappy parent. I had an athletes parents come to me mid season and wanted to know why their kid wasn't the running back. I informed them that I had others that were better at that position (better agility, speed, vision, ball handling, ect....) and that their son was the best guard I had on the team. Mind you their kid is a two way starter at G and LB and a really great kid. They did not like my response and went to the AD and asked him the same question.
Their premise is that if there is qualitative data that their son fits then he should be able to play the position that he/they want. He is a quick kid, strong, and obviously is able to get the job done wherever I need him to be, and that is at G. They just can't handle that.
I can create this "rubric", but the scope of the data would be so broad that half the team would qualify. If I wanted to be a real piece of work I could create a rubric that doesn't allow any of the athletes to qualify. In the end this is unrealistic and will create more problems than it solves in my opinion.
I am confident that the basis for this request from my AD is due to an unhappy parent. I had an athletes parents come to me mid season and wanted to know why their kid wasn't the running back. I informed them that I had others that were better at that position (better agility, speed, vision, ball handling, ect....) and that their son was the best guard I had on the team. Mind you their kid is a two way starter at G and LB and a really great kid. They did not like my response and went to the AD and asked him the same question.
Their premise is that if there is qualitative data that their son fits then he should be able to play the position that he/they want. He is a quick kid, strong, and obviously is able to get the job done wherever I need him to be, and that is at G. They just can't handle that.
I can create this "rubric", but the scope of the data would be so broad that half the team would qualify. If I wanted to be a real piece of work I could create a rubric that doesn't allow any of the athletes to qualify. In the end this is unrealistic and will create more problems than it solves in my opinion.