|
Post by tsnk4040 on Nov 25, 2009 21:45:17 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 25, 2009 21:50:20 GMT -6
Your gut says, "this is a horrible thing" (because its different)
But my head says there are so many things that are right about this (breaking the cartel of teachers dominating the sport)
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Nov 25, 2009 22:19:51 GMT -6
Well, with AAU basketball and 3rd graders playing in year-round club volleyball leagues, I don't think this is a huge surprise.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Nov 25, 2009 22:21:02 GMT -6
(breaking the cartel of teachers dominating the sport) Why do you have such a hard-on for coaches who are teachers?
|
|
|
Post by coachguy83 on Nov 25, 2009 22:44:39 GMT -6
I think it is a negative thing in that kids are not being developed properly in the classroom or the weight room. I have no issue with kids that are cut from the frosh team playing Pop Warner, but the two teams fighting over players is not right. I coach at the youth level and I want to win, but not if it will hurt our high school program. I feel my job is to build better football players in the year or two that I have them so that when they get to be juniors and seniors they are playing football in November and winning a state title.
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Nov 26, 2009 5:21:20 GMT -6
First of all, grabbing a kids facemask like that while coaching for a school district might get you fired.
Theres a whole different level of accountability and a whole different level of expectations to be a school district employee vs coaching pop warner.
I have NO PROBLEM AT ALL with a kid choosing to play pop warner ball however I do have a major problem with the selfish coaches who RUIN a kids school ball career by telling lies, manipulating and otherwise interfering with the kids reasoning/thinking/decision making when it comes time to play school ball.
As a former ms/jr high coach I experienced it every year. Stud 7th grader that could have played jr high ball is kept down in the pee wees so he can run over the leaugue and the coaches can puff their chests out for their "run jimmy, run" coaching all of the way to the "ship". Meanwhile, the kids that Jimmy could have competed with are lifting weights and learning the varsity system etc Jimmy who has experienced "superstardom" as a standout 7th grader for the pop warner team cant stomach the idea of being a 4th team jr high player and never plays football again. Sometimes it can be from the select classless boobs in his ear telling him that the jr high staff/hs staff is clueless etc. They essentially throw the kids career away to get one more year out of him for their own selfish reasons. Happens all the time.
Regarding teachers who coach- coaching IS TEACHING and again, theres an accountability thing there. I dont know about you guys but I know this, my season never ends as a coach, I work with my kids all year, every day from 7am-4pm and again in the evening at school functions. The non teachers...most of them arent around much after November. eh, I dont think we really need to debate the benefits of having teachers as coaches, its impact in the classroom/school environment is obvious to most of us.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 26, 2009 6:17:30 GMT -6
The argument supporting teachers "being the best coaches" (and all other systems are invalid) is a chicken-or-the-egg argument. Teachers have a monopoly on the kids' time because they HAVE to go to school. Thus, "teachers make the best coaches because they have the kids (captive audience) most of the time" (even though on most campus you may not even see your kids during the day. Also, the assertion that "only teachers can 'teach'" is short sighted, as well.
If you had a CHURCH fulfilling the same role, is ministry not instruction (teachingy)as well? Many southern churches can support large sports and supply non faculty coaches.
My point was, it isn't that much of a stretch to see how a program outside of school can be just as good, if not better.
My argument with the 2nd post was that competition is good. For teachers (outside of Texas) to have a lock-out of competitive/cartel services (coaches) simply makes them stale. If your HS athletic program is competiting with a Dave Cisar type "independent" program, then your average "gym-teacher-who-coaches-football-on-the-side" may not suffice.
You guys (teachers) can get all butthurt about it, but the fact is, the educational system in most states empowers teachers to dominate the coaching fields. It is a self-contained world that insulates itself from outside influence or perspectives. It coddles subserviant teachers with it's exceptionalist, union-entitlement mentality. They don't want non-faculty because they can't hold your teaching contract/tenure over your head. Shoot, just look at airraider's situation and tell me that kind of mess would be tolerated by a non faculty person. Self contained world with your own rules.
