Difference between fine JPEG and Standard JPEG

Is there much difference between the large, fine JPEG setting and the large, standard JPEG as far as image quality if used in smaller prints? I many times will email photos of kids to their parents from a sporting event and some of the fine JPEG images are 5-7 MP in size, if they are uncropped. How much quality is lost stepping down to the standard large JPEG? Just curious as some smaller files might make the work flow better.

You merely need to begin answering the question for yourself conceptually, "What do I lose in 'quality' shooting with a 10MB camera vs. with a 2MB camera?"

A: Resolution in the photo

...limits the amount of small detail which can be seen when the photo is enlarged to a bigger final print
...and increases the 'stair step' effect ('aliasing') seen in any edges which are not perfectly horizontal or perfect vertical.

The actual amount anyone would notice is 'it depends'

upon the specifics of the camera model used to take the Standard vs. the Fine photo (as there is not a single uniform standard for those terms!)
upon the amount that the viewer decides to 'zoom' the image on his/her monitor

For small prints, a 5-7MB JPEG is serious overkill. (You mean MB, not MP, right?)

Yes, my typo - I meant MB, not MP! Sorry

I have always shot the fine large JPEG format for sports. I might have to experiment a bit. I usually only do some cropping as far as PP work.

Keep in mind that you can use the Convert and Save feature in DPP to downsize things. It has two settings you can play with. One is the number of pixels per side, where it will maintain the original aspect ratio, and one is the quality. I always use this to drop things down for uploading to wherever I put it on the internet. So you could maintain the higher quality shot setting and then reduce the size later. I've dropped stuff down from 10 MB to around 800 K and they still look pretty sharp.

Since we don't know the camera, we don't know if it's using a higher level of compression, or actually reducing the pixel dimensions, or both.

Canon allows both options. If I wanted to save space I would lean towards reducing pixel dimensions before increasing compression.

The 'Quality' parameter generally controls the degree to which the JPG compression of color hues occurs...think of high 'Quality' doing little to compress hues in the sky, while low 'Quality' might leave clearly visible bands of blue in the sky due to the compression used to reduce the high number of different hues to a low number of different hues of blue.

The camera is a 7D Mk II