Another year another large high school football stadium in the eight figures. “We love our football here in Texas, don’t we?” Yes we do. But damn.
“Dad, I just heard that Pacman Jones’ adopted son is transferring to our school, I don’t think I’ll be starting at my position this year, after all.”
My town will become the next suburb to be a hotbed for “recruits”. For any coach or educator to recruit high school student/athletes for the sole purpose of the kid playing sports at their school is a violation of UIL rules, but, as you can imagine, those coaches get around that all the time. Just have Deion Sanders’ son say he’s coming for the great teachers and academics, not the football program, and he won’t have to sit out a year, which is the current penalty for transferring high schools for purposes of athletics. (And if he’s transferring during his senior year, he’s counting on not being required to sit out a year, otherwise he misses his senior year.)
I have spoken to parents in other towns, in a personal and professional capacity, and their concern is that their kid, who is a junior or senior now, who has grown up in the school district, who has put the work in on and off the field, and who is next in line to start on the football team, has now seen that spot filled by an athlete who transferred in. And not just any athlete, of course. Usually one of the best in the area. Just as the local kid is about to get his day under the sun, the kid who has lived in this town all his life, and start for his team—MOVE OVER, here comes new blood:some former NFL athlete’s son is transferring in at that very position, and you, kid, are getting a demotion. Or hey, don’t call it a demotion, because you never had the spot to begin with. You are going to stay where you are. No varsity football for you.
It used to be that the parents would see the writing on the wall ahead of time, and move their kids out to a more rural school just so their kid would have a better chance to play. Well, then the same kid at that other, smaller school who is being replaced will be in the same position, until there’s a rural transfer somewhere by a quarterback to a school district with 11 men total in it, just enough to fill one side of a football team.
Which side are you on? Are you the one that says “tough shit” to the parents who complain that their child will now not get to start because some four-star recruit has moved to town? Or are you against these transfers, sympathizing with the kid who is getting replaced just before the start of his senior year?
Maybe you don’t need to take a side yet. Your kid is three years old, say. “C’mon, John, the world will change so much in 14 years. Hell, the local car dealership might start paying the high school quarterback by then, and then all this nuance and sleight-of-hand recruiting will be peanuts compared to the train that’s coming. Soon Hooters or your local gentlemen’s establishment will be paying the school to put their name on the front of the kids’ jerseys, and the taxpayers will get a break after paying down the fancy stadium for ten years.
There is so much to consider. Just like in college, the better your football team is, the more the community is excited, and the more the community is excited, the more people want to join in on that excitement (i.e., move to your city). And the more people that move to your city, the more revenue that comes in (businesses, restaurants, wealthier individuals), which self-fulfills upwards, and then the standard of living increases altogether. Or at least your options increase. And you benefit from this, I guess, in some way, like more tax dollars for more public projects.
That’s the theory anyway.
Since the NFL sentiment of paying players has now made its way to NCAA football, do you think it’s a matter of time before we pay high school players as well? Why or why not? They’re already televising these high school games. Who gets paid from that ad revenue in broadcasting the game? Are educators not “stuffing” their pockets in the same way the NCAA and all its schools have been for the last 50 years with pay raises to administrators and not the actual educators, er—teachers?
If so, and if the principle holds from the college level, can a high school rising senior then pick and choose his high school based on a higher offer from a car dealership in that town than in the other town? Is it worth paying that kid? Does he really contribute to more revenue for the city, and more people moving there? Maybe. Perhaps not to the same extent that the revenue helps a college, where a better team means more non-athletic students paying full tuition to attend your school so they can tailgate and get drunk and cheer on their top 25 team, and maybe attend a bowl game in a fun metropolis. But just you wait.
Maybe if you say “tough shit” to that child who gets replaced by the superstar kid, you are not a parent of that child. It would be hard to see the dejection on your high school junior’s face when he comes home and says CeeDee Lamb’s adopted son moved to town, with some address of a barndominium that is just barely registered with the city, and says, “Dad, looks like I won’t be starting at wide receiver this year after all.” This dejection, after the work you’ve seen him put in the last 5 years at least. As a parent, it would be very hard to witness that dejection.
I could say to my son, welcome to the free market, kid. Talent prevails. The best man wins. Just like capitalism.
But is capitalism—free market—the best way to address a football program? Is a liassez-faire attitude the best thing for this situation? Maybe Ron Swanson would think so. Maybe it’d be a good lesson for the kid, right? Welcome to the real world, life isn’t fair, etc. and so forth. But then if it’s the free market we’re teaching them, why not pay the high schoolers? Oh no way, that’s too far. We like the free market, just not for children. At least not out in the open.
So just like we have guardrails around capitalism, enforced by agencies—actually enforced—we ought to have the same for our kids. It’s hard to determine where to land on this. I guess it’s not my problem, yet. But I sympathize with the kid and the kid’s parent who waited a long time, put the work in to start at his or her position, only to get replaced by someone significantly better, immediately, with no advance warning.
It’s not like you beat out the guy next to you that you knew you had to beat out, that you’ve been competing with for years, all the way back to middle school. No, this is like you’re competing in your fifth grade spelling bee, your local one, and you’re kicking ass, spelling words like “thermometer” and “separate”, cruising through the bracket, and then all of a sudden you get to the final and they let a kid enter the tournament, last minute, you know, the one that can rattle off shit like “probouleutic” and “zwitterion” in his sleep, and you don’t even know what hit you. You’re no longer the best speller. You’re being replaced, and you’re not allowed to compete in the tournament anymore. Move aside.
The town will love the new stadium. The better the team, the more buzz. The more buzz, the more money. The school will love it. The community will love it. That kid being replaced? They will not love it.
コメント