re: Who actually likes “travel ball”

quote:

---

well HDR isnt really that reasonable

---

What I’m seeing on their website is $100 for a video analysis and $100 for a practice plan.
That doesn’t seem unreasonable to me?

Now driveline wanting $300 per month for online training… actually that isn’t unreasonable either, depending on how much they can accomplish remotely.

I got a text from a parent asking if my son can guest on his team next weekend in a Pg event 6 hours away.

I told him no. My son is playing all 3 sports in hs and they work his butt off mon- thurs in the summer. I want him to be free on the weekends to relax, fish, and help me and his grandpa at the camp.

It’s also not fair to my girls to sacrifice their weekends.

$100 per month budget with an incoming high school freshman who drops his hands and swings for contact since he was 8 years old, which one are you going with?

quote:

---

This is a fair statement when directed at many travel ball families.

Yet, it undermines the vast majority of the travel ball communities. Everyone I know that has a travel ball kid take it only as seriously as the effort that our athletes are putting into the game.

My kid is a baseball first, football and track a distant third type of kid. Video games and YouTube only on days that he's physically sick and unable to play or work on baseball.

Tell me, if he takes it that seriously to chase his dreams, as a father, should I not support that? Or should I just shake my head and say, "No son, you'll never achieve that dream. Just go play some minecraft."

Yeah, I'm just going to stick to my approach of rewarding his hard work for chasing his dreams.

---

:bow: :bow: :bow:

quote:

---

people on this board have no clue what it takes to be great at something.

---

Did you ball play college ball?

quote:

---

im gonna leave you with a couple of nick saban quotes you may need to read and think about......and in the end, remember...to be great...it takes what it takes

---

It's now apparent why you had such a puzzling, visceral reaction when someone mentioned "college" in this discussion.

According to the NCAA, over 482k kids play high school baseball. Of those, somewhere around 36k go on to play college baseball (NCAA not NAIA or Juco).

Given the numbers above, I would argue that going on to play college baseball provides us all with an objective definition of "great" or "good" or "high achiever." We can even narrow it further to Division 1 programs.

If we adopt this objective definition, then it would logically follow that anyone who doesn't go on to play college baseball is average/mediocre/okay/run-of-the-mill. This would include a kid who played travel ball and put in a lot of hard work and sweat equity. Heck, one can be all league, all region, all state and still be on the meaty part of the bell curve. No college ball-I'm going to consider you part of the 440k that fall somewhere on the spectrum of "average," regardless of whether you played travel ball starting at age 9 and treated it like a part-time job instead of a recreational activity.

In your opinion, what is a fair "objective standard"? Do you agree with mine? Why or why not? If not, what would you argue the "objective standard" should be?

Also, at what point would time and money invested by a travel ball player and his family expiate his "averageness" or "mediocrity" if he doesn't meet the objective standard? Is travel ball akin to purchasing an indulgence?

Your replies attempt to create a Dan Hawkins "go play intermurals, brother" dichotomy that allows you to thump your chest and regurgitate boilerplate sayings while dismissing legitimate concerns about high school and youth sports.

Up until a certain point in the previous century (reasonable minds disagree on exactly when, but I'd argue post Nixon), youth sports and high school sports in general did not take themselves too seriously. There were always travel type teams for better/more serious players who wanted to test themselves against better competition. Specialization was not mandatory. Playing on club/travel teams was not a Hobson's choice.

I don't believe it is a good thing that a youth sports industrial-complex has arisen that has the effect of demanding that kids treat a recreational activity like a part-time job in order to max out as a regular player for a high school team that may or may not make the playoffs. Travel Ball/Club Sports is a very lucrative venture. Its a business, first and foremost. Selling the promise of exposure to college scouts/coaches is a grift, statistically speaking. Its also dishonest to portray someone who maxes out as a high school catcher or hockey goalie as some sort of ubermensch because they liked a sport and were willing to put in the time commitment.

Athletic pursuits should be part of a young person's life, but not the predominant pursuits. Academics, time with family, worship, and socializing are equally as important, if not more important.

I'm glad you agree that sports have low stakes, especially for kids. I think the crux of the debate is why have we condoned the creation of unnecessary hurdles to participation in athletics at the amateur level? Especially if the hurdles first and foremost benefit business concerns? IMO, by the time kids get to high school, there's been plenty of self-selection regarding interest and commitment to sports. Roster Limits/Cuts can take care of the rest. Natural ability and work ethic can figure the talent pecking order.

quote:

---

they are goign to fund the shite out of them and within 10 years high school baseball would be gone.

