|
Post by CS on Mar 9, 2018 19:21:58 GMT -6
I think you're just about spot-on..... I have a follow up, though. As an AD, what would you do with coaches who under-achieve? I'm talking about the coach who does bare minimum (and sometimes less) over a period of time. We recently had an AD change and I've told both that we need to start scrutinizing effort and commitment among our coaches. Unfortunately, no one is listening. I've tried collaborating with them, I've tried offering assistance, and I've tried tolerating, but it's gone nowhere. In fact...last year, not only did they tell the AD that they wanted the weight room, but they requested the sports room, both gyms, and they even told the AD that they needed all the halls. Basically, it was an attempt to keep us from doing anything in the building after school. I hung around after school and after a few days noted they were only using a small portion of what they were reserving. I told our AD and the track coach's response was "you can have your guys stay after and if we're not using it, you can use it." I don't work that way. Honestly, being an AD comes with nepotism and politics. My recommendation holds little weight when it comes to hiring/firing of coaches as I report my recommendation to the administration, we talk about it and then they make their recommendation to the school board. Some administrators go with my recommendation, some don't. But, the school board can still vote against the administration's recommendation, which happens. I desperately wanted to can a volleyball coach one year as she was not only inept, she was unprofessional and many of her actions were liability issues. Our girls hadn't won a game in two years, they were embarrassing to watch and she I told her I wasn't recommending her for rehire, explained everything that had happened with her and he agreed with me. He recommended that she not be rehired but she was a former "sports star" of the school, popular in the community and the board voted against the recommendations, 5-0. But, I do a few things to keep our coaches on their toes. I ask that all of the coaches send me a schedule of off-season activities that they plan on implementing and a schedule for said events that they can provide the kids and parents with. This is documented on their evaluations. Their evaluations are almost painfully detailed and specific to the sport they're coaching. I just had our boys basketball coach in my room this morning for an evaluation and he got dinged on the "Fundamentals" section because the boys didn't follow their shots in and couldn't rebound for chit. He also got nailed on the "Knowledge Of The Game" portion as he went through a dozen different offenses and eight different presses by the end of the season. I'm going to recommend him for rehire as he's good with the kids, puts in the work in the off-season and is professional; he just needs to to stop being an Xs and Os guy. Did you go to all of his practices?
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 24, 2018 11:24:24 GMT -6
Wasp spray is a good idea. My door opens into the hall so I have a thick wire I use to anchor myself to the handle and I’ve instructed my students to throw any object they can at anyone who enters. Of course none of this works if everyone thinks it’s a fire drill. Funny story, our admin ran a fire drill 2 days after the shooting. I was peeking around every corner like a cop all the way out. We had one yesterday. We are an lower elementary school (pre k - 5th) so the students are not quite as aware. I understand that they need to get "x" amount of fire drills in, and usually once a month but I still didn't think it was great. If you were at a HS, and it wasn't announced before hand (at least to the faculty who could then relay to the class as they exited "It is ok, it is a drill, we knew about this beforehand)...I would say that is kind of a tone deaf admin. Of course, based on several of the thoughts and ideas I keep seeing on social media and hearing on radio call in shows, one could argue we have many members of society that are tone deaf. It was last minute and he sent out an e-mail but I only check mine once a day due to the fact that our school district sends out emails like they get money for each one sent. Anyway, it was just bad timing. It doesn’t help that I teach 9th graders and they over dramatic in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 24, 2018 6:39:36 GMT -6
Wasp spray is a good idea. My door opens into the hall so I have a thick wire I use to anchor myself to the handle and I’ve instructed my students to throw any object they can at anyone who enters.
