|
Post by fcboiler87 on Oct 22, 2014 11:42:46 GMT -6
Pros and cons? Pros are it gets kids out and interested. It (can) teach them proper fundamentals of the game. Cons? "Old school" coaches who just have kids beat each other and yell constantly and do not teach (I realize this is not all or many but I'd bet most leagues have at least one).
I agree that youth football doesn't need to begin tackling until 5th or 6th grade. I do also believe there should be flag available for youth younger than that. Where to start? I don't think there's a good place, but 3rd or 4th would be okay for me. The problem is in a smaller community that if you don't start football early enough, you lose good athletes to soccer. I'm not saying it's a widespread thing or a huge issue, but it can make a difference. What if 2 or 3 kids from each class play soccer instead because they got started earlier on soccer and they happen to be the best athletes in the school? It's unfortunate that it can work like that and I'm not saying it always does but it something to consider when discussing youth football.
As a high school coach and former youth and middle school coach, I believe the role of the younger levels is to help the kids develop fundamentals and a passion for the game. Should those levels run our stuff? Some of it yes, more so at the middle school level. But what you HAVE to have is creating a passion for the game and getting kids interested and staying out for football instead of bailing for soccer or another sport or even the couch. To me, that is the role of the youth level.
|
|
|
Post by dytmook on Oct 22, 2014 12:22:27 GMT -6
For every HS coach shaking his head at a youth program, there's a youth coach shaking his head at a HS program who suddenly can't win with the same kids and against the same kids that the youth program won with every year up to then. It's not like the kids in the other towns magically grow bigger and faster than our kids, or that the other towns have this big influx of talent that we don't have - simple fact is, you're getting outcoached. I just wish more HS coaches would fess up to that. Okay - I just wish more coaches at any level would fess up to that, since that's the only way you get better. I will freely acknowledge youth coaches (incorrectly) blame players too. Well I do get what you're saying, but just because Johnny's 8th grade team never lost doesn't mean they will run the table in high school. Now they should be decent, but when you mix 3-4 years of other kids with them as well as other kids continuing to develop it's not just being outcoached. Not to say it isn't a portion of the problem too.
|
|
|
Post by mahonz on Oct 22, 2014 13:07:16 GMT -6
Full disclosure, I have never coached below HS varsity level.
I am ambivalent about youth football.
When I was growing up and the dinosaurs roamed the Earth, we didn't start tackle football until 8th grade. There was no Pop Warner or other in our area until later. I would've killed to start playing earlier.
Some believe that if we don't get kids started playing at an early age, some never will give it a try, because Soccer in particular starts them so young.
I see communities where youth program is closely aligned with HS, and it benefits the latter tremendously.
And of course there are successful HS programs that have no connection to youth teams or vice-versa at all.
One thing that may affect continued participation in HS: By the time kids get to 9th grade, they have had nice unis with names on back, played on HS field with scoreboard, PA, cheerleaders, the whole bit. Some have played in championship games with trophies and medals.
There's no special allure to playing HS football. They've been there, done that. Only thing we can offer them that's different is starting practice three weeks before school and year-round conditioning.
I also cringe when I observe youth coaches who coach their teams like boot camps - spend more time on calisthenics and conditioning than fundamentals and learning how to play the game. That's when some kids will learn football is not much fun and stop playing.
Coach If / when you retire you should put coaching the youngest age group possible on your Bucket List. The youth Org would hire you on the spot and you will then be blown away what happens to you personally when you have 18 7/8 year olds fixated on you like you are some kinda Super Hero. That experience alone really puts things into perspective. Football truly is nothing more than a game.
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Oct 22, 2014 13:11:39 GMT -6
For every HS coach shaking his head at a youth program, there's a youth coach shaking his head at a HS program who suddenly can't win with the same kids and against the same kids that the youth program won with every year up to then. It's not like the kids in the other towns magically grow bigger and faster than our kids, or that the other towns have this big influx of talent that we don't have - simple fact is, you're getting outcoached. I just wish more HS coaches would fess up to that. Okay - I just wish more coaches at any level would fess up to that, since that's the only way you get better. I will freely acknowledge youth coaches (incorrectly) blame players too. Well I do get what you're saying, but just because Johnny's 8th grade team never lost doesn't mean they will run the table in high school. Now they should be decent, but when you mix 3-4 years of other kids with them as well as other kids continuing to develop it's not just being outcoached. Not to say it isn't a portion of the problem too. Agreed. All I'm saying is there are different perspectives.