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Nov 26, 2009 7:13:00 GMT -6
Ill add something to my post:
Any time someone says "the kids PREFER IT" or "THE KIDS REALLY LIKE IT..."
I remember to take that with a grain of salt.
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Nov 26, 2009 7:31:37 GMT -6
You guys (teachers) can get all butthurt about it, but the fact is, the educational system in most states empowers teachers to dominate the coaching fields. It is a self-contained world that insulates itself from outside influence or perspectives. It coddles subserviant teachers with it's exceptionalist, union-entitlement mentality. They don't want non-faculty because they can't hold your teaching contract/tenure over your head. Shoot, just look at airraider's situation and tell me that kind of mess would be tolerated by a non faculty person. Self contained world with your own rules. But aren't you the same guy who wanted to get a teaching degree a year ago so you could be a member of the cartel? So what happened? Why so bitter now?
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Nov 26, 2009 7:47:47 GMT -6
I will also add that, in the city where I coach, the kids who come from the private, Pop Warner-type programs are typically better coached in fundamentals and have a much higher "football-IQ" then the kids who come to us from the public junior high programs.
I think there is a couple of reasons for this:
1) Pop Warner coaches are not hamstrung by eligibility requirements and don't have administrative hoops to jump through
2) Pop Warner coaches are typically volunteers and are not beholden to parents. If parents bitch and moan too much, the coach can simply walk away and really not "lose" anything. The coaches in the public junior highs always have administration hanging over their heads. Sometimes these guys (the private Pop Warner coaches) come off as p r i c k s, but that is because they have complete control over the program and run it the way it needs to be run
3) Pop Warner Coaches are typically not motivated by a stipend. They are usually very knowledgeable, run great practices, and are solid fundamentally.
4) Players often have to pay to play Pop Warner and, in some cases, must provide their own equipment. When parents are shelling out big bucks for their kids to participate, those kids typically don't miss practice and are highly motivated. In public school programs, there usually is no "cost" to play, so if the kid doesn't show up, the family really isn't out anything.
Again, that is just my experience in one city. The Pop Warner programs are really a cut above the school programs. I'm sure that in other places, that is not the case.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 26, 2009 7:51:05 GMT -6
Become a teacher JUST to coach? That never sounded like a good career path. I'm happy in the private sector, nor would it be fair to the students or fellow teachers.
That's like becoming a nurse just so you can get free flu shots.
"Club league" football can be good, just like club hockey. It misses the feeder aspect required for the NCAA, and the tight-knit high school social network (part of growing up), but other than that it shouldn't be a "bad" thing
|
|
|
Post by 19delta on Nov 26, 2009 8:14:12 GMT -6
I agree. I don't think there is anything intrinsically "bad" about club leagues.
If I lived in the city where I coach, I would have my kids play Pop Warner ball instead of playing for the public junior high schools. The Pop Warner teams are simply better organized, administered, and coached.
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Nov 26, 2009 8:17:21 GMT -6
Where I used to coach the peewee guys TWICE had instances where a coach assaulted a kid and on another instance literally walked out on the kids at halftime and told them to coach themselves. NIce. I guess just about anyone can "coach" a pee wee team and not have to worry about background checks, fbi fingerprinting etc.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Nov 26, 2009 8:46:40 GMT -6
In my state, at least the schools I've worked at, coaches (even if faculty members) are not protected by tenure law.
In fact coaches are "at will" employees who can be fired (technically, "not rehired") without a reason even having to be given.
At my last school, two-thirds of the head coaches in all sports were non-teachers. In football we were fortunate than most because of our ten paid positions grades 8-12, six were in-district (and a seventh was a teacher in another system).
|
|
|
Post by coachjmcs on Nov 26, 2009 9:23:43 GMT -6
3) Pop Warner Coaches are typically not motivated by a stipend. They are usually very knowledgeable, run great practices, and are solid fundamentally. I agree but in my area, they aren't motivated by stipend either. And you get what you pay for. We have a couple of great coaches that have been doing it for years, and a bunch of bums that are on an ego trip that will not last the season.