Of course none of this works if everyone thinks it’s a fire drill. Funny story, our admin ran a fire drill 2 days after the shooting. I was peeking around every corner like a cop all the way out.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 22, 2018 12:45:34 GMT -6
IMO the RB coach shouldn’t say chit to the WRs because that means he’s not watching his RBs. WR coach should coach the WRs, not the RB coach. Coordinator can coach any position on their side of the ball. HC can coach anybody he wants. This. I'm one of those coaches that gets upset if my guys are being coached by someone else. HUGE pet peeve of mine. I know for a fact that your kids are doing something wrong so coach your own
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 16, 2018 7:11:10 GMT -6
I’ve read that article and numerous other ones. Remember I said I researched the diet because a coach on staff was telling me about it one day. And I’m not sitting here saying fat is the enemy but butter isn’t healthy if you’re eating it all the time. In moderation it has benefits. My biggest concern with this diet is the fact that it passes off harmful foods as “ok” because studies have shown that saturated fats aren’t as bad as we once believed. The coach on staff told our kids that bacon is good for you...it’s not. To clarify, I realize that eating these things every now and then is as dangerous as smoking a cigarette once a month. It’s not going to kill you today. But if you tell the average person they can eat all this sh!t food because it’s low in carbs and it’s healthy they’re going to. I don’t think the average person is not going to over eat bacon or other meats and low carb but whole or unprocessed foods. These foods are highly satiable and people tend to eat less and generally over eat these high fat foods than high carb alternatives. That said I am not all in on keto because I do think there are clean carbs that have the same qualities of satiability that people tend to not over eat like baked potatoes. While we agree on drastically cutting processed foods and eating some foods, we probably just aren’t ever going to get on the same page on the benefits of switching to high fat vs high carb diets. I am no expert or Adonis so it’s probably not going to kill anyone to disagree though. You don’t understand I’m an advocate of not taking extreme measures to lose weight like cutting out any form of macro. If your over indulging in carbs I’m not for that either. I had a buddy do nothing but drink protein shakes for 2 weeks to cut fat....is that healthy? P.s. your response came after I had decided to leave this thread and I read it...now I’m back in you sob 😂
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 16, 2018 6:57:26 GMT -6
I’ve read that article and numerous other ones. Remember I said I researched the diet because a coach on staff was telling me about it one day. And I’m not sitting here saying fat is the enemy but butter isn’t healthy if you’re eating it all the time. In moderation it has benefits. My biggest concern with this diet is the fact that it passes off harmful foods as “ok” because studies have shown that saturated fats aren’t as bad as we once believed. The coach on staff told our kids that bacon is good for you...it’s not. To clarify, I realize that eating these things every now and then is as dangerous as smoking a cigarette once a month. It’s not going to kill you today. But if you tell the average person they can eat all this sh!t food because it’s low in carbs and it’s healthy they’re going to. You see bacon or cheese on that list and have a snap reaction without understanding the configuration of the actual diet. Tell me what is bad about this meal plan: Meal #1: 4 whole omega 3 eggs 8 or 1 cup egg whites Meal #2: 50 gram (2 scoops) whey isolate shake 2 TBSB cold-milled ground flax 1/2 TBSB natural almond or cashew butter Meal #3: 6oz cooked chicken or white fish 1/2 TBSP olive or coconut oil 1-2 cups steamed broccoli, Brussel sprouts, or green beans Meal #4: 50 gram (2 scoops) whey isolate shake 2 TBSB cold-milled ground flax 1/2 TBSB natural almond or cashew butter Meal #5: 6oz cooked lean steak, ground beef, or salmon Large green leafy salad with 1 TBSP omega 3 oil and lemon vignette What on this is unhealthy? Answer: Absolutely nothing. Add a bit of bacon to meal #1 or to the salad with meal #5 Every now and again and it's still just as healthy. Keto done right will leave a person with less inflammation, more energy, better body composition, and improved bloodwork long-term. Negatives: It's difficult to stick for most people without strict planning and very minimal eating out (tough to find keto friendly options) and the constipation that can occur even with there being a lot of fiber in this diet. You’re not understanding my argument. That meal plan is perfectly fine. However, to an average person or kid that is trying to eat “healthier” and you say that cooking with butter and being able to eat processed foods as long as they are low carb is ok what do you think they will do? Hell! There were 2 responses after roseys that proves my point. People see they can cook with butter and put chz and bacon on everything. What you planned out in your post is a lot like how I eat now if you added fruit. I have no inflammation or high blood pressure. I also noticed you had lean meats and no processed foods in your meal plan. I have also said repeatedly that in moderation this stuff isn’t going to kill you, but the average American that is wanting to lose weight the easy way and you tell them to eat all the bacon you want and cook it with butter, is going to do just that. Anyway, I’m done with this. Eat a well balanced meal plan with plenty of greens and fruit. Have red meat,processed meats and cheese sparingly and exercise regularly and you should be fine. Edit: the steak in your final meal isn’t the best. If you eat it every now and then it’s fine but red meat has been linked to colon cancer for decades
