|
Post by jrk5150 on Jun 29, 2016 10:08:51 GMT -6
Ha ha - perspective doesn't mean self-aware! That may never come... :-)
|
|
|
Post by coachjo14 on Jun 29, 2016 11:43:48 GMT -6
Darn terrible JV league quarterback is gonna be all "Uncle Rico" about how he woulda took us to a championship.... "Not a doubt in my mind".
As I've gotten older I realized I was a darn good player and while I dreamed of Sundays my DNA just wasn't right. I was always undersized (Until I got into coaching now im too fat lol) and got to a point where I just couldn't stay healthy. I'm ok with that. I accept my part. I know a lot of guys and parents who are still blaming so and so for not being rich and famous. Sheesh!
|
|
|
Post by cqmiller on Jun 29, 2016 12:51:23 GMT -6
30 kids seems like you could almost do a "platoon" with your best 6 kids playing full time both ways if you want:
6 best kids on Offense/Defense split next 10 kids into 5 on offense and 5 on defense to keep your starting 11 on both sides as your top 16 players (about 1/2 of your kids) The remaining 14 kids put 7 on offense and 7 on defense. When your 6 studs need a breather, get those kids reps. Couple of plays every-other-series or soemthing like that.
If they really want playing time, around here most teams below 9th grade max at 15 kids... split into 2 teams.
|
|
|
Post by 44dlcoach on Jul 21, 2016 23:19:53 GMT -6
30 kids seems like you could almost do a "platoon" with your best 6 kids playing full time both ways if you want: 6 best kids on Offense/Defense split next 10 kids into 5 on offense and 5 on defense to keep your starting 11 on both sides as your top 16 players (about 1/2 of your kids) The remaining 14 kids put 7 on offense and 7 on defense. When your 6 studs need a breather, get those kids reps. Couple of plays every-other-series or soemthing like that. If they really want playing time, around here most teams below 9th grade max at 15 kids... split into 2 teams. Late to the party but I love this idea. No reason you can't switch those "2nd tier" and "3rd tier" players from O to D and vice versa every week or every couple weeks to keep them learning and playing multiple positions either.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jul 22, 2016 7:48:28 GMT -6
I also think when you're a program, the program winning plays into it. For example, you can afford to lose some freshman games if your varsity program is successful. If the kids are learning and developing and getting playing time, the W's and L's aren't quite as important as long as they can look ahead and see a future for themselves. Doesn't quite work the same way in youth ball - the kids don't have the perspective, they are focused on the now. My experience in youth football is that the winning is almost always more important to the adults than it is to the kids.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 22, 2016 10:05:08 GMT -6
I also think when you're a program, the program winning plays into it. For example, you can afford to lose some freshman games if your varsity program is successful. If the kids are learning and developing and getting playing time, the W's and L's aren't quite as important as long as they can look ahead and see a future for themselves. Doesn't quite work the same way in youth ball - the kids don't have the perspective, they are focused on the now. My experience in youth football is that the winning is almost always more important to the adults than it is to the kids. A truer statement has not been typed on the Huey former. And we coaches are equally guilty.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Jul 26, 2016 13:26:44 GMT -6
I also think when you're a program, the program winning plays into it. For example, you can afford to lose some freshman games if your varsity program is successful. If the kids are learning and developing and getting playing time, the W's and L's aren't quite as important as long as they can look ahead and see a future for themselves. Doesn't quite work the same way in youth ball - the kids don't have the perspective, they are focused on the now. My experience in youth football is that the winning is almost always more important to the adults than it is to the kids. I don't disagree, but I WOULD disagree with a statement that winning doesn't matter to the kids. I don't see too many 0-8 programs with great retention. I'm sure it's possible, but kids don't like to lose. Now, is it more important for them to go 7-1 vs. 5-3 or even 4-4? Probably not. I think you can definitely get carried away on the winning thing, which is why I agree with your post as written.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jul 26, 2016 21:11:21 GMT -6