|
|
|
Post by dytmook on Oct 22, 2014 13:53:00 GMT -6
Totally agree, I will say parents tend to lack the perspective to see that when Johnny's team loses for the first time in 10 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 17:53:51 GMT -6
jrk5150, what is the local HS program's record? I don't know that youth football is necessary for success at the HS level, nor should 6 year olds be herded through a varsity football farm system. Frankly, most youth teams don't owe the varsity any more than the varsity owes the local college football team. I didn't start playing until 9th grade, myself, and started for 3.5 years at the varsity level as an undersized DL on the best teams in our school's history. I have a cousin who played youth ball, but quit the sport for 3 years because of a bad experience with youth coaches, as he continued to be a standout athlete in soccer (held a few state records by the end of his soph. year).. He finally got talked into playing football again as a junior and made the All State team that season as a return man on a team who went to state. He'll probably be All State again this year. Who knows what his experience may have like if the bad youth experience hadn't turned him off the sport for so long. That cousin of mine has an older brother who was an even better athlete, but also quit because of a bad youth football experience. He got sick of football around the 7th grade and never played again. Maybe with less pressure on him in football (he was also a stud and 2 time All State player in soccer), he would have stuck with it. Personally, I coached pee wee ball (6-8 year olds) for a season. I did not care for the experience. I think that kids should play football and have outlets for playing football, but I agree with the others who say that tackling shouldn't begin until 7th grade. The weight limits, vast size differences in kids, etc. that you see at the youth levels, paired with bad/incompetent coaches and crazy parents, can ruin the game for lots of kids. Putting 7 year olds out in 100 degree July heat in full pads for 2 hours a day just doesn't lead to accomplishing much. However, getting them playing some type of football is great for the same reasons all team sports are great. All the lessons in teamwork and responsibility, the physical activity, learning to push through the hard times and work... all of these can be very valuable. fantom also made a great point about backyard ball. Why do we insist on regime ting everything kids do and turning into a competition for parents? Let them play and do stuff on their own!
|
|
|
Post by jrk5150 on Oct 22, 2014 18:27:53 GMT -6
They are having a great season, they are 6-0, clinched a share of the league, and if they win this week they clinch their first outright league title in 7 years. They should win. The senior class is a special group - they won through youth ball, they rolled through the league as freshman, a bunch of them played as sophs, had a good year last year and this is the year everyone has been pointing to. We've been talking about this group of kids since they almost went to Disney (Pop Warner) as 11 year olds.
That said, this coaching staff has underachieved based on their talent for years. I have no complaints about their results last year or this year, but the years leading up to now were abysmal compared to the talent they had on the field. It took this supremely talented team for them to win. And just to be clear, these coaches know more than I do, I couldn't do what they do, etc. and so forth. Doesn't mean I can't see that they aren't getting the most out of the talent they have. And I could tell stories about how they run the program that would have many of you shaking your heads. I just prefer not to go there, I don't feel it's my place. I will say as a youth program we'd love to have a close relationship with the HS program - we are a one town program, we feed the HS. They want nothing to do with us, both because the HC doesn't believe in youth football despite the facts I outlined earlier, and because he doesn't like the two guys who run our program (one of whom is a HS coach as well).
As for youth ball - everyone is going to have an opinion based on their experiences. I'm no different. If you asked me 11 years ago, I'd have said the same thing - no need for tackle up to age 12-13 or something. I am of a different opinion now after seeing my son, and coaching 7-8 year old kids for 3 years, and just finishing my 7th year coaching ages 9-11. Some of these kids need these years where the contact is a bit less violent for them to grow and develop and learn. Drop them into contact for the first time at 12 years old, when you have kids going through puberty lighting it up - I just don't think that's the right decision. But maybe I'm wrong.
|
|
|
Post by blb on Oct 22, 2014 18:35:58 GMT -6
I have seen groups who had success at lower levels become self-satisfied and believe they were good enough get passed by others who kept working-developing to get better.
Success at youth, MS, or even Freshman-JV, doesn't always translate to Varsity success.