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 16, 2018 5:10:39 GMT -6
I explained further down that the processed food is what I thought and know are bad for you. You can tell me what you want about Keto diets but you can’t say cooking with butter and eating pork rinds is healthy. Again I do realize that butter in moderation isn’t all that terrible. It also involves eating lots of processed meats which have been proven to cause cancer. Sooooooooooo yeah, I’m not a dietician but that’s pretty bad. I am not saying the science can’t change (especially since if you look at this article and see the 30 year difference between Time covers) but current science says that high fat diets, including butter have significant health benefits. I am not necessarily all in on a full time ketogenic diet but a lot of science is showing that lowering carbs and eating fat is improving health. www.dietdoctor.com/low-carb/fat-your-friendI am 100% with you on the processed food part. I’ve read that article and numerous other ones. Remember I said I researched the diet because a coach on staff was telling me about it one day. And I’m not sitting here saying fat is the enemy but butter isn’t healthy if you’re eating it all the time. In moderation it has benefits. My biggest concern with this diet is the fact that it passes off harmful foods as “ok” because studies have shown that saturated fats aren’t as bad as we once believed. The coach on staff told our kids that bacon is good for you...it’s not. To clarify, I realize that eating these things every now and then is as dangerous as smoking a cigarette once a month. It’s not going to kill you today. But if you tell the average person they can eat all this sh!t food because it’s low in carbs and it’s healthy they’re going to.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 15, 2018 19:24:15 GMT -6
Also, this sh!t cannot be healthy for you in the long term. Just eat real food like someone said and workout anyway you’re able You should probably educate yourself. Fat is not the enemy you've been lied to about. In fact it's essential for optimal body function - just like salt. Supplement with proper fiber at each meal and it's perfectly fine long-term. I explained further down that the processed food is what I thought and know are bad for you. You can tell me what you want about Keto diets but you can’t say cooking with butter and eating pork rinds is healthy. Again I do realize that butter in moderation isn’t all that terrible. It also involves eating lots of processed meats which have been proven to cause cancer. Sooooooooooo yeah, I’m not a dietician but that’s pretty bad.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 14, 2018 16:39:23 GMT -6
Also, this sh!t cannot be healthy for you in the long term. Just eat real food like someone said and workout anyway you’re able I'm not picking a fight or being a jerk.... what on the list isn't real food? All i've done is cut out grains, fruit, and most dairy. Spinach, broccoli and avocado have more potassium and magnesium than any fruit out there. Processed meat, pork rinds, bacon? Fruit is bad? I wasn’t talking about the veggies. I do intermittent fasting like @defcord said so the restrictive diets aren’t what the problem is but this just doesn’t seem right. Cooking everything in butter? I started researching this diet when a coach here got on it and I wasn’t convinced it was safe. It has benefits yes but so does alcohol in the short term
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 14, 2018 12:54:49 GMT -6
rosey65 so what kinds of stuff do you eat in that diet? Just curious. Help a newb out Red meat bacon poultry seafood spinach, broccoli, other green veg (cauliflower, brussel sprouts, asparagus, cabbage, etc) avocado full-fat salad dressings eggs cheese everything is cooked in oil and/or butter snack on olives, pork rinds, salami slices.... and thats only when im hungry. Im not NEARLY as hungry as I used to be Only hard alcohol, no beer Also, this sh!t cannot be healthy for you in the long term. Just eat real food like someone said and workout anyway you’re able
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 14, 2018 12:50:27 GMT -6
rosey65 so what kinds of stuff do you eat in that diet? Just curious. Help a newb out Red meat bacon poultry seafood spinach, broccoli, other green veg (cauliflower, brussel sprouts, asparagus, cabbage, etc) avocado full-fat salad dressings eggs cheese everything is cooked in oil and/or butter snack on olives, pork rinds, salami slices.... and thats only when im hungry. Im not NEARLY as hungry as I used to be Only hard alcohol, no beerLost me
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 14, 2018 8:09:49 GMT -6
I got a concussion in H.S. from a guy who today is a well known coach in California (thanks, Rocky), a dislocated thumb, a hip pointer that was a season ender. But, I also got banged up while cycling, swimming, gymnastics, competitive diving, and scraped some coral while surfing, not to mention baseball and a hyper extended knee in Track. When you're active as a kid, things happen. There's the occasional gouge that needs stitches...you learn to shake it off whenever you can. Or...you can be in the band and never get hurt...or laid. "Or...you can be in the band and never get hurt...or laid.".......well played, my friend. I don't know about your school but I hear more about band kids getting in trouble for sleeping around than anyone else
