Hold Backs Getting out of Control...

He'sStuckAreYouBlind said:
What do you consider "taking shots at a kid"?

It's not unfair to say a kid might've had less success if they were younger. That's just truth.

The people who care are the people who think it's morally wrong to hold a kid back in school for the sole purpose of gaining an age advantage in sports. The OHSAA rule was intended for kids who were struggling academically and needed to be held back.

But you're right. That's just me and there's plenty of people who don't think the way I do. It's not "taking a shot at a kid" to say his success is largely due to his extra time. That is fact. You can't argue it because you can't prove it wrong. You had the chance to prove you could win at 14 or 15, but you chose to hold back. Therefore, you don't have the right to say he could've won it when he was younger, or that the extra year isn't what made him a better wrestler. The extra year DID make them a better wrestler and it eliminated other good wrestlers from being in their way. No, TribeTime, you might not have said these things, but many others on here are.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of people that can argue there kids won @ 15 yrs old, they don't because it never mattered to them. They never needed the excuse!
 
Last edited:
He'sStuckAreYouBlind said:
What do you consider "taking shots at a kid"?

It's not unfair to say a kid might've had less success if they were younger. That's just truth.

The people who care are the people who think it's morally wrong to hold a kid back in school for the sole purpose of gaining an age advantage in sports. The OHSAA rule was intended for kids who were struggling academically and needed to be held back.

But you're right. That's just me and there's plenty of people who don't think the way I do. It's not "taking a shot at a kid" to say his success is largely due to his extra time. That is fact. You can't argue it because you can't prove it wrong. You had the chance to prove you could win at 14 or 15, but you chose to hold back. Therefore, you don't have the right to say he could've won it when he was younger, or that the extra year isn't what made him a better wrestler. The extra year DID make them a better wrestler and it eliminated other good wrestlers from being in their way. No, TribeTime, you might not have said these things, but many others on here are.
Click to expand...
Did the OHSAA say that their intention with the rule change was to allow students that were held back for academic reasons to participate in sports or is that your interpretation?
 
SPGT said:
There are plenty of people that can argue there kids won @ 15 yrs old, they don't because it never mattered to them. They never needed to excuse!
Click to expand...
I hope those are 15 year old Juniors you're referring to.

15 year old freshman don't count secondary to being obvious hold backs 😂
 
SPGT said:
There are plenty of people that can argue there kids won @ 15 yrs old, they don't because it never mattered to them. They never needed to excuse!
Click to expand...
I'm not following what you're trying to say. Sorry
Buckeye454 said:
Did the OHSAA say that their intention with the rule change was to allow students that were held back for academic reasons to participate in sports or is that your interpretation?
Click to expand...

Prove me wrong
 
He'sStuckAreYouBlind said:
I'm not following what you're trying to say. Sorry


Prove me wrong
Click to expand...

An alternative theory is that the OHSAA recognized that not all kids start school when they're three...

Alternatively, and I know this is going to be controversial, maybe someone at the OHSAA recognizes that not every 13/14-year-old kid is physically mature enough to compete with an 18-year-old Senior (I think that's a safe graduating age that everybody has agreed upon?)

My point is that to assign intent to the rule without a statement from OHSAA is pure speculation.

The rule wasn't changed that long ago. It actually allowed athletes to compete older. If they wanted to assign an academic criteria to that, they very well could have. They didn't.
 
SPGT said:
My kid turned 15 Nov. of his freshman yr. Not a holdback in any grade.
Click to expand...
A jab at the "anti-holdback club", not your kid. Sounds like he will graduate at 18 which I think we've established is perfectly normal (and also none of our business). Congrats on your success- sounds like it's well deserved.
 
Buckeye454 said:
A jab at the "anti-holdback club", not your kid. Sounds like he will graduate at 18 which I think we've established is perfectly normal (and also none of our business). Congrats on your success- sounds like it's well deserved.
Click to expand...
I didn't take it as a jab, I'm not anti holdback club, (I'm a "don't really care" if you are playing inside the established rule club). my point is I have never worried about the hold back guys because if never really mattered. My kid wrestled hold back seniors, his freshman year and beat them, two were nationally ranked. I'm not standing on a soap box telling you how good my kid is, I'm telling you anyone can beat. I never let him use they are older than me as an excuse.
 
One thing to ask is how many of the dads were held back?Its easy to do it to your kid but how many had to deal with it themselve's.
 
He'sStuckAreYouBlind said:
What do you consider "taking shots at a kid"?

It's not unfair to say a kid might've had less success if they were younger. That's just truth.

The people who care are the people who think it's morally wrong to hold a kid back in school for the sole purpose of gaining an age advantage in sports. The OHSAA rule was intended for kids who were struggling academically and needed to be held back.

But you're right. That's just me and there's plenty of people who don't think the way I do. It's not "taking a shot at a kid" to say his success is largely due to his extra time. That is fact. You can't argue it because you can't prove it wrong. You had the chance to prove you could win at 14 or 15, but you chose to hold back. Therefore, you don't have the right to say he could've won it when he was younger, or that the extra year isn't what made him a better wrestler. The extra year DID make them a better wrestler and it eliminated other good wrestlers from being in their way. No, TribeTime, you might not have said these things, but many others on here are.
Click to expand...
The shot at the kid wasn’t intended at you, you didn’t take shots but others have. I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, I’m not team holdback or team anti holdback. There is advantages for sure, I’m team don’t bash the kid ( wasn’t you) for a parent holding them back for sports & in this particular case wrestling.
 
"Districts choose either Aug. 1 or Sept. 30 as the date by which a child must be 5 years old to enter kindergarten. Each school district should display this information on its website or be able to provide a parent who asks with the district’s age cut-off date for kindergarten."
"But a family can choose to wait until a child turns 6 before enrolling the child in kindergarten."
So if a child attends a school district that has chosen September 30 as its cutoff date for kindergarten, a child whose birthday is in September may start kindergarten the month before in August when the child is still shy of the child's fifth birthday.
I guess the September cutoff has been the law for many years as the youngest kids in my grade had September birthdays; they all started kindergarten when they were four and turned five after school had started (back then, right after Labor Day). They graduated from the eighth grade at 13, turned 14 in September of their freshman year, had to wait until their junior year to take driver's ed, graduated with they were 17, and were in college a month or so before turning 18. This was normal back then for those kids.
The oldest kids in my class of course had October or November birthdays from the previous year and took driver's ed during the fall of their sophomore year, something everyone else envied.
I know that times have changed and parents of a child who has a September birth date and lives in a school district that has the September 30 cutoff date would never send that child to kindergarten in August before the child turns five, sports or no sports. I guess all kinds of studies say that such kids should wait a year.
 
My sister's birthday is Aug 21. She graduated from high school at 17. She was already at college when she turned 18. I'll have to ask her if she would have rather waited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top