My experience in youth football is that the winning is almost always more important to the adults than it is to the kids. I don't disagree, but I WOULD disagree with a statement that winning doesn't matter to the kids. I don't see too many 0-8 programs with great retention. I'm sure it's possible, but kids don't like to lose. Now, is it more important for them to go 7-1 vs. 5-3 or even 4-4? Probably not. I think you can definitely get carried away on the winning thing, which is why I agree with your post as written. It may matter to some kids, but not much and certainly not anywhere CLOSE to how much it matters to the coaches. I put parents in the same category as the kids. Parents want to come to the game and watch their kid play and be a contributor. Parents really don't care what the score and the record is as long as their kid is treated fairly, plays more snaps than they sit, and is viewed as a valued member of the program. In many communities, this holds true for parents through high school. I have run our youth program (5th/6th grade) for 6 years. We have lost games that we would have otherwise won had we played our "best" 11 players. But we don't do that. We play everyone. Everyone either starts somewhere or is in a rotation with other kids. And we NEVER have parents and kids complain about losing games. And we win more than we lose but it is all in perspective. Winning is FAR from the most important priority in our program but that still works well for us (3 undefeated seasons in 6 years is pretty good for not playing the best 11 kids all the time, IMO). For the vast majority of kids playing youth football (and this probably extends all the way through high school), winning is NOT their most important priority. Keeping score and tallying wins and losses...I would guarantee that more youth coaches than youth players would know those numbers 6 months after the season is over.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Jul 27, 2016 14:11:25 GMT -6
I put parents in the same category as the kids. Parents want to come to the game and watch their kid play and be a contributor. Parents really don't care what the score and the record is as long as their kid is treated fairly, plays more snaps than they sit, and is viewed as a valued member of the program. In many communities, this holds true for parents through high school. Parents come in all different kinds. Many of our parents couldn't even keep score, because they're not from football cultures. At the other extreme are those who don't have time to coach, so instead they'll just back-seat drive your coaching. There are parents who want to see their children in the game as long as possible, and others who'd just as soon their children not expose themselves to possible injury (their spouse or maybe other relative put up the registration fee, they reluctantly signed the consent form). There are parents who are just glad to have the kids off their hands for a while. And finally, there are the parents who just plain want their kids to have a good time, regardless of how they do it.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Jul 27, 2016 21:18:01 GMT -6
I don't disagree, but I WOULD disagree with a statement that winning doesn't matter to the kids. I don't see too many 0-8 programs with great retention. I'm sure it's possible, but kids don't like to lose. Now, is it more important for them to go 7-1 vs. 5-3 or even 4-4? Probably not. I think you can definitely get carried away on the winning thing, which is why I agree with your post as written. It may matter to some kids, but not much and certainly not anywhere CLOSE to how much it matters to the coaches. I put parents in the same category as the kids. Parents want to come to the game and watch their kid play and be a contributor. Parents really don't care what the score and the record is as long as their kid is treated fairly, plays more snaps than they sit, and is viewed as a valued member of the program. In many communities, this holds true for parents through high school. I have run our youth program (5th/6th grade) for 6 years. We have lost games that we would have otherwise won had we played our "best" 11 players. But we don't do that. We play everyone. Everyone either starts somewhere or is in a rotation with other kids. And we NEVER have parents and kids complain about losing games. And we win more than we lose but it is all in perspective. Winning is FAR from the most important priority in our program but that still works well for us (3 undefeated seasons in 6 years is pretty good for not playing the best 11 kids all the time, IMO). For the vast majority of kids playing youth football (and this probably extends all the way through high school), winning is NOT their most important priority. Keeping score and tallying wins and losses...I would guarantee that more youth coaches than youth players would know those numbers 6 months after the season is over. I'm not sure that we're disagreeing - seems like you are disagreeing with me, but you're post really isn't anything I have a different opinion on. I agree it's not THE most important thing to kids OR parents. Maybe not even top 3 things. But I still believe it is important. Unfortunately there really isn't any way to KNOW, there are just too many variables year to year. My org's retention this year is much worse than it has been in the last 10 years, coming off our worst year W/L as an org in decades. But there are still too many variables to know for sure why. But I'll tell you what - keep doing the right things (which to me is obvious that you are), and go 0-fer for a couple of years doing all those right things, and see what happens with retention and parent complaints. My guess is down and up, but who knows. :-)