|
|
|
Post by npchamps on Nov 26, 2009 9:31:23 GMT -6
I coached at a school were had 120 kids out for 7th and 8th football and 4 coaches. the batam football started and now it down about 35 kids batam has well over 50 and the school adm does understand why they dont want to play middle school fb. By the way they have cut a coach at the school.
|
|
|
Post by jrarick on Nov 26, 2009 9:57:00 GMT -6
It is hard for coaches below ninth grade to make decisions about the position a young athlete should play at. We do everything we can create as many teams as possible in our feeder programs to insure that we get multiple QB's, TE's etc. It is not a competency issue - kids change. That stud QB in seventh grade that can throw the ball thirty yards never gets any taller and walks into your August team meeting in eleventh grade at 5'7" tall. That's nobody's fault - but when you have only one seventh grade team - that's what you get. Decisions that are made about players and player's position quite often get clouded when they are taken outside of the "program". And more often than not - when teams are competing for the same players - and when it is more important to win the 8th grade championship than it is to place kids in the position that will most likely play as seniors - things can get really screwed up. We are fortunate in our community to have multiple teams at every grade level from fourth to eighth grade. Even our freshmen will quite often play a "B" game or two for the kids that are new to the game, or smaller, or just not very good yet. And it's funny - one of them - sometimes two or three will be great contributors in their senior seasons. Jack Rarick Holt Football www.coachsvideoassistant.com
|
|
dbeck84
Sophomore Member
Posts: 170
|
Post by dbeck84 on Nov 26, 2009 10:21:41 GMT -6
The district I'm in is small so all of the teachers have a chance to see all of the students every day. From what I've seen the teams coached by teachers are more disciplined and more successful than the ones that aren't. It's beneficial to have the head coach in the buliding all day so he knows if a kid is acting like a jerk in the hallways or getting kicked out of class. The teacher coaches also seem to be more dedicated to their job because it isn't as easy for them to just quit and go elsewhere. Again this is just one example from one small school.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 26, 2009 12:22:22 GMT -6
Where I used to coach the peewee guys TWICE had instances where a coach assaulted a kid ....and this would never happen in public/private school because it is beneath "teachers"? I'm lost at what your aassertion was supposed to be other than a strawman. Negatives of club/pee wee? * not subsidized by local/federal monies. Have to get your own $$ sponsors (very big deal when it comes to equip, insurance, travel, officials, etc) * you won't get poor kids unless you have enough $$ to grant "scholarships". * team consistency / development. You HAVE to recruit (and this should be unregulated) to get numbers and you don't have a captive audience. Those kids that pay, have to play * with that, it would be a nightmare trying to do any off-season stuff such as strength, speed, or passing training. * no feeder/contact with NCAA And honestly, this ONLY becomes an issue (the "issue" is what creates the market for an school-independent program to exist) when school districts (actively enforce) zoning. If you can (happens all the time where I'm at) legitimately move from school to school, just by changing a residency address (and you have a dozen schools to choose from), you can hop from program to program at will. That, is essentially what peewee leagues offer (that is the draw). If I don't like X-High School (or I won't be the starting linebacker), I can always go to P, D, or Q high school.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Nov 26, 2009 12:51:05 GMT -6
Where I used to coach the peewee guys TWICE had instances where a coach assaulted a kid ....and this would never happen in public/private school because it is beneath "teachers"? I'm lost at what your aassertion was supposed to be other than a strawman. I believe the assertion is that teacher/coaches provide another level of accountability. The teacher coach has a great deal more at stake than the non faculty coach. He/she can't just say "to hell with it". In the case Touchdownmaker brings up, I am imagining that assaulting would probably be some type of shaking, pulling, pushing.... The discipline is probably that he doesn't coach youth ball at that playground/organization anymore. With a teacher coach, it could be much more severe. Teacher/coaches have more skin in the game...not in terms of time invested, work put in etc... but because their beer money employer is their mortgage payment employer. This doesn't necessarily make for the most elite level of football, BUT looking at AAU basketball (which is at a higher level than HS basketball) ...I think it is important to ask if that pursuit for eliteness is the goal
|
|
|
Post by tog on Nov 26, 2009 13:27:28 GMT -6
It is quite simply not a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by los on Nov 26, 2009 22:59:46 GMT -6
Another negative to me Brophy, since the article was about Pop warner, is the weight class/weight restrictions and older/lighter player deal......that in itself creates a kind of artificial enviroment, that would make it tough to gage ones talent vs the competition......this seemed to be what they were telling the kids in the article = you're not ready for the "real world" of hs football.....stay with us, we need you, you'll play more here and really stand out....the couple kids in the story, sounded like they were glad they made the change to the hs program and actually regreted staying in PW for as long as they did? I can really only think of one, maybe two "good reasons" for a kid to play PW, after about 12 yrs old = they don't have another alternative, no football at their school..... or the sub varsity programs are poorly run....other than that, whats the point?
