Thread Rating:
09-28-2012, 01:51 PM
There is no such thing as a "Sports Only" hold back even if that is the primary motivation. Allowing a kid to have an additional year at home and in school is a benefit that extends way beyond sports even if you don't know it when you give them that opportunity.
The issue of fairness is also not rightly considered here. Older kids do better in academics, socially, and of course athletically. There is a cut off date for all sports. The closer you are born to that cut off date the older you will be in that cohort and the more likely you will flourish. Holding a kid back in many circumstances simply moves him from the young side of that equation to the older side. Thus removing a disadvantage that has, in fact, proven to accumulate over time. This has been well documented in published studies. Read Malcolm Gladwell's best seller "Outliers" where he points out these studies and shows with scientific precision how "age vs peers" is a determining factor for many components of performance for children as they progress through school.
I frankly wish every school ensured all kids graduate at 19. That would keep the playing field level. But it is ridiculous and frankly, counterproductive for anyone to suggest that the year a child's family elects to have them repeat a grade in order to provide them the greatest chance for success in the classroom, sports, music, and any other endeavor they may pursue - that that year they should be banned from participating in organized sports.
The long term objective of school, sports, band, music, etc. is to prepare a young person for college and/or career. Having an extra year to accomplish that is a positive choice that many families are choosing. My oldest son has most of his education paid for today via football scholarship that never would have occurred had he not repeated the 6th grade. But that is the smallest benefit we realized. He was in my home for an extra year and had an extra year to prepare for the academic challenge in school. His life will forever be improved by a choice we made many years ago and I hope others will never take that away from other families who would like to do the same for thier son or daughter.
The issue of fairness is also not rightly considered here. Older kids do better in academics, socially, and of course athletically. There is a cut off date for all sports. The closer you are born to that cut off date the older you will be in that cohort and the more likely you will flourish. Holding a kid back in many circumstances simply moves him from the young side of that equation to the older side. Thus removing a disadvantage that has, in fact, proven to accumulate over time. This has been well documented in published studies. Read Malcolm Gladwell's best seller "Outliers" where he points out these studies and shows with scientific precision how "age vs peers" is a determining factor for many components of performance for children as they progress through school.
I frankly wish every school ensured all kids graduate at 19. That would keep the playing field level. But it is ridiculous and frankly, counterproductive for anyone to suggest that the year a child's family elects to have them repeat a grade in order to provide them the greatest chance for success in the classroom, sports, music, and any other endeavor they may pursue - that that year they should be banned from participating in organized sports.
The long term objective of school, sports, band, music, etc. is to prepare a young person for college and/or career. Having an extra year to accomplish that is a positive choice that many families are choosing. My oldest son has most of his education paid for today via football scholarship that never would have occurred had he not repeated the 6th grade. But that is the smallest benefit we realized. He was in my home for an extra year and had an extra year to prepare for the academic challenge in school. His life will forever be improved by a choice we made many years ago and I hope others will never take that away from other families who would like to do the same for thier son or daughter.
![[-]](https://bluegrassrivals.com/forum/images/lifestyle/collapse.png)
10-05-2012, 02:10 AM
well they already got the rule in effect that if any player is 18 or maybe 19 by a certain day they can't play any sports their senior year....As i have knew alot of hold backs around the jenkins area they wont be able to play their junior year if thats true
10-05-2012, 03:40 PM
JCPS has the rule that you have to be on grade level in order to play. You get 3 years in Middle school to play sports. If you have to repeat a grade then you are not allowed to play. We had a great athlete this year who wanted to play but because he had to repeat 6th grade when he came to our school 3 years ago he was ruled ineligable this year because its his 4th year in middle school. His age isnt the problem as he hasnt turned 15 yet but because he had to repeat he was not allowed to play his 8th grade year. but that resets in HS. He will get 4 years from when he gets there to compete. but if he repeats a grade it takes away one year
10-09-2012, 12:55 AM
well coach lockwood tell me then how that helps the kid or the program for him to set that one year. i have a job where i deal with the children. if they do not have sports some of them dont have anything. i can recall one that i coached in baseball years ago, the one year his grandmother had him set out for discipline reasons is the very year he got in with the wrong crowd and began selling drugs. did that help the kid no. did that help his team no. did that help the state that is now funding him, no.
here are some factors that you all are not taking into consideration. every child matures differently. the state has already mandated the latest age they can play at. some of these kids hit their birthday on the wrong day and get considered to be a year older, but they shouldn't cause they are now the runt of that group. there is also the fact that the parents may want that extra year with the child, which they will never get back. there are those that may be born on the right date, but were born premature (speaking from experience). this means they are by a month or so a year older as the school sees it but, really are not.