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Jul 27, 2016 21:19:04 GMT -6
I put parents in the same category as the kids. Parents want to come to the game and watch their kid play and be a contributor. Parents really don't care what the score and the record is as long as their kid is treated fairly, plays more snaps than they sit, and is viewed as a valued member of the program. In many communities, this holds true for parents through high school. Parents come in all different kinds. Many of our parents couldn't even keep score, because they're not from football cultures. At the other extreme are those who don't have time to coach, so instead they'll just back-seat drive your coaching. There are parents who want to see their children in the game as long as possible, and others who'd just as soon their children not expose themselves to possible injury (their spouse or maybe other relative put up the registration fee, they reluctantly signed the consent form). There are parents who are just glad to have the kids off their hands for a while. And finally, there are the parents who just plain want their kids to have a good time, regardless of how they do it. That's why I said I put parents in the same category as the kids. Like the kids, whether or not the team wins is WAY down the list of priorities for most parents. I'm not really sure what you are arguing with.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Jul 27, 2016 21:25:45 GMT -6
That's why I said I put parents in the same category as the kids. Like the kids, whether or not the team wins is WAY down the list of priorities for most parents. I'm not really sure what you are arguing with. Eh, I guess I can find one word of disagreement - I don't think it's WAY down, but it ain't at the top for most, sure.
|
|
|
Post by bobgoodman on Jul 27, 2016 23:37:02 GMT -6
Parents come in all different kinds. Many of our parents couldn't even keep score, because they're not from football cultures. At the other extreme are those who don't have time to coach, so instead they'll just back-seat drive your coaching. There are parents who want to see their children in the game as long as possible, and others who'd just as soon their children not expose themselves to possible injury (their spouse or maybe other relative put up the registration fee, they reluctantly signed the consent form). There are parents who are just glad to have the kids off their hands for a while. And finally, there are the parents who just plain want their kids to have a good time, regardless of how they do it. That's why I said I put parents in the same category as the kids. Like the kids, whether or not the team wins is WAY down the list of priorities for most parents. I'm not really sure what you are arguing with. What makes you think I'm arguing?
|
|
|
Post by murph2120 on May 1, 2017 16:03:41 GMT -6
You take your worst 9 players and put them on a 2nd unit offense with your top two kids at QB and one of fhe runningback spots. You have them remember a 4 play no huddle system to get their plays done quickly. You run plays 1 through 4 in the same order. My plays were
1. Fullback dive 2. Fullback dive 3. HB Iso/Lead 4. Fake Iso/Lead - QB keep away
If they get a first down at any point they start at play #1 and stay in the game. Most of the time when we got a first down with that group it was on play #4 with my best athlete on the QB run
We had a 30 man roster... so thats 20 kids taken care of. The middle of the road kids can play defense. Hopefully a few of those kids are pretty good and you dont mind them being on the field.
Hope this helped
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 3, 2017 15:34:56 GMT -6
Statistics have shown that kids quit sports at the lower levels because they're not playing. An eleven year old is not going to rally behind a winning team from the sidelines if they're not playing. They are focused on the "here and now"; they've practiced hard and now they want to play the game. It's not that difficult to pick up wins at the lower levels while getting all of the kids a ton of playing time.
1. Split between two evenly matched teams. One team plays offense one quarter, the other plays defense and then they swap.
2. Have a "best 11" group that you throw out there in game changing situations. Goal line, short yardage, game winning drives, etc..etc..
3. There are simple ways to hide your weaker players by position and by play calling. Hell, we hid some of our worst athletes at QB when we ran Wing-T at the youth/MS level because they're a nothing more than a glorified hand-off machine.
