Extensive article in yesterday's New York Times explores the tough choice of elite players for the so-called "academy" club teams who are barred from participating in their high school programs.
Any club coach will tell you the quality of club ball is far better for obvious reasons: the kids stick together and often develop as a team over the years. They can recruit and draw talent from anywhere, not just a given school district. They are selected as an all-star team. Coaching and training may be better. All that notwithstanding, there are values to the high school game in terms of social networking, peer recognition, name in the papers and community pride. I doubt a club player ever got to ride on a fire truck down the main street of town to celebrate a state championship.
The goal of the academy programs is to follow the European model which identifies and develops players at a young age in an effort to find the 18 athletes who will ultimate compete on the world level. In this country, there is the added incentive of major college exposure and hopes of a scholarship.
Given the odds against a scholarship and even higher odds against a professional contract, especially for women, I wonder if the commitment asked of an academy player is not too much, especially that of foregoing the high school experience. But in the free market, as long as there are player
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment