Stacking a team in sports occurs when all (or most) of the best players in a league are assigned to one team. Stacked teams are built intentionally to experience a greater chance of on-field success — and this is usually what occurs. Sometimes a team ends up being stacked by random, as is the case when youth sport teams are based on a draft and one team ends up with better kids as a result of chance. But what about when teams are intentionally built by using only the best players? Does creating a super team enhance, or hurt, the spirit of competition? Today, we see stacked teams purposely created at the youth sport level, and with the NCAA now allowing unlimited transfers, many college programs are finding it easier than ever to load up on the very best players. Are we seeing authentic champions today, or merely teams that have gone “all in” with resources to select the very best athletes for their teams? Is this fun and healthy, or just an easy shortcut to experiencing “success?”
Easy wins, or earning victories?
As the NCAA de-regulates, it’s now what many would call the wild, wild west. Schools with rich football history have massive fiscal advantages over less able schools, and this translates directly toward getting the best players by either recruiting, or the transfer portal. What this means is that aside from Disney movies, you won’t be seeing too many big upsets in the future as the gap between have’s and have nots widens exponentially. What this also likely means is that the same few schools will play for a championship each year, while the majority of schools watch. As the fans from these stacked schools gloat and boast about their team’s annual success, it seems to never be lost on them the huge advantage they have these days. Is this good for competition? Sports?
Scale this model down to youth sports in your hometown — what if one soccer team loaded up by taking the 10 best players, then let the rest of the teams in the league draft the remaining kids. In most instances the stacked team is going to win fairly easily, but what joy should be taken out of such a lopsided and unfair sport experience? Is this what we call earning a championship? Of course not, but these days it seems like many people don’t care — as the late Raiders owner Al Davis used to say, “Just win, baby!” Is it just about results, regardless of how the success is achieved? Or do championships mean a lot more when they are earned against worthy opponents?
If you talk to current and former athletes, you will soon learn that it is almost always the path — or the grind — toward success that was most memorable about a successful season. Battling against tough opponents and overcoming adversity is what makes the success so satisfying, providing memories for a lifetime. What is not so fun or memorable is winning because your team is a designed “super team” playing against clearly inferior opponents. It is the spirit of fair competition that occurs when teams are roughly similar in talent that pushes athletes mentally, physically, and emotionally to play their best, and this is the ultimate sport experience.
Final thoughts
Team stacking sure seems to occur a lot these days, but before you go organizing the best team possible — and justify doing so by assuming every other team is doing the same — perhaps a brief pause may help. Winning by means of simply having the best team may be a bit hollow, while building up a normal team that beats better teams will create memories of a lifetime. And at the end of the day, very few of the kids you parent/coach are going to end up being professional athletes, so why not help them develop character, athletic transferable skills, and memories from their sport experiences? Healthy competition is the best way to accomplish those goals, not creating super teams that roll the competition.
drstankovich.com