4. We always have our best 11 on special teams as big plays on that side of the ball are huge.
We won a youth league title about a decade ago and every one of the 23 kids we had on the team virtually got the same amount of playing time. We had to chart the playing time and saw that only a handful of kids got more time than the others.
|
|
|
Post by mkuempel on May 4, 2017 8:52:38 GMT -6
Very similar to what has been mentioned above, 11 "start" on offense in the first quarter, with a play runner or two (12-13 players playing consistently), another 11 "start" on defense in the 1st quarter (that's a minimum of 24 kids playing consistently in the 1st quarter), then swap O and D for the 2nd quarter (24 kids again playing consistently in 2nd quarter). If you are interested in winning, the 2nd half becomes a little more time for the "better" players, maybe start your best 11 on both sides and rotate lower level kids a series or two through the quarter, then the 4th quarter can become "winning time", play your best 11 all over the place.
My goal for our youth program is for every single one of those players to play high school football, so I want to eliminate any reason (within our control) they have for not playing in the future, playing time is one we are in complete control of, no one at all, even the "draft experts" can predict the future, so no one can tell who is going to end up being a player in 6th grade. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 8, 2017 9:51:05 GMT -6
About 11 years ago, I coached a 4th grade team with twenty-five kids (including three girls, lol) on it. We won every game leading up to the "championship" by doing what I described in my first post. The dipchit we played in the "championship" played thirteen out of his twenty-two kids that game and we lost by three points. We had fun all season long and no one griped once about losing the "title".. Twenty of our kids were still playing football by their 8th grade year. Ten of the opposing idiot's kids played the following year and he wasn't brought back to the league.
I really wish that all of my youth stints had been that much fun.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on May 8, 2017 10:31:03 GMT -6
no one at all, even the "draft experts" can predict the future, so no one can tell who is going to end up being a player in 6th grade. Just my opinion. I think this gets WAY overplayed. I can only speak to my own experience/observations, but based on the 13 years I've been in/around our youth program (which means I've seen hundreds of kids, which isn't all that much in the grand scheme of things), and certainly my experience growing up, I tend to disagree to some extent with this observation. Again just from what I've seen, the vast majority of the time the best kids at 10-12 years old are pretty much the best kids at 17. It's not absolute, I do see the occasional kid who falls behind once puberty sets in. But I have yet to see the other way happen - I haven't seen a single kid, in my life, go from a non-factor/can't get on the field at 12 to a real player at 16-17. Not one. I think it's certainly more possible/probable when you're dealing with a big kid going from marshmallow to dude, but I haven't personally seen that happen. That's a limitation of my experience. All I can say is that the best players every year on our local HS varsity team over the past 10 years were the best players on our youth teams at 10-11-12 years old. Without exception. And I don't recall a single HS varsity starter in that time who wasn't also a significant player as a youth. That said, I also don't want to overstate my own point - even if true, it doesn't really mean all that much. I've been pretty outspoken that my mission as a youth coach has nothing to do with the HS varsity program. My mission is to give these kids the best experience I can, and maximize retention. But I'm also not going to agree that everyone playing equal time is a good idea either - at least given the limitations of my coaching ability. I give kids plenty of chances in practice and games to perform and earn time. I don't bury kids. Historically the retention rate of the teams I've coached is very good, and I don't know that I've ever lost a kid because of playing time or anything like that. So while I am sure there are guys who do it better out there, I think I do a decent job with it. And I believe if I took a different approach - an "everyone plays equal time" approach, I'd lose most of our games and lose kids. Just my opinion. Interestingly enough, I am currently dealing with some fall out from last year, when we had one of our state's best HS coaches (no hyperbole there at all, he is that good) coaching the age group below me (his kid was on the team). Apparently there was a perception that he was spending a little too much time playing daddy-ball with his kid, and showing quite a bit of favoritism around the best handful of kids. Now we're dealing with a lot of those kids (and their parents) who don't want to come back because of him. I've had to assure them that he's not moving up to my staff, and that I do things a little differently. To each their own, I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by mkuempel on May 8, 2017 13:04:20 GMT -6
no one at all, even the "draft experts" can predict the future, so no one can tell who is going to end up being a player in 6th grade. Just my opinion. I think this gets WAY overplayed. I can only speak to my own experience/observations, but based on the 13 years I've been in/around our youth program (which means I've seen hundreds of kids, which isn't all that much in the grand scheme of things), and certainly my experience growing up, I tend to disagree to some extent with this observation. Again just from what I've seen, the vast majority of the time the best kids at 10-12 years old are pretty much the best kids at 17. It's not absolute, I do see the occasional kid who falls behind once puberty sets in. But I have yet to see the other way happen - I haven't seen a single kid, in my life, go from a non-factor/can't get on the field at 12 to a real player at 16-17. Not one. I think it's certainly more possible/probable when you're dealing with a big kid going from marshmallow to dude, but I haven't personally seen that happen. That's a limitation of my experience. All I can say is that the best players every year on our local HS varsity team over the past 10 years were the best players on our youth teams at 10-11-12 years old. Without exception. And I don't recall a single HS varsity starter in that time who wasn't also a significant player as a youth. That said, I also don't want to overstate my own point - even if true, it doesn't really mean all that much. I've been pretty outspoken that my mission as a youth coach has nothing to do with the HS varsity program. My mission is to give these kids the best experience I can, and maximize retention. But I'm also not going to agree that everyone playing equal time is a good idea either - at least given the limitations of my coaching ability. I give kids plenty of chances in practice and games to perform and earn time. I don't bury kids. Historically the retention rate of the teams I've coached is very good, and I don't know that I've ever lost a kid because of playing time or anything like that. So while I am sure there are guys who do it better out there, I think I do a decent job with it. And I believe if I took a different approach - an "everyone plays equal time" approach, I'd lose most of our games and lose kids. Just my opinion. Interestingly enough, I am currently dealing with some fall out from last year, when we had one of our state's best HS coaches (no hyperbole there at all, he is that good) coaching the age group below me (his kid was on the team). Apparently there was a perception that he was spending a little too much time playing daddy-ball with his kid, and showing quite a bit of favoritism around the best handful of kids. Now we're dealing with a lot of those kids (and their parents) who don't want to come back because of him. I've had to assure them that he's not moving up to my staff, and that I do things a little differently. To each their own, I suppose. The reason I say what I did above, is actually the opposite in our case. We've had a lot of kids who were studs in youth programs not necessarily get passed over athletically, but don't end up being studs in high school. They get in trouble, grade issues, etc. My point was that in our case, we need every kid who plays in youth to continue to play in high school. It sounds like you are doing a great job of giving the kids a great experience and keeping them playing through high school.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 8, 2017 13:34:07 GMT -6
Yes, generally speaking, your super athletic, football loving kids at the youth level will be starting under Friday night lights. But, how many of those kids do you have on a team? Maybe five or six? If you're lucky? In all reality, we have no idea where a lot of these kids will end up when they're juniors and seniors in high school. A few years of puberty sure does change some things..
|
|
|
Post by seabass on May 8, 2017 13:49:56 GMT -6
The kids who play a lot care a LOT about wins and losses. The kids who don't play don't care.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on May 8, 2017 20:04:02 GMT -6
The kids who play a lot care a LOT about wins and losses. The kids who don't play don't care. As I said, I coached youth football (5th/6th grade) for 7 years. In my experience, what you posted is simply not the case. I would be shocked if a single player from our team this past fall would be able to tell me what our record was.
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on May 9, 2017 6:36:58 GMT -6
The kids who play a lot care a LOT about wins and losses. The kids who don't play don't care. As I said, I coached youth football (5th/6th grade) for 7 years. In my experience, what you posted is simply not the case. I would be shocked if a single player from our team this past fall would be able to tell me what our record was. Some of it may depend on age & environment. None of our 8u players have cared about the score. However, some care whether they win or lose. Others care more about picking their noses and chasing butterflies. As the players get older, a larger percentage of them care about W/L's and scores. i.e... on our 12u team, many of our players definitely care about W/L's. Some of them even want to know the score immediately after running off of the field. Our players go to school with a lot of the other players from the different teams in our league and, players from teams from other leagues, also. The trash talking, team record comparisons, league comparisons, etc... goes on in the hallways, at the parks, etc... Personally, I've even heard it going on between two players (neither player in our league) after church let out. It's not always hostile. Often, it's just talk and comparisons, etc... But, it does go on. And, it is important to some kids. I posted on the dumcoach site that we've already had a player involved in an incident with other players from another team & league this year and our season doesn't even begin until July! I would say that in my organization, we coaches care about the W/L's. But, it is definitely not at the top of our priority list. Neither can the W/L's be ignored or, we won't have an organization for long. Football is a competition, after all. We like to win. We want our players to like winning. But, it's up to us to figure out how to get our teams to win and get all of our players meaningful playing time. We do not try to get all of the players equal playing time. Better players play more during tight games. If we play a subpar team or, it's a game that we have in control, the back-ups play more.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 9, 2017 10:57:50 GMT -6
The kids who play a lot care a LOT about wins and losses. The kids who don't play don't care. As I said, I coached youth football (5th/6th grade) for 7 years. In my experience, what you posted is simply not the case. I would be shocked if a single player from our team this past fall would be able to tell me what our record was. I have coached youth or middle school football for six out of my eighteen year career. Youth leagues and middle school coaches that were more focused on winning and not on developing players had far more kids quit football when compared to those that struck a balance. It isn't difficult to be a competitive team and still play all of your kids. To me, it isn't about those programs being "feeders" for the high school; it's about continuing to build enthusiasm for our sport. We're already losing kids left and right because of the concussion issue. Plus, why would you sit a 9-10 year old that's been busting their hump for you five days a week because you're chasing a "youth league title"?
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on May 9, 2017 15:10:45 GMT -6
As I said, I coached youth football (5th/6th grade) for 7 years. In my experience, what you posted is simply not the case. I would be shocked if a single player from our team this past fall would be able to tell me what our record was. I have coached youth or middle school football for six out of my eighteen year career. Youth leagues and middle school coaches that were more focused on winning and not on developing players had far more kids quit football when compared to those that struck a balance. It isn't difficult to be a competitive team and still play all of your kids. To me, it isn't about those programs being "feeders" for the high school; it's about continuing to build enthusiasm for our sport. We're already losing kids left and right because of the concussion issue. Plus, why would you sit a 9-10 year old that's been busting their hump for you five days a week because you're chasing a "youth league title"? Why did you put "youth league title" in quotes in your second post but, not in your first?
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 9, 2017 15:35:48 GMT -6
I have coached youth or middle school football for six out of my eighteen year career. Youth leagues and middle school coaches that were more focused on winning and not on developing players had far more kids quit football when compared to those that struck a balance. It isn't difficult to be a competitive team and still play all of your kids. To me, it isn't about those programs being "feeders" for the high school; it's about continuing to build enthusiasm for our sport. We're already losing kids left and right because of the concussion issue. Plus, why would you sit a 9-10 year old that's been busting their hump for you five days a week because you're chasing a "youth league title"? Why did you put "youth league title" in quotes in your second post but, not in your first? I generally do, given the fact that I think "YOUTH CHAMPIONSHIPS" are a f-cking joke. We played for the ol' "youth league title" every single year I have coached youth football and it was always a gigantic sh-t show. I watched as opposing coaches played a third of their kids through the "play-offs" and even less than that in the "championship". And, Lord forbid you lose the "'title" and play all of your kids equally; I had parents screaming at me from the sidelines. The bottom line is cut and dry; hyper competitive youth leagues are destroying sports in this country. Fewer and fewer kids are competing in athletics these days and guess when they quit? BETWEEN THE AGES OF 10 AND 14 YEARS OLD.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on May 9, 2017 16:01:00 GMT -6
Why did you put "youth league title" in quotes in your second post but, not in your first? Fewer and fewer kids are competing in athletics these days and guess when they quit? BETWEEN THE AGES OF 10 AND 14 YEARS OLD. Well...that's when they all quit when I was 14 in 1980-something. You lose kids from sports - especially those that hurt - as they hit puberty and their reality sets in - girls, job, or sitting on the bench while some blowhard HS coach chases a "High School league title" that really when it comes down to it doesn't mean anything more than a youth league title. :-) In all seriousness, middle school is when you start seeing kids drop who aren't going to be players. The hitting ramps up, and those who'd rather not are going to hang it up. Then you may see a bump at the freshman level when kids who haven't played now want to "try it out". Most of those kids - in fact all in my limited experience - don't make it to Friday night. As with most things, balance is the key. I disagree just as much with the youth coach who only plays his best and sits the rest - hell I disagree with that in HS - as I do with the guy who insists that winning in youth sports isn't important at all and that the entire focus should be on "preparing them for the next level". I think both guys are absolute morons who shouldn't be anywhere near a whistle.