I think the rules should be held to the standard that the khsaa has set. They obviously have personnel that have time to conduct such studies and therefore would know what is right for the children as a whole. It does not matter if you have these hold backs or not, you are always going to have kids that are far more advanced than others.
I am from Mayfield and I can tell you we face those bigger players that are far more advanced all the time. The secret is not in how much more advanced physically your players are. The secret is how much more advanced mentally your coaches and your players are. The last seven years we have played a far bigger and even faster paducah tilghman team in high school. Look at the results. The last two years we have played a much bigger Lou Holy Cross team, look at the results.
I have coached football, baseball, soccer and basketball. I have always heard the jokes and remarks about how we got beat or we won because this kid or that kid showed up driving a car. This stuff does not matter if you have the proper coaching and the proper teaching. This really is a discussion that is best left to the experts on education.
here are some factors that you all are not taking into consideration. every child matures differently. the state has already mandated the latest age they can play at. some of these kids hit their birthday on the wrong day and get considered to be a year older, but they shouldn't cause they are now the runt of that group. there is also the fact that the parents may want that extra year with the child, which they will never get back. there are those that may be born on the right date, but were born premature (speaking from experience). this means they are by a month or so a year older as the school sees it but, really are not.
I think the rules should be held to the standard that the khsaa has set. They obviously have personnel that have time to conduct such studies and therefore would know what is right for the children as a whole. It does not matter if you have these hold backs or not, you are always going to have kids that are far more advanced than others.
I am from Mayfield and I can tell you we face those bigger players that are far more advanced all the time. The secret is not in how much more advanced physically your players are. The secret is how much more advanced mentally your coaches and your players are. The last seven years we have played a far bigger and even faster paducah tilghman team in high school. Look at the results. The last two years we have played a much bigger Lou Holy Cross team, look at the results.
I have coached football, baseball, soccer and basketball. I have always heard the jokes and remarks about how we got beat or we won because this kid or that kid showed up driving a car. This stuff does not matter if you have the proper coaching and the proper teaching. This really is a discussion that is best left to the experts on education.
10-09-2012, 01:26 AM
Our team has a 6th grader that is over 6 foot tall and probably weighs more than 200 lbs playing on 7th grade team. He is a true 6th grader. He's never stayed back. He's bigger than any of our 8th graders even the ones that have stayed back. At this age, it's hard to say about size and speed. Just because a kid stays back doesn't mean they will necessarily be bigger or a danger to someone else.
10-09-2012, 07:44 AM
We also sometime automatically assume that a kid is held back because he is big Mayfield 7th grade is really big as big as most 8th grade teams our defensive lines had 3 kids all over 5ft9 and 200 lb. My son has a growth hormone imbalance and is 5ft9.5 and 300lb with a size 13 shoe. All of these kids are age appropriate but in a small town you hear oh he had to be held back. Most the time the kids are held back.to grow enough to not be at a disadvantage size wise when they go into the next grade not because they are already big and they want him to get bigger. Kids hit puberty early or later sometimes.kids can hit puberty as early as 8 or as late as 15. Believe me a kid who hits puberty late can be at a huge disadvantage strength and size wise Should that kid be punished by being forced to sit out?
10-09-2012, 08:25 AM
Quote:but you have to think the kid on the academic team or fca is not running full speed down a football field and hitting a kid 1-2 and possibly 3 years youngerThat is a moot point, first off, why would you put kids on the same field with kids 2-3 years older. That is not too smart imo. Secondly, even without holding back a kid, you could legitimately have a 15 yr. in 8th grade.
10-09-2012, 08:42 AM
You are always going to have some kids bigger than others,no way around it. I was a 175 lbs center in high school going against kids 40 to 50 lbs heavier.It is not the size of the dog in the fight,but the size of the fight in the dog.If you are taught properly, leverage and technique will win out most times.
10-09-2012, 10:42 AM
new o Wrote:Starting them late is the same as holding them back, they still would take your kids spot. Holding a kid back does not make them better, they have to work very hard that extra year for it to pay off. Back when I was in school all kids started school around the same age but now kids start as early as 3 years old which is crazy but because the parents work they have no choice financially.
