No more Captains in High School?

[Unregistered]

Most kids know who the leaders are on the team. My daughter's team elects capts and some year one of the Capt is a Jr (they have 3 or 4 capt) but I believe the Coach has the final say - What does the MIAA say about Capts??

Why 3 or 4? That was the beginning of the problem. there was a time that teams had but 1, then it became 2, now for many schools it's 3 or 4. Next logical step was to make everyone leaders.

[Unregistered]

I've never met a kid that wanted the consolation trophy or didn't know the difference. The American kids I know are very competitive and could care less about anything but the winning part.

Really?? So your so-called competitive kids are OK with losing more than they win?? This would be OK for them?? If they lost more than they won, would you think they would still play the sport beyond 14/15 years old in a competitive environment???

If I had to guess, your competitive kids win more than they lose.......

[Unregistered]

Why 3 or 4? That was the beginning of the problem. there was a time that teams had but 1, then it became 2, now for many schools it's 3 or 4. Next logical step was to make everyone leaders.

Saw an article in the Worcester Telegram that mentioned that the Holy Name Girl's team has 5 captains this year. The definitely seems like 2 or 3 too many.

[HS Harry]

So, just to clarify a few things:

1. The Shared Leadership directive is a suggestion from the AD, not a policy. No coach or team has been mandated to eliminate captains and replace them with a leadership council as was misreported earlier. While a few teams (girls volleyball, field hockey this fall) appear to be experimenting with it, many others have no intention to adopt the change. Not sure whether the boys soccer team will, but it appears that the new girls soccer coach, Kate Berry, is not. Football is definitely not, no idea about cross country or golf.

2. Two girls, one arguably the top long distance runner in the state, wrote scathing letters to the local newspaper condemning the practice after what they deemed a failed attempt last Spring. They cited the lack of leaderhip that arose from the shared approach increase in cliques, rather than the opposite.

3. AD Nancy O'Neil insists that the idea was not developed to address the growing number of irate parents marching into her office when their little superstars are not named captain, but I can't believe it's not in the back of her mind.

This seems like a well-intentioned, but rather naive approach to addressing the problem of lack of leadership among this generation.

Great post, thank you for your insight. It would be silly to believe that this "directive" represents a wide-spread move away from the traditional acceptance of captains in HS sports. Certainly things have changed dramatically since the earlier days of HS sports when teams routinely had only a single (or occassionally co-) captain. But we have also added so many more sports - mostly on the women's side. So change was inevitable. I believe that there are some sizeable differences between the role of captains. Those distinctions appear from school to school and from sport to sport. Typically, girls/women handle these leadership roles differently than their male counter-parts. So to try to have single comprehensive discussion about "captains" is pretty useless. And in fact, its plausible that this type of system could make sense for certain sports in certain schools - although, the formality and rigidity of the L/S system seems a bit over-reaching. Personally, I don't like when an AD makes these kinds of sweeping proclaimations. They rarely work and I've always felt that the best ADs support the autonomy of individual coaches/programs - and that they avoid dicating policy to them.

[Unregistered]

Great post, thank you for your insight. It would be silly to believe that this "directive" represents a wide-spread move away from the traditional acceptance of captains in HS sports. Certainly things have changed dramatically since the earlier days of HS sports when teams routinely had only a single (or occassionally co-) captain. But we have also added so many more sports - mostly on the women's side. So change was inevitable. I believe that there are some sizeable differences between the role of captains. Those distinctions appear from school to school and from sport to sport. Typically, girls/women handle these leadership roles differently than their male counter-parts. So to try to have single comprehensive discussion about "captains" is pretty useless. And in fact, its plausible that this type of system could make sense for certain sports in certain schools - although, the formality and rigidity of the L/S system seems a bit over-reaching. Personally, I don't like when an AD makes these kinds of sweeping proclaimations. They rarely work and I've always felt that the best ADs support the autonomy of individual coaches/programs - and that they avoid dicating policy to them.

It is designed to be policy. The AD wanted all teams to implement it. Only reason why it didn't happen in girls soccer is that the old coach would not have supported it. Volleyball and Field Hockey girls are furious about it. Other teams kids fought back. It will be dropped by next year.

[Unregistered]

Saw an article in the Worcester Telegram that mentioned that the Holy Name Girl's team has 5 captains this year. The definitely seems like 2 or 3 too many.

Our winter track coach makes all seniors captains. It is ridiculous, especially this past year when no senior earned any points in a meet. Top junior runner was real leader of the team of underclassmen, but the seniors put it on their college applications. Seems like that is what many kids are looking for these days, just another notch on their app without any meaning to it. I want to believe that colleges can see through these things.

[HS Harry]

It is designed to be policy. The AD wanted all teams to implement it. Only reason why it didn't happen in girls soccer is that the old coach would not have supported it. Volleyball and Field Hockey girls are furious about it. Other teams kids fought back. It will be dropped by next year.

When I said that I don't think it represents a wide-spread move away from acceptance of captains - I meant region-wide. Not specifically L/S. But, its also not surprising that it was met with significant opposition in L/S. As I said, such sweeping changes are rarely well-received, especially when they come way ahead of the curve.

[Unregistered]

Cujo is spot onin his analysis.

Soccer teams don't need captains. Teams should have captains. Where are the youth supposed to learn leadership skills?

In any case, the public schools are not intended to produce leaders and those who have the misfortune to have to send their children to such are seeing that in practice. All who can afford it in L-S are sending their children to the ISL schools or out of state boarding schools.

This latest action merely reveals the truth.

Sounds more like an opinion. The reality is that public schools are more than capable of producing leaders, in all areas of society, and they do .

