I was just sitting down reading a story from a web-site yesterday only to find that there was somone in Ohio who wanted to ban all star games.  Normally I don't react to what somone is saying, but this really bugged the hell out of me.

Here is the link to the article if anyone wants to see for themselves.  In this article he is talking about kids younger than 10 years old.

If you dont have time to read it, let me give you the coles notes version.  Bascially what is being said is that the writer of the letter wants to ban the all-star game because it shatters a person self-confidence and can bruise the kids ego. 

Then he compares it to school and says that if a kid is learning numbers and letters quicker, do we call then "special" or "gifted".  Then he compared the all-star game to taking a vegetarian to a fancy steakhouse and or a person on a strick diet to a buffet.

Next he says all these games do is reward the kids who have developed quicker, then he got rediculous and said that all-star games with children at a young age can lead to injuries with extra games and practices.  I'll use a direct quote and he says "They take a toll on young bodies and lead to an avalanche of overuse injuries."

Then he goes on from there talking about how you should take a stand and help in the fight to ban all-star games in general, or something along those lines.

I don't know what to say after something like this.  This was written by the guy who wanted the great institution of the "Participant" trophy installed at every youth sports league in North America.  Whenever someone wants their child not to feel upset by belittleing other accomplishment bugs me to no end.

This letter was probably written by a parent who thinks their son or daughter when they are signed up for sports is going on to better things even though they can't tie their own shoes yet.  Then when their child got passed over for an all-star team, they are just so upset and they use the old addage of if I can't have it no one can.

Then he proceeds to damage his stance on the issue further saying that it can lead to a bruised ego when a child is passed over for an all-star team.  If your kids who is younger than 10 years old knows what an all-star team is unless he is watching the peofessionals, you have missed the point.  A 10 year old isn't going to be drafted tomorrow so whether or not he makes an all-star team should be irrelevant.

Next we have the overuse injuries comment.  You know what else provides overuse injuries to kids, playing video games for hours on end and eating bag after bag after bag of chips.  That also adds to the kids being severely overweight and less interested in sports. 

At least when kids are playing sports like baseball, basketball and football, they have a goal to strive for in being a great player, who is better -yes some kids are going to be better and it is not based solely on whether or not they have developed some are more skilled than others- than other players on their team.

Why should somones accomplishments be torn down to make other feel better about themselves?

I say that all-star teams are great because the ones who are passed over will try harder and they will try to become a better player.  Being dissappointed builds character in a person and isn't that more important in raising a productive member of society.  When kids get dissappointed at a young age, they learn how to persevere and get beyond road blocks.

If you don't teach a kid dissappointment at a young age what is going to happen when s/he hits middle age and goes off sulking when he didn't get a big account at the law firm s/he may work at.  It motivates them to become better at what they are doing and gets them working harder to achieve that goal.

Nobody celebrates mediocraty and by banning the all-star game, that is exactly what you are doing.  You saying that everyone is equal, which in many cases, like sports and life, they are not.  If you say to a kid that everyone gets a trophy for participating, the kid will be conditioned to think that way their entire life.

Listen to a lot of recruiting stories for big college programs.  Not everyone can go to USC, so when teams play USC, there is a little extra motivation to try and beat them to show them what the missed.  Ian Johnson, runningback at Boise State was passed over at UCLA, and has gone on to become one of the best runningbacks in college football.  What may have motivated him to this level, somone telling him he was not good enough.  Johnson was passed over on an all-star team and went on to great things in spite of his situation.

If you remove the all-star game you will be a lot more harm than good, by raising a nation of soft people, like the ones on American Idol who think they are excellent even though they are probably the worst on the planet, everyones great accomplishments will be downgraded and belittled to make everyone appear equal.  No one is equal or we would all be playing professionally.

I learned this concept when I was playing minor hockey and was passed over for an all-star team.  It motivated me to become a better player and then I kept moving up in levels.  When I got to my highgest level that gave me an incredible sense of accomplishment and I felt good about my self.

If there was no all-star game, maybe I wouldn't have gotten as high up as I did.  An All-Star game made me a better person, and I wasn't even apart of the game.  The team I was passed over for gave me motivation to get better, it taught me to peresevere and be a driven person and to work hard for everything I got.

By removing the All-Star game and start giving trophys to everyone, you create a culture of entitlement and then when somone doesn't receive a "good job" or an "atta boy" thats when it hurts the kids development.

When these people realize that they are hurting the kids rather than helping them, we will get a better kids and better professionals, because somone didn't say to them, "Congratulations Participant"