---

Arguably, this depends on the location. Louisiana, to my knowledge, doesn't have the equivalent of East Cobb: no 80 team program, and no 8 diamond, multi-million dollar facility with a gross income in the millions of dollars. That excludes the ability to host/stage tournaments and bring in travel ball clubs from other states. Per the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, ECB's operating budget was $1.1 million in 2007. Perfect Game paid ECB for naming rights; they have plenty of other business sponsors. If the governing body for Georgia high school athletics forced people to choose between travel ball and high school athletics, I'm confident that your prediction would come true.

IMO the important things are (1) land/facilities, (2) power and influence.

Let's take West Monroe, since you used it as an example. West Monroe HS baseball plays in a gorgeous ballpark that the team doesn't have to rent, nor does the team have to rent workout/practice facilities; coaching staff is likely comprised of Ouchita Parish School Board employees with salaries and benefits (this was true for football at least). As a municipal sub-entity there is either sovereign immunity or purchasing power in the liability insurance market. You also have non-coaching staff employees that handle administration and facility maintenance.

Assuming that kids and families have to choose between high school ball and travel ball, and assuming that the vast majority of folks in travel ball in the Monroe area choose it over high school, you thought 8-10 teams of high school aged boys would be viable.

Previously, a travel ball team in Monroe made money from hosting tournaments, player subscriptions, fundraisers, and sponsors. There were expenses for facility rental and compliance costs (insurance, legal, tax); operating costs were likely offset by having parents volunteer labor/donate time and non-parent coaches were 1099 independent contractors who had day jobs. It was a modest enterprise, one that could turn a profit even.

Before travel ball became a competitor to high school in this scenario, the relationship was mutually beneficial. Schools and coaches got a supply of fit and experienced players. Coaches could still make money off their camps. Travel ball didn't harm anyone, it made a good living, it provided a revenue stream for local public athletic fields.

Now travel ball is a competitor of the local power structure. You're taking money out of their pockets; money that is not offset by field rentals. Maybe it will be harder to find places to practice and play; maybe vendors won't want to do business with you because it could impact their business with the City of Monroe or Ouchita Parish or the State of Louisiana. Maybe sponsorship funds will dry up for the same reason. Maybe the program now has a payroll to meet, in order to get a decent coaching staff that isn't subsidized by government salaries; maybe folks that moonlight as coaches don't have enough time to do what the program requires in terms of administration, oversight, logistics, etc. Here, travel ball would be trying to buck the power structure/disrupt the market while simultaneously having to rapidly scale.

Without an East Cobb, travel ball clubs in Louisiana don't have the FU power you seem to believe that they have.

Anecdotally speaking:

I know a couple of guys from college/grad school who got offers from SoCon teams. One elected not to play in college; the other had really great grades and played at a D-III school with highly reputable academics.

At a certain point its possible that a percentage of the roster are there because there are guys on the quad who turned down the opportunity to play in college.

quote:

---

Up until a certain point in the previous century (reasonable minds disagree on exactly when, but I'd argue post Nixon), youth sports and high school sports in general did not take themselves too seriously. There were always travel type teams for better/more serious players who wanted to test themselves against better competition. Specialization was not mandatory. Playing on club/travel teams was not a Hobson's choice.

I don't believe it is a good thing that a youth sports industrial-complex has arisen that has the effect of demanding that kids treat a recreational activity like a part-time job in order to max out as a regular player for a high school team that may or may not make the playoffs. Travel Ball/Club Sports is a very lucrative venture. Its a business, first and foremost. Selling the promise of exposure to college scouts/coaches is a grift, statistically speaking. Its also dishonest to portray someone who maxes out as a high school catcher or hockey goalie as some sort of ubermensch because they liked a sport and were willing to put in the time commitment.

Athletic pursuits should be part of a young person's life, but not the predominant pursuits. Academics, time with family, worship, and socializing are equally as important, if not more important.

I'm glad you agree that sports have low stakes, especially for kids. I think the crux of the debate is why have we condoned the creation of unnecessary hurdles to participation in athletics at the amateur level? Especially if the hurdles first and foremost benefit business concerns? IMO, by the time kids get to high school, there's been plenty of self-selection regarding interest and commitment to sports. Roster Limits/Cuts can take care of the rest. Natural ability and work ethic can figure the talent pecking order.

---

Thank you for this.

quote:

---

Everyone chasing athletic scholarship dollars

---

I have a buddy that has 2 girls in travel softball for this very reason. I pissed him off recently when I told him if he would put the 20K a year in a 529 for college he would be better off. He is convinced travel ball is the road to sports glory.