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Nov 26, 2009 23:45:13 GMT -6
LOL @ the article comparing the crowdy sizes. 400 people in the stands vs a varsity home game? Talk about stretching the truth to make a story. Sure, there may be some games with under 400 fans....but even small schools can pull in the thousands.
To the point...
To me it's not a big deal if a kid wants to play pee wee vs middle school. If he likes to play with his friends (from different schools) or he likes the coach or the MS program stinks great.
However, that kid needs to be on the freshman team and in the program by fall of his freshman year. He needs the weight room, he needs to learn the terminology and the varsity coaches need to start to get a look at him and get him in the proper position. By his sophmore year, he's one small step from varsity football (ok, for some it's a decent sized step).
|
|
ramsoc
Junior Member
Posts: 431
|
Post by ramsoc on Nov 27, 2009 0:22:30 GMT -6
However, that kid needs to be on the freshman team and in the program by fall of his freshman year. He needs the weight room, he needs to learn the terminology and the varsity coaches need to start to get a look at him and get him in the proper position. By his sophmore year, he's one small step from varsity football (ok, for some it's a decent sized step). When I coached Pop Warner, we had a two freshmen and a sophomore come back and play for us instead of playing for their high school teams. The year before, we were a game away from going to Orlando and they had "unfinished business". Needless to say we made it to Orlando that year. Now these three the next year all started on their varsity programs which were top tier schools, not bottom feeders. They were all selected to the county all star game in their senior years. So there's no "need" to be with your high school program as a freshmen.
|
|
|
Post by coachks on Nov 27, 2009 0:37:22 GMT -6
However, that kid needs to be on the freshman team and in the program by fall of his freshman year. He needs the weight room, he needs to learn the terminology and the varsity coaches need to start to get a look at him and get him in the proper position. By his sophmore year, he's one small step from varsity football (ok, for some it's a decent sized step). When I coached Pop Warner, we had a two freshmen and a sophomore come back and play for us instead of playing for their high school teams. The year before, we were a game away from going to Orlando and they had "unfinished business". Needless to say we made it to Orlando that year. Now these three the next year all started on their varsity programs which were top tier schools, not bottom feeders. They were all selected to the county all star game in their senior years. So there's no "need" to be with your high school program as a freshmen. Besides the obvious reply (There are exceptions to every rule), here are a few things to consider. Being good doesn't mean you reached your potential. Being a D1 recruit doesn't mean a player maximized his potential in high school. Being named all county doesn't mean he couldn't have been better. (Actually, awards are meaningless as it is). Just because their career wasn't ruined doesn't mean it wasn't setback by missing a year. Further, they have (future) teammates to consider. So you have a couple of players who made the choice to NOT play with you and had success at the pee wee level, while the other 30 of you played freshman ball. That isn't an atmosphere I'd want to create. Do these kids even want to play for us, I mean, they did choose their pop warner team over our team. I'll go out on a limb and assume these kids are talented. Now the message is sent to johnnie, who was the tailback on the JV team who is now benched for Kevin since he made the choice to play with us instead of his pop warner team.
|
|
|
Post by touchdownmaker on Nov 27, 2009 3:03:54 GMT -6
I think the important thing to remember is that a pop warner/pee wee coach has to coach his team, hes going to want the best players because winning is important to him and to his players. A high school coach wants to win, hes going to want the best players possible and hes not going to be too happy with players who will not play in his program as soon as possible to learn his system. Neither guy is wrong for wanting the player, nor is the player wrong for doing what he wants to do, football is a game. The kid has the right to choose to play where he wants to play. What makes things "wrong" is HOW a player is manipulated and influenced to make the choice he must make.