Speaking of back when I was in school, I would have loved to play against 8th graders as a sophomore in highschool, which is what 2 year holdbacks are doing. Holding them back may not make them better (because they can't compete with their own age group} but it sure does make them older.
10-09-2012, 01:19 PM
I don't think anyone is objecting to holding "a" kid back (individual) for being undersized, or to mature etc... but I think the problem is when a team has several that are held back like 6 or 7 on a team. That is the case with some programs out there. I don't care what you say, when a team has 7 or 8 kids a year or two older than the other team that is a huge disadvantage to the non-hold back team or program. Put the ages beside the names on the roster and the team with more 14 year olds on the 7th grade team will win. That old saying "we grow em' big down here" doesnt mesh if they are two years older. Let me put together a 14-13 year old team and I will beat up on 12 year olds all day long too. However, certain teams and programs (along with parent support) are going to continue this and it is a shame.
10-09-2012, 01:40 PM
I see alot of ppl missing the age point here. The proper age for most 8th graders is 14/15. Some of you are acting like if a kid is 14/15 and in the 8th grade they cant compete with Fr. and Soph. they dont have to, they are legal age for 8th grade. You do realize that the ages of legal Fr. are 15/16, Soph. 16/17, Jr 17/18, and Sr. 18/19 right? Whether a kid plays during his or her holdback year in middle school is only regulated by the school districts themselves or by conference boards were all schools involved are in agreance to 1 yr. per grade rule. Holdbacks may not play any high school sport during their holdback year in middle school per KHSAA rules.
10-09-2012, 09:31 PM
I was never held back, and I graduated at the age of 18. I've known students held back for legitimate academic reasons (learning disabilities). Should they be penalized and not allowed to play because they turn 15 in November, December, or January? If you regulate hold backs, you have to regulate ALL holdbacks. I don't believe 16 year old students should still be in middle school, but I was 14 in 8th grade. Everyone acts as if 8th graders are 12 and 13.
10-10-2012, 01:19 AM
Hitters_Count Wrote:I see alot of ppl missing the age point here. The proper age for most 8th graders is 14/15. Some of you are acting like if a kid is 14/15 and in the 8th grade they cant compete with Fr. and Soph. they dont have to, they are legal age for 8th grade. You do realize that the ages of legal Fr. are 15/16, Soph. 16/17, Jr 17/18, and Sr. 18/19 right? Whether a kid plays during his or her holdback year in middle school is only regulated by the school districts themselves or by conference boards were all schools involved are in agreance to 1 yr. per grade rule. Holdbacks may not play any high school sport during their holdback year in middle school per KHSAA rules.
I don't have a problem with holdbacks, even though I agree that it's best to figure that out before they start school. I don't know about "most" 8th graders being 15 though. I would imagine most start 8th grade at 13 and finish at 14.
10-10-2012, 01:36 AM
Pretty much all of EKY would be opposed...lol.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
âRelax, all right? Donât try to strike everybody out. Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, theyâre fascist. Throw some ground balls â itâs more democratic.â
Crash Davis
10-10-2012, 06:07 AM
Throw this out there: for public schools, do you want your tax money paying for a kid to spend an extra year in your school system that is totally unnecessary and unjustified? Increasing your student to teacher ratios for no reason? That alone is enough to not justify it. In an era of diminishing tax bases and worsening schools, how can we allow kids who are due for promotion to waste an extra year of taxpayer money on a whim without any justification other than the parents want it? You say, oh, it's just one kid? What if every kid's family thought the same way?
To the other arguments i see offered here: It is frankly an awful thing to do to a child to make him repeat a grade, and coddling them until they're 19 instead of 18 doesn't do anything except increase the trend of extended adolescence we see in this country today, the one that has so many jobless 20-somethings and older living in their parents' basements. If you have to keep them in school forever in fear you will never see them again when they go to college, well, a wise man once said, if you let something go and it never comes back to see you, it was never yours to begin with. These are some pretty weak arguments for something that people are doing for no other reason than to gain some kind of perceived advantage that usually disappears when the other kids catch up growth wise in high school anyhow. And there's absolutely no reason to allow a child to play sports, especially a violent contact sport, more than one year at each grade level. Ih the rare event your kid's good enough to get a football scholarship, they'll find him just as well after four years of HS regardless. Generally, all you are doing is sending in a 15 year old to beat up on 12-13 year olds, and that is frankly reprehensible.
To the other arguments i see offered here: It is frankly an awful thing to do to a child to make him repeat a grade, and coddling them until they're 19 instead of 18 doesn't do anything except increase the trend of extended adolescence we see in this country today, the one that has so many jobless 20-somethings and older living in their parents' basements. If you have to keep them in school forever in fear you will never see them again when they go to college, well, a wise man once said, if you let something go and it never comes back to see you, it was never yours to begin with. These are some pretty weak arguments for something that people are doing for no other reason than to gain some kind of perceived advantage that usually disappears when the other kids catch up growth wise in high school anyhow. And there's absolutely no reason to allow a child to play sports, especially a violent contact sport, more than one year at each grade level. Ih the rare event your kid's good enough to get a football scholarship, they'll find him just as well after four years of HS regardless. Generally, all you are doing is sending in a 15 year old to beat up on 12-13 year olds, and that is frankly reprehensible.
10-10-2012, 07:07 AM
YA know folks,as long as there are sports, there will be WINNERS and losers,WINNERS will always prevail and losers will always look for something or someone to blame it on,If you want to hold your child back,go for it.... best thing most could do... very rare that it wouldnt help you and your child,....if you dont want to hold your child back,....then shut up !!!!!! its your choice as well as the child and if both agree great..... and for those of you that dont like it hey dont let your BABIES out there :hilarious
10-10-2012, 09:47 AM
WILD WILLIE Wrote:YA know folks,as long as there are sports, there will be WINNERS and losers,WINNERS will always prevail and losers will always look for something or someone to blame it on,If you want to hold your child back,go for it.... best thing most could do... very rare that it wouldnt help you and your child,....if you dont want to hold your child back,....then shut up !!!!!! its your choice as well as the child and if both agree great..... and for those of you that dont like it hey dont let your BABIES out there :hilarious
Actually you are right it is perfectly legal and may help a majority of kids, but its funny that if it is legal and right for the kids, why do we have hundreds of posts llike this defending something that is legal? Just say your right and leave it alone. No one is blaming you for holding your kid back, just do it and quit blaming everyone else because they don't.
10-11-2012, 10:36 PM
Kentucky needs to modernize the age for starting 1st grade. Most states now 'hold back' at the first grade level. Just start kids later. For most boys it is helpful anyway.
10-16-2012, 11:42 AM
We held our youngest son back in the 1st grade. He had trouble with his grades and we made the right decision. He is now an A student who was on the academic team last year. Micah is also one of the smallest if not the smallest starters on Mayfield's 8th grade team. I agree with one of the other posters. Its the fight in the dog that counts.
10-16-2012, 01:07 PM
Often kids can bloom late and i understand this as i wrestled 105 as a freshman and i was 5'6. I now weigh 225 and stand 6'4 mainly got all my height after graduating, this can be a curse for an athlete. On the other hand if a child is 6'2 in the 7th and is being held back, i dont agree with this situation.
10-16-2012, 08:09 PM
cry babies, get over it, if you dont like it dont watch it, my child is 13 yr old 5' 10, 196 lbs and will knock your boys socks off if they get in front of him and if they are running down the side line, he has ran quite a few of them down this season, should I let him play another year in the 8th grade
10-16-2012, 08:17 PM
jmhsrv1970 Wrote:Actually you are right it is perfectly legal and may help a majority of kids, but its funny that if it is legal and right for the kids, why do we have hundreds of posts llike this defending something that is legal? Just say your right and leave it alone. No one is blaming you for holding your kid back, just do it and quit blaming everyone else because they don't.
I think that it is an individual choice, a parent knows what is best for their own child . As for blaming everyone else as you put it ...They are two types of people in this this world ...if being shot at one will run and hide and the other will return fire..I think he is returning fire
10-17-2012, 08:27 PM
I would keep mine back again if we could. It has done nothing but improved him in every way. Sports and academics. He enjoys school and a proud member of the Pirate middle school team.
10-18-2012, 07:39 AM
What cracks me up about this discussion is unless your bubble baby plans on sitting out of sports during high school they will be facing kids up to four years above their age.. I can name alot of schools that start freshman on their varsity squads and you don't see those parents on here whining because the other kid is 19 and there kid is only 14 ... it is a way of life.Only a few years back there where no middle schools in this area and all schools were k-8 as a 5th grader i started Hb and corner and the big 8th graders ran over me but just like everyone else i survived and so will your kids
irateShoirateSho
irateShoirateSho
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
