|
I am originally from Illinois, where we sometimes play two tournament games in a day and we don't have these quarters of play limits (Normal Community West played two games in the Peoria Richwoods touranament on Friday). Add to this that my own team that I coach regularly plays two games in a day, and we have played far more. Suffice to say I don't even like the idea of having to deal with these limits.
JV is a great way for a young varsity player to get some experience against her peers, to be a star. On varsity she may get to play, but be limited in role. Allowing younger players to be in both types of game gives them the varsity experience while also allowing them to develop aspects of their game that they may only be able to develop at the JV level. My AAU players star for their MS teams, and many have to be role players on my team. While they get a valuable experieince playing for me, some will find their MS time most valuable because it allows them to develop their own game. I am all for allowing kids to play as much as possible. Of course, the board that created this wacky limit does not see things the same way I do.
The advantage concept should not be what you are thinking about. The rule was not created with the intent that the coach may have to play a kid in JV, thus imperiling his varsity won-loss record. It is not intended to be a factor in the outcome of varsity games (i.e., you roll the dice when you put a varsity player on your JV bench - it may mean you can't play her in the varsity game). It should only influence a varsity game when the coach makes the decision to play the kid extra JV quarters.
What is good for the player? The player clearly benefits from being able to get some JV time along with her varsity time. But varsity is what really counts, and those games are almost always going to come after the JV games. It isn't the fault of the coach or some nefarious scheme of the coach to take advantage of a rule when the coach plays a kid for two quarters and sits her. That's what the rule is telling the coach he must do. It is a limit (outside the NFHS rules) that is placed on the coach that has created this situation, and he is just managing the playing time to allow a young varsity player to get a little JV time on the side. Neither the player nor the varsity team should have to pay a price for a simple decision to suit a player for a half of basketball in which nob0ody intends for her to play.
I would agree that once the player is declared "ineligible" due to being out of quarters, you should note it in the book and the coach is not free to revisit this determination.
|