|
|
|
Post by coachcb on May 9, 2017 17:36:52 GMT -6
changingthegameproject.com/why-kids-quit-sports/Virtually every single issue addressed in this article can be fixed by a coach. Unfortunately, I have been surrounded by youth coaches who do everything they can to FURTHER these issues. I am not trying to be disrespectful of the OP but this thread, in and of itself, shows what is wrong with youth sports. It'd be nice to see a Youth Football thread entitled "How Do I Maximize All Of The Kids' Playing Time?".
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on May 10, 2017 6:49:13 GMT -6
changingthegameproject.com/why-kids-quit-sports/Virtually every single issue addressed in this article can be fixed by a coach. Unfortunately, I have been surrounded by youth coaches who do everything they can to FURTHER these issues. I am not trying to be disrespectful of the OP but this thread, in and of itself, shows what is wrong with youth sports. It'd be nice to see a Youth Football thread entitled "How Do I Maximize All Of The Kids' Playing Time?". Sorry - this lost me right here: "researcher Amanda Visik interviewed numerous youth athletes and asked them why they played sports, and 9 out of 10 said the #1 reason they played was it was fun!" If you don't realize how absurd that statement is on its face, then you don't know much about motivation. You cannot interview people of any age and ask straight up questions about their motivations and expect accurate answers. See Daniel Pink, Gallup, and any number of other researchers who understand you have to get at motivation and preferences in a roundabout way, because most people have no idea what really drives them; people generally lack self-awareness. And let's make this even easier - how many times have ALL of us asked a kid "why did you do that" and get a complete blank look with an "I don't know". And while sometimes that's a "crap, did I do something wrong, deny deny deny" response, sometimes it's because the kid actually has no idea WHY they did something. They do things because they want to, they don't do things they don't want to, and rarely can articulate why it's one or the other. Fun things are certainly going to more often hit the "want to" column. Of course. Fun is important. But what this kind of survey doesn't do is adequately measure what "fun" actually means to a kid, and what other drivers are in play when it comes to a kid's motivation to do an activity. Not to mention, can you (should you) force "fun"? Do adults really have any idea what "fun" is to a kid? And how do you combine "fun" with the actual hard work it takes to function in an activity like a sport? This isn't gym class. It's not for everyone. And trying to force something to be fun - when in fact sometimes it's not - might be just as big a mistake as completely ignoring "fun". Edit - and not only that, but I have yet to see a study that points out that for many kids, especially those who are driven to succeed in athletics, winning is fun. Again, I come back to the same place I always do - balance.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on May 10, 2017 7:17:56 GMT -6
One last thing - ran out of time to "edit" my last post.
We all have our individual filters that we see the world through. Frankly, that's part of why we get it so wrong - we don't see the world the same way that kids do. That said, I do spend a lot of time trying to remember what I thought and what I felt as a kid when this stuff comes up. I understand that I have much different perceptions and priorities as an adult than I did as a kid, and than the kids I coach do. I try to account for that. But I will say - I HATED HATED HATED playing sports where the coaches were all "everyone plays". To the extent that if I'd have had a choice, I'd have played elsewhere. Now, that didn't drive me out of the sport, but man, I hated it. I also hated sitting, so yeah, I get that.
Balance...
|
|