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 14, 2018 7:45:26 GMT -6
Pee Wees all the way up to 5 years of College ball. Probably more concussions than I had diagnosed and several turned ankles and I have no health problems yet. Workout with weights 4 times a week and am very active in practice and when some booger eater thinks he can take me down I show him whats what.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 12, 2018 10:46:24 GMT -6
I am curious as to what kind of policies, your schools may have in place, or your opinion for a student, to play two sports in the same season. We have a young man that wants to play baseball and throw the shot put. The head baseball and head track coach have both agreed that the kid should choose between one or the other, they are both concerned that it can open a "can of worms", soon you'll have other kids wanting to do both, and will create a problem with kids using one sport or the other to get out of practices, and to travel on road trips. Track coach is concerned that he will have softball girls wanting to come over, and the continuity of his practices will be disrupted. The kid is not exceptional in either sport, nice kid to have around, we think it is more his parents pushing the two sport thing. After they spoke with the Baseball and Track coach at the same time and they came to the conclusion that he'll have to choose one (they also said they would give him two weeks to alternate with practices to decide what he would prefer). Parents went straight to the AD, who sided with parents, saying the two coaches have to "work something out", he does not think a kid should have to choose between sports. The baseball coach also argued that the young man not committing full time to baseball may put the team in jeopardy, the kid may not be the best of his ability in a crunch situation. And if he doesn't play the kid they'll say its because he was at a track meet or practice. I'm the Head track coach here and we work it out. We have baseball and soccer going on right now as well as ROTC. My distance runners are ROTC guys and they don't have to come to practice because they are doing what they need to do. I have one thrower on the soccer team and he gets his throws in before practice and goes to soccer. I don't have anyone on the baseball team but there are 1 or 2 I would like to have. If it came down to it I wouldn't make the kids choose cause I would lose and I would be right back where I was. To me, it's not a big deal if they miss my practice for another practice. The baseball coach works them out well and they aren't just sitting around getting fat they are competing.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 11, 2018 5:47:15 GMT -6
You just have to pick and choose wisely. I have seen some really good speakers this weekend and some that I just got up and walked out on. All in all I will always learn more on Huey but I have always learned something at a clinic. Plus the school pays for it so what is there to lose 😎
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 5, 2018 11:26:54 GMT -6
This is just me being cynical. And I am actually a very positive person and coach. I just believe that games are won by doing your job, not some great speech or believing that you will do it, or pointing out that John Candy is in the stands. Don't get me wrong, believing you can win, good speeches, motivation, etc, matter. They just aren't what wins. I do believe the opposite definitely leads towards losing. No motivation, no belief, etc, will mean you won't win. Enough rambling. Here is what I am trying to point out. You know that if the Patriots would have scored on their second to last drive and won, that everyone would say, ME INCLUDED, I knew that was going to happen. All the Patriots would say that Brady willed them to win, they knew their was no way they could lose, it is the Patriot way, Brady looked the guys in the eyes and they all just knew "no way we lose", or that Brady pointed out that some celebrity was in the stands or whatever. If the last play would have been caught and they converted the 2 point play and won in OT, same thing. So surely Brady or Belichick said something on those last two drives. But turns out, it was just words or belief, not results. I was rooting for the Pats and am a Tom Brady fan, so I am not slamming him, the team, or even this game. Just pointing out universal football/sports beliefs that are probably incorrect. Of course the winners can always say - we knew. We believed. I guess that actually wasn't enough rambling, cause I continued to ramble. Peace out. LOL IMO motivation is more important in the off-season and during practices. Not saying you have to be a cheerleader that whole time but that those things are more mundane and easy to lose focus on what we are there to do. For games, I feel like funkfriss is right. If they can't get up for games than you're screwed. For games, it should be about managing those emotions and refocusing them on what needs to get done.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Feb 2, 2018 12:38:30 GMT -6
Are kids physically tough because they are mentally tough? Does anyone have kids who are physically tough as nails but soft mentally? What about mentally tough as nails but physically soft? Are they the same thing, or are they exclusive from one another? Those are definitely two different things. The real question is which one would you rather have in a football player? Ithink you need to strike a balance between the two.