And it's not always result of poor coaching at Varsity level.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Oct 22, 2014 20:41:43 GMT -6
One thing that has me starting to question the value of padded football at a young age is the brain research. There is evidence that suggests the "subconcussive hits" MIGHT have a cumulative negative effect on brain health. With this in mind, I think it makes sense to shrink that window of subconcussive hits. Instead of strapping on a helmet at 7 yrs old, waiting until your 12 yrs old would likely make that cumulative amount of hits much smaller.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Oct 22, 2014 20:44:46 GMT -6
One thing that has me starting to question the value of padded football at a young age is the brain research. There is evidence that suggests the "subconcussive hits" MIGHT have a cumulative negative effect on brain health. With this in mind, I think it makes sense to shrink that window of subconcussive hits. Instead of strapping on a helmet at 7 yrs old, waiting until your 12 yrs old would likely make that cumulative amount of hits much smaller. Or...strap on the helmet at 7, and then find another sport at 13.......... Point being, there is a definite undercurrent in this thread that others have pointed out. A predisposed mindset that "HS football is what matters, and youth ball is just building towards it" For those who have this mindset, any other point of view just seems ridiculous. As others have pointed out though, when put into a similar (not the same, as blb pointed out, but similar) context, it seems ridiculous to think of HS coaches gearing their programs to ensure a pipeline to college athletics.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Oct 22, 2014 21:30:00 GMT -6
One thing that has me starting to question the value of padded football at a young age is the brain research. There is evidence that suggests the "subconcussive hits" MIGHT have a cumulative negative effect on brain health. With this in mind, I think it makes sense to shrink that window of subconcussive hits. Instead of strapping on a helmet at 7 yrs old, waiting until your 12 yrs old would likely make that cumulative amount of hits much smaller. Or...strap on the helmet at 7, and then find another sport at 13.......... Point being, there is a definite undercurrent in this thread that others have pointed out. A predisposed mindset that "HS football is what matters, and youth ball is just building towards it" For those who have this mindset, any other point of view just seems ridiculous. As others have pointed out though, when put into a similar (not the same, as blb pointed out, but similar) context, it seems ridiculous to think of HS coaches gearing their programs to ensure a pipeline to college athletics. This is just my opinion, but I think all youth sports should be about preparing them for high school sports. Before anyone jumps all over me, here is why and it's just my opinion. I personally don't believe that you are emotionally mature enough to reap the vast rewards of athletics until you're around 13 yrs and up. Now this is my opinion, but I challenge people to consider this: What do you remember about your athletic career when you were in say 3rd grade? I know what I rememeber: having fun, sometime not liking getting yelled at, getting to have a pop after a game. These are fine things. But it wasn't until I was much older that I remember learning these IMO much more important things in sports such as: sacrificing time, social life, for future gains. Making commitments to teammates and honoring those commitments, fighting through adversity, learning to deal with failure etc. So CoachD, I would have to say IMO, playing football from 8th grade - 12th grade is vastly more rewarding and life changing than playing football from 2nd grade - 7th grade.
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Oct 22, 2014 21:37:40 GMT -6
So CoachD, I would have to say IMO, playing football from 8th grade - 12th grade is vastly more rewarding and life changing than playing football from 2nd grade - 7th grade. OR, the brain develops in such a way that making connections and relationships don't seem as concrete until much older. Same reason everyone develops closer bonds with HS teachers as opposed to their elementary ones. Also, probably the same reason why super successful Pro athletes seem to support their colleges and have deeper relationships with their college coaches/programs than their HS ones. Heck, that isn't just athletes either-- most Alum associate much more with their colleges than high schools. So while the rewards are there at the early ages, the realization of those rewards is much less apparent. And keep in mind, the amount of kids playing football from grade 8-12 is VASTLY less than the amount who play from 2nd-7th....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2014 21:41:02 GMT -6
What is wrong with young kids playing football to have fun? For most of the kids at that age, that's all that really matters.
The main issue I have with youth football is that, IME, it often isn't as fun or safe for kids of that age as it should be and it turns them off. The tackle league of 6-8 year olds I coached in wasn't, anyway.
Yes, you can groom them for varsity and teach them fundamentals while they play, and you should be doing this, but how many of those kids will stick through the process from 1st grade on up to 12th? How many of them will be playing for the same varsity coaching staff in the same system by the time they get to HS in 5, 6, or even 9 years later?