[Unregistered]

I tend to agree. There is so little substance to so many of the posts;

The reason there is so little substance is the topic is so stupid to begin with. Mommy or Daddys little girl didn't get picked so they made a stink and rather than get sued over it, L-S caved. It had to start somewhere and to think the administration of L-S had this as an agenda item is foolish given the much more important things to deal with.

[Unregistered]

It is designed to be policy. The AD wanted all teams to implement it. Only reason why it didn't happen in girls soccer is that the old coach would not have supported it. Volleyball and Field Hockey girls are furious about it. Other teams kids fought back. It will be dropped by next year.

time to rant....
This idea of eliminating leaders or sharing leadership is an example of a disturbing trend of hold hands and sing Kumbaya (? spelling). Face it...there are leaders and followers. This is what makes up our society and what had built a great team and a great nation. Everyone can't be the leader!! I hope that, as a society, we are not getting so preoccupied with everyone's emotions instead of moving forward. You can't eliminate Darwinism. It is not only a fact of life, but also the basis of advancement.

Leaders are important to recognize and reward. Followers are important to implement and recognize how the structure of a team is developed. Anything else is in the direction of mediocrity, forced diversity, and socialism.............correct.....I am not a liberal democrat

[Unregistered]

Really?? So your so-called competitive kids are OK with losing more than they win?? This would be OK for them?? If they lost more than they won, would you think they would still play the sport beyond 14/15 years old in a competitive environment???

If I had to guess, your competitive kids win more than they lose.......

You should really go back and re-read my post.

[Unregistered]

correction

You should really go back and re-read my post.

You are correct. I did misread your post....it might have been the double negative. We more or less agree. It is annoying when I hear parents say 'there is nothing wrong with losing'. While this is correct, in that it is important to feel humility and learn to deal with adversity. Losing also lets one fuel the desire to come back stronger and seek a different result. There is much to learn from losing.............HOWEVER...................
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH WINNING, and, as you said, competitive kids do want to win

[MASC]

Sounds more like an opinion. The reality is that public schools are more than capable of producing leaders, in all areas of society, and they do .

The same way the US Soccer system produces a small number of quality players. The cream rises irrespective of how bad things are around them.

The public school system is designed to foster mediocrity. No where in the mandated curriculum are leadership skills promoted. The "self directed" team is taught as the pinnacle of the work environment. It is a flawed concept that is forced upon our youth to create a manageable work force willing to pay taxes and be obiedient to the government.

The public schools do not create leaders. Any leaders who have graduated from public schools achieved their successes inspite of the public schools not due to them.

Please name some leaders who attended public HS's in Massachusetts and made significant contributions to this country.

A lie told enough times is perceived as the truth.

In the interests of full disclosure, I attended public schools in Massachusetts from K through 12. My children attended public schools K through 8.

[Unregistered]

The same way the US Soccer system produces a small number of quality players. The cream rises irrespective of how bad things are around them.

The public school system is designed to foster mediocrity. No where in the mandated curriculum are leadership skills promoted. The "self directed" team is taught as the pinnacle of the work environment. It is a flawed concept that is forced upon our youth to create a manageable work force willing to pay taxes and be obiedient to the government.

The public schools do not create leaders. Any leaders who have graduated from public schools achieved their successes inspite of the public schools not due to them.

Please name some leaders who attended public HS's in Massachusetts and made significant contributions to this country.

A lie told enough times is perceived as the truth.

In the interests of full disclosure, I attended public schools in Massachusetts from K through 12. My children attended public schools K through 8.

Give me an example of a leader I could be proud of in Massachusetts that the private schools have produced.

[dd2]

The same way the US Soccer system produces a small number of quality players. The cream rises irrespective of how bad things are around them.

The public school system is designed to foster mediocrity. No where in the mandated curriculum are leadership skills promoted. The "self directed" team is taught as the pinnacle of the work environment. It is a flawed concept that is forced upon our youth to create a manageable work force willing to pay taxes and be obiedient to the government.

The public schools do not create leaders. Any leaders who have graduated from public schools achieved their successes inspite of the public schools not due to them.

Please name some leaders who attended public HS's in Massachusetts and made significant contributions to this country.

A lie told enough times is perceived as the truth.

In the interests of full disclosure, I attended public schools in Massachusetts from K through 12. My children attended public schools K through 8.

MASC, I don't know if I agree with your views on public school and leadership. I agree that public schools often fail to push their students to the highest levels of excellence. There are many times I feel that public schools accept mediocrity and call it excellence. To be honest, that's true of most private schools too. And while I would give the finest academic high school education nod to the very, very top private schools, I am not willing to say that they prepare leaders any more effectively than public schools. After all, private schools have the luxury of selecting their students. Those students are supposed to be the most capable, so you'd expect them to be more successful on the whole than public school kids.

For what it's worth, here are some leaders who graduated from public school in Massachusetts:

Scott Brown
Barney Frank
Jack Welch (former GE CEO)
Paul Tsongas
Mike Dukakis

Additionally, I believe these relatively recent presidents attended public high school, though not in Massachusetts (and interestingly NOT Barack Obama, who went to Punahou, the most exclusive private school in Hawaii):

Ronald Reagan
Jimmy Carter
Gerald Ford
Bill Clinton
Richard Nixon

A few others of note:

Newt Gingrich
Orin Hatch
Harry Reid

Maybe all of these people succeed in spite of attending public schools. But I wouldn't be at all surprised if they would all attribute some of their success to experiences they had in public school, perhaps lessons learned because they had to deal with a broad cross-section of our society in their youth.