|
|
|
PBIS
Jan 31, 2018 18:43:58 GMT -6
via mobile
newt21 likes this
Post by CS on Jan 31, 2018 18:43:58 GMT -6
How many of you guys are involved with PBIS? I’m part of our schools implementation team and I’m constantly thinking back to how this also applies to coaching. For those who are new to it or unaware, the basic gist is trying to create a system to positively (and socially) reward students for the kinds of behaviors we want. It’s the new hotness of culture building but for your school. It’s really got my wheels turning for how I could approach building a programs culture in positive way, curious if anyone else has gone through this process and made the same connections. We did this at a school I was at several years ago. It was implemented by a Teach for America guy and It ended up getting scrapped because no Teacher’s ever gave “merits” to the good kids. The teachers didn’t notice them doing those things because they already did and the goobers were getting all the awards. You could say that is a good thing but it kind of spits in the face of the kids who always do good things when it doesn’t get noticed
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 31, 2018 8:52:57 GMT -6
Well that’s good. What are the certs they have to get to be able to coach? USA Football has a Program, the CDC has a Program as do a few States. Some local League require some EMT basics. My League requires a few Clinics that every Head Coach must attend. One in particular includes Rules, Ethics and Integrity which I believe is the most important and certainly the most abused. I have taken the USA Football Certifications. Given enough bananas a Monkey could pass this test but at least its forced learning and making coaches more aware their surroundings. It covers hydration, concussion awareness, emergency procedures, tackling techniques, blocking techniques, practice organization, fitting equipment and the like. Watch a video, answer some multiple choice questions and keep trying live until you pass. I have been coaching youth football for the most part since 1983 and today's coaches are far more informed than ever before. Its simply up to them to apply this information which IMHO 95% will happily do. We all understand that our Sport is under attack and that adjustments are necessary in order to survive. A Government Mandate is not surviving. I totally agree. Thank you for coming on here with information and not a lesson on debate that doesn't need to be had. If you listen to the Coach and Coordinator podcast the HC at Webb City, MO talks about youth football in depth and what he does to help those coaches. His method may not help some coaches around the country but I think if the pee wee program is affiliated with the school system then it is a good model to help run a successful youth program.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 30, 2018 19:43:12 GMT -6
I see what you’re saying and agree but if you look at all the rules changes and the emphasis on safer tackling techniques that state associations are pushing to make the game safer I don’t see youth leagues doing the same. Believe me, if every youth league was required to have coaches be certified I would be more on board but without the pay most places can only take who is willing to volunteer for the job. IMO this isn’t a horrible move and it’s sad that the the state legislation even has to get involved because nothing significant has changed in youth football. All youth football leagues...no background check... no certification(s)....no League. The Insurance Companies mandate this. Every single last one of them Nationwide. Its actually more difficult to fill positions now a day and that is a good thing. Well that’s good. What are the certs they have to get to be able to coach?
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 29, 2018 18:45:22 GMT -6
If anything I made a hasty generalization because I'm not cherry-picking information. It's all the information I have. And instead of providing me with some sort of statistics that could prove me wrong or educate me you just attack the way I make my argument. I'm not saying anything is true, and it may be unfair of me to have the opinion that I have but this is the real world, not a debate. There hasn't been a good pee wee football league anywhere I have seen. Maybe it's the same for this lady or maybe she is just trying to make a name for herself on a hot-button issue. Only time will tell. I also never said that the magnitude doesn't have an effect. I said the argument is a moot point because the problem being addressed is repeated hits to the head not necessarily harder hits to the head. What they are saying is that by not allowing kids to play before 12 in most cases you are taking 5-6 seasons of hits off of the brain. By telling you that a causative relationship has not been proven, I am educating you. By challenging the logic of your assumptions, I am educating you. I'm making the point that uninformed assumptions/opinions are not "just as good or valid" as informed assumptions and opinions. I'm not saying don't have an opinion, just inform that opinion with facts, and formulate an opinion based on facts and logic, rather than a knee-jerk reaction (or a hasty generalization, as you aptly put it). Even the article you linked to says, "...the mechanisms that cause CTE and relationship to concussion, subconcussive injury and TBI remain poorly understood." (italics mine) Civil discourse (i.e., debate) is real world. Logic is real world. If I don't agree with something you say, or that you assume, my ability to tell you why in a calm and reasoned way is productive communication. I get it - CTE is a real hot-button issue right now. It's easy to get caught up in the hysteria. I'm a father and a grandfather, in addition to being a coach. I understand concerns about the health of players and player safety, and I share those concerns. I said as much in my initial response to your comments. I'm just saying that thinking things through and having real, reasoned discussion based on informed opinion is better than just fanning the flames with "hasty generalizations." I'll leave you with this food for thought though. Once they determine the there should be no football under age 12, how soon do you think it will be before someone will put 2 and 2 together and say that children are not adults until age 18? They can't form legally binding contracts until they are 18. By law, they are not, at least for most civil cases, considered legally liable for their behavior; their parents are. So, football shouldn't be allowed until a person reaches the age of majