Elite or Entitled

Calling a child or coach “elite” has become disturbingly common in youth sports. A convenient label that often says more about ambition, and social status than about demonstrable athletic development. Too many parents and coaches prefer the image of elite status over the slow, sometimes boring work of developing the underlying skills, physical qualities, and psychological resilience that actually produce elite performers. When the badge of “elite” replaces a commitment to evidence‑based progression, the result is entitlement, misplaced control, and stalled long‑term growth.

Talent, at its core, is a set of trainable capacities expressed over time, not a static badge you apply at age 10. Decades of research into talent development show that high‑performance outcomes are the product of prolonged, targeted practice, appropriate periods of sampling and specialization, and careful management of growth and training loads. Early labels can short‑circuit this process by creating pressure to specialize prematurely or to chase quick visible wins instead of building durable athleticism.

Parental involvement is indispensable… Supportive parents enable access, resources, and emotional stability, but when involvement becomes control driven by ego, it undermines development. Parents who insist on dictating training, coaching choices, or playing time without sport‑specific knowledge can disrupt coherent, periodized development plans and put short‑term visibility above long‑term athlete health. The dynamic shifts further when parents treat performance as an extension of identity, rewarding outcomes that elevate their status rather than fostering independent athlete growth.

Coaches are not immune to the problem as we see so often in the Roaring Fork Valley. In club environments, confidence and certainty are currency, and some coaches overstate credentials or simplify complex developmental processes to sell programs. Misleading claims about “Athlete Enhancement” or “Elite Performance” exploits parental fears and desires. Responsible coaching practice requires humility, transparency about limits of prediction, and adherence to validated development models. Something research on coach education and expertise repeatedly emphasizes.

The correct approach is straightforward: use objective, longitudinal markers and output statistics rather than badges and anecdotes. High‑quality athlete development programs monitor growth and maturation, neuromuscular performance, technical skill progression, and training load over time. Simple, repeatable tests: sprint times, jump metrics, strength benchmarks, RIR or session RPE load tracking, and sport‑specific skill assessments. This provides the data to separate true potential from momentary dominance due to early maturation or superior coaching in a narrow skill set.

Monitoring serves three practical functions. First, it diagnoses where an athlete actually is (physical capacities, skill level, injury risk) Second, it guides individualized programming that prioritizes deficits and builds transfer to sport tasks. Third, it protects welfare by identifying sudden spikes in load or lack of adaptation responses that predict injury. When parents and coaches use these outputs as the basis for decisions, the conversation shifts from status to substance.

Developing top‑tier athletes is not mystical, it is repetitive. Effective pathways balance progressive overload, varied motor learning, and psychosocial support. Models that emphasize diversified early experiences followed by gradual specialization produce more robust athletes and reduce burnout. Likewise, strength and conditioning protocols aligned with maturation stages For example, emphasizing movement quality and relative strength in pre‑pubertal years and systematic power and speed development during / after maturation, are evidence based and reproducible.

Culture matters. Teams and programs that reward curiosity, self‑efficacy, and coachable behaviors produce resilient performers. Parents who ask questions about testing, progression, and long‑term plans, and who defer to qualified professionals for programming decisions, are helping their children more than those who demand immediate prominence. Coaches should provide clear metrics, realistic timelines, and transparent communication so families can participate constructively rather than commandeer the process.

In short: “elite” is earned through measurable progression, not conferred through desire. Parents and coaches who substitute labels for data and control for collaboration are more likely cultivating entitlement than excellence. The antidote is simple but disciplined.. Commit to evidence‑based monitoring, respect developmental timelines, and prioritize long‑term athlete welfare and performance over ego driven titles.

Sources:

- Côté, J., Baker, J., & Abernethy, B. (2007). Practice and play in the development of sport expertise. In G. Tenenbaum & R. C. Eklund (Eds.), Handbook of sport psychology.

- Côté, J., Lidor, R., & Hackfort, D. (2009). ISSP position stand: To sample or to specialize? International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology.

- Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch‑Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review.

- Gabbett, T. (2016). The training—injury prevention paradox: should athletes be training smarter and harder? British Journal of Sports Medicine.

- Harwood, C., & Knight, C. (2015). Parenting in youth sport: A position paper on parenting expertise. Psychology of Sport and Exercise.

- Impellizzeri, F. M., Marcora, S. M., & Coutts, A. J. (2019). Internal and external training load: 15 years on. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance.

- Jayanthi, N., Pinkham, C., Dugas, L., Patrick, B., & LaBella, C. (2013). Sports specialization in young athletes: evidence‑based recommendations. Sports Health.

- Jones, R., Armour, K., & Potrac, P. (2004). Sports coaching cultures: From practice to theory. Routledge.

- Lloyd, R. S., et al. (2014). National Strength and Conditioning Association position statement on long‑term athletic development. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research.

- Malina, R. M. (2014). Maturation and athlete development: A brief overview. American Journal of Human Biology.

- Vaeyens, R., Lenoir, M., Williams, A. M., & Philippaerts, R. M. (2008). Talent identification and development programmes in sport. Sports Medicine.