In many cases the pop warner guy has the advantage in that hes already got the relationship with the kid, he may have another advantage, hes winning while the hs guy isnt...on the other hand, that could be reversed, ie the hs is a powerhouse and the pee wee team isnt.
ego plays big into this for both sides, job security plays into it specifically for the hs guys and what should happen for the kid is HONESTY FROM BOTH SIDES. I know for a fact that it doesnt always happen that way.
|
|
|
Post by brophy on Nov 27, 2009 6:56:52 GMT -6
LOL @ the article comparing the crowdy sizes. 400 people in the stands vs a varsity home game? Talk about stretching the truth to make a story. Sure, there may be some games with under 400 fans....but even small schools can pull in the thousands. yeah, I don't know how anyone overcomes that situation. You would have to be one helluva promoted to make peewee "work". The calculus of it all would require PW to work twice (or more) hard than a school. It is a self-contained operation. ( yikes more yikes ) www.popwarner.com/football/pop.aspFootball has more related to being a social representation of the community. How much of the football program is REALLY centered towards the 30 - 50 kids in jerseys? How much of it really is just an extension of a pep rally? How many people are there for the band? How many are there for the cheer/pep squad? How many are there because they're alum? PW would provide a great outlet for specialized instruction, just like a "Sylvan vs School Tutor" argument. If you have coaches who WANT to be there and coach fundamentals and demand excellent production - then it will likely beat the school option hands down. In many respects, the private schools straddle this fence and are the intermediary between club ball and (public) school ball. They have all the positives of both worlds.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Nov 27, 2009 7:46:32 GMT -6
LOL @ the article comparing the crowdy sizes. 400 people in the stands vs a varsity home game? Talk about stretching the truth to make a story. Sure, there may be some games with under 400 fans....but even small schools can pull in the thousands. yeah, I don't know how anyone overcomes that situation. You would have to be one helluva promoted to make peewee "work". The calculus of it all would require PW to work twice (or more) hard than a school. It is a self-contained operation. ( yikes more yikes ) www.popwarner.com/football/pop.aspFootball has more related to being a social representation of the community. How much of the football program is REALLY centered towards the 30 - 50 kids in jerseys? How much of it really is just an extension of a pep rally? How many people are there for the band? How many are there for the cheer/pep squad? How many are there because they're alum? PW would provide a great outlet for specialized instruction, just like a "Sylvan vs School Tutor" argument. If you have coaches who WANT to be there and coach fundamentals and demand excellent production - then it will likely beat the school option hands down. In many respects, the private schools straddle this fence and are the intermediary between club ball and (public) school ball. They have all the positives of both worlds. 1. high school football IS a social thing--it is about more than just the game --and that is a GOOD thing 2. you do a disservice to all those teaching and coaching who coach fundamentals and demand excellent production 3. I see private schools as the WORST of both worlds.
|
|
|
Post by justryn2 on Nov 27, 2009 9:06:49 GMT -6
I coach in a private league not affiliated with Pop Warner. Our rules will not allow a player to play if he is older than 14 when the season starts OR if he is already enrolled in high school. However, I think there are some advantages to the private leagues up through middle school.
First, in our area, very few of the middle schools have a football program. The private leagues are actually the only option for most 6th, 7th and 8th graders. Second, where a middle school would typically have just one team for 7th grade and one for 8th, the private leagues have multiple teams with combined age and weight limits. The end result is more playing time for more kids.
Having said that, IMO once a player moves on to high school he should play high school ball. Actually, my biggest issue is when high schools try to run their programs like the private youth leagues with more emphasis on participation and "the football experience" than on success on the field.
I believe that, up through middle school / jr. high, participation is important and there should be much more emphasis on getting everyone significant playing time and teaching fundamental football skills. Once the players move on to high school its time to start holding them, and their coaches, accountable for success.
|
|
|
Post by tog on Nov 27, 2009 9:09:04 GMT -6
why do your middle schools not have football?
|
|