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Oct 22, 2014 21:44:19 GMT -6
I think that kids should play football and have outlets for playing football, but I agree with the others who say that tackling shouldn't begin until 7th grade. The weight limits, vast size differences in kids, etc. that you see at the youth levels, paired with bad/incompetent coaches and crazy parents, can ruin the game for lots of kids I would argue that the size differentials are substantially less below 7th grade as opposed to 7th and above.
|
|
|
Post by NC1974 on Oct 22, 2014 21:51:43 GMT -6
So CoachD, I would have to say IMO, playing football from 8th grade - 12th grade is vastly more rewarding and life changing than playing football from 2nd grade - 7th grade. OR, the brain develops in such a way that making connections and relationships don't seem as concrete until much older. Same reason everyone develops closer bonds with HS teachers as opposed to their elementary ones. Also, probably the same reason why super successful Pro athletes seem to support their colleges and have deeper relationships with their college coaches/programs than their HS ones. Heck, that isn't just athletes either-- most Alum associate much more with their colleges than high schools. So while the rewards are there at the early ages, the realization of those rewards is much less apparent. And keep in mind, the amount of kids playing football from grade 8-12 is VASTLY less than the amount who play from 2nd-7th.... I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. This might be a corny example but it's true. I have found my self at times as an adult reminding myself that I can push through certain discomforts of life because I've done it before (in the form of high school athletics). I can't imagine myself using 3rd grade football as the same kind of motivation. I didn't know what it meant to push through my comfort zone as a 3rd grader (thank god, nor should any 3rd grader IMO). So I'm going to stand by my assertion that high school athletics (or athletics that take place from 13 yrs old and up) end up having more of a positive affect on your life. But of course as always when I post on Coach Huey, I respect your opinion and enjoy the debates!
|
|
|
Post by tiger46 on Oct 23, 2014 0:06:19 GMT -6
Today, one of our former players dropped by practice to see how our team was doing. He's 19. He played on our first championship (11>12yr olds) team. We've had other former players drop by at our practices. We've had former players show up at all of our games this season. That seems to happen every season.
I can't possibly say what participating in youth sports meant to those kids. But, obviously, it means something to them or they wouldn't be stopping by and asking questions and visiting with coaches. My experiences may be different since I'm from a small town. But, I remember what it was like to win our little league baseball championship. I also remember what it felt like to lose the championship the following year. I am not the only one. Players from both teams talked about the little league baseball and basketball games and other sports at various levels about as much as we did HS football during our 20 year reunion.
Competitive kids love competing. No one can impose their own values over how/what a kid feels about participating in sports at any certain age. HS football isn't nearly as important to kids as HS football coaches think/want it to be. We probably all played some HS sport, or another. Loved playing but there were always other things going on in our HS lives. Hell, I'd have ran over every one of my coaches with my car on game day just for the chance that a girl would let me get to 2nd base with her later. That wouldn't have made me any different than most any other teen-aged boy that I grew up with. IIRC, keg parties ranked pretty high with us, also.
|
|
|
Post by coachklee on Oct 23, 2014 3:50:31 GMT -6
OR, the brain develops in such a way that making connections and relationships don't seem as concrete until much older. Same reason everyone develops closer bonds with HS teachers as opposed to their elementary ones. Also, probably the same reason why super successful Pro athletes seem to support their colleges and have deeper relationships with their college coaches/programs than their HS ones. Heck, that isn't just athletes either-- most Alum associate much more with their colleges than high schools. So while the rewards are there at the early ages, the realization of those rewards is much less apparent. And keep in mind, the amount of kids playing football from grade 8-12 is VASTLY less than the amount who play from 2nd-7th.... I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. This might be a corny example but it's true. I have found my self at times as an adult reminding myself that I can push through certain discomforts of life because I've done it before (in the form of high school athletics). I can't imagine myself using 3rd grade football as the same kind of motivation. I didn't know what it meant to push through my comfort zone as a 3rd grader (thank god, nor should any 3rd grader IMO). So I'm going to stand by my assertion that high school athletics (or athletics that take place from 13 yrs old and up) end up having more of a positive affect on your life. But of course as always when I post on Coach Huey, I respect your opinion and enjoy the debates! I treated the last month of my senior/4th year of college with the same mindset studying, practicing & preparing for my exams in my last 2 math classes. I still think back to how football, track & to a lesser extent basketball taught me to be tough and work hard like you man!
|
|