Is it even possible anymore?

[Unregistered]

Wrong.

Person "A" was a low-level professional from Europe without any children, who came here to coach.

Person "B" never made such a claim, it was more along the lines that kids are too young to make life choices and deciding on a single sport. He played in two sports as well in college, so he will always have that slant.

And, no, while an interesting take, it had nothing to do with employability or anything else. It was about letting kids not be stuck making a decision so young.

And, last, one should realize that being 'employable' isn't all about grades. When I hire, I look a well-rounded candidate and not a bookworm. So, someone who is versatile, who can operate and succeed in a team environment, are who I target. If she used her athletics to get ahead of someone of a similar grade-level, so be it. Not like we are talking an idiot here...we are talking about a B student.

Rather interesting how you managed to make that post so negative. Impressive, actually, if that's your sort of thing.

Ever think that you just know different A's & B's?

[Unregistered]

More pathetic by the day, BTNT. Most of us never claim our kids are Person A. But you sure are genuinely interested in the Person B kid and wanting the best for them, aren't you? Why play sports at the D3 level when all that time could go towards academics, right? It's a silly little sport when Person B players but all-important for Person A. Got it.

Oh come on Pman like you haven't been calling all D1 athletes unemployable for years? At least stand by your trolling.

[Unregistered]

Oh come on Pman like you haven't been calling all D1 athletes unemployable for years? At least stand by your trolling.

Not to mention the b in his butt about segmenting the better more intense players away from the rank and file. AKA all the GDA bashing.

[Unregistered]

Not to mention the b in his butt about segmenting the better more intense players away from the rank and file. AKA all the GDA bashing.

No that's someone else who has a financial interest in an ECNL club

[Unregistered]

Oh come on Pman like you haven't been calling all D1 athletes unemployable for years? At least stand by your trolling.

Never did that once. And as noted frequently, I numerous times have expressed admiration for true high level athletes and have endorsed that I would have pushed for D1 if I had a high D1 kid. It's all on the record, just as are my frequent endorsements of high level players being afforded superior training opportunities. Of course the lies will continue.

[Unregistered]

Ever think that you just know different A's & B's?

Of course, and everyone has a different tale to tell. Never claimed that everyone fits into one side or another.

These are real world examples and can see how both have very valid points.

[Unregistered]

Wrong.

Person "A" was a low-level professional from Europe without any children, who came here to coach.

Person "B" never made such a claims, it was more along the lines that kids are too young to make life choices and deciding on a single sport. He played in two sports as well in college, so he will always have that slant.

And, no, while an interesting take, it had nothing to do with employability or anything else. It was about letting kids not be stuck making a decision so young.

And, last, one should realize that being 'employable' isn't all about grades. When I hire, I look a well-rounded candidate and not a bookworm. So, someone who is versatile, who can operate and succeed in a team environment, are who I target. If she used her athletics to get ahead of someone of a similar grade-level, so be it. Not like we are talking an idiot here...we are talking about a B student.

Rather interesting how you managed to make that post so negative. Impressive, actually, if that's your sort of thing.

Seriously, can you maybe wrap all of your "A" & "B" personas into one and just claim what you stand for?

[Unregistered]

Seriously, can you maybe wrap all of your "A" & "B" personas into one and just claim what you stand for?

Nope, because as mentioned, they are different people. "A" played overseas, coached here for a college program, and I played with in an adult league.

"B" is my brother, thereby the player in question is my nieces. Super good kid.

The funny part of the story is they both were on the board of the club in town together, and had a heated argument over the topic. Which, I summarized in my OP. Both had vented to me about the other, not knowing my connection to both, so I got to see both slanted sides first, before I made the connection.

Both have valid points, and it may come down to the more likely one is to have success, the more likely they should stick with one sport. The problem becomes when to make that decision, and how does one honestly step away and make that decision?

There is no other intent with my post other than to point out two very different sides to the same subject, and both have merit.

[Unregistered]

Nope, because as mentioned, they are different people. "A" played overseas, coached here for a college program, and I played with in an adult league.

"B" is my brother, thereby the player in question is my nieces. Super good kid.

The funny part of the story is they both were on the board of the club in town together, and had a heated argument over the topic. Which, I summarized in my OP. Both had vented to me about the other, not knowing my connection to both, so I got to see both slanted sides first, before I made the connection.

Both have valid points, and it may come down to the more likely one is to have success, the more likely they should stick with one sport. The problem becomes when to make that decision, and how does one honestly step away and make that decision?

There is no other intent with my post other than to point out two very different sides to the same subject, and both have merit.

The ultimate point is both wanted the other to do things their way and really can't appreciate that the other's perspective is entirely personal. That's why they had the heated argument, no? All comes down to personal goals and just like this site they assumed that what they wanted for their kid is what everyone wants for theirs. The problem that creates though is when you put them on the same board, one wants to get the town to set the bar high and the other wants to set the bar low. That sux. There really should be two set ups so that each could attract their philosophical followers to it without interference from the other. That used to be what A & B teams did for most town except now being on the B team is generally viewed as a slap in the face these days

[Unregistered]

The ultimate point is both wanted the other to do things their way and really can't appreciate that the other's perspective is entirely personal. That's why they had the heated argument, no? All comes down to personal goals and just like this site they assumed that what they wanted for their kid is what everyone wants for theirs. The problem that creates though is when you put them on the same board, one wants to get the town to set the bar high and the other wants to set the bar low. That sux. There really should be two set ups so that each could attract their philosophical followers to it without interference from the other. That used to be what A & B teams did for most town except now being on the B team is generally viewed as a slap in the face these days

Yes, philosophically opposed. But, I raised this question originally in response to yet another link telling us that kids should play other sports. I don't see how it's cut and dry.

But, as for the bar being set high, that's a vague determination. Both wanted what is best for the program, and it was successful. Just difference opinion on how to get there, and what's best for the kids involved.