- Dec 14, 2009
- 746
- 1,777
I get where you are coming from here. Unfortunately, like most things in our industry to have a postive option there are the negative sides of it as well. That 25% replacement is not intended specifically for replacing athletes for ones with higher skills. The intention is that this gives the coach a cushion to replace athletes if needed for injuries or if a parent cannot afford the cost of an end of the year event. In this instance I believe that if the team has earned a paid bid then the new athlete absolutely deserves the rights to that paid bid. However, it is nearly impossible to word the process in way that the 25% is only for injuries and financial burdens that would also allow for the elimination of the ability for a team to stack their team with 25% of higher level athletes. It is just the nature of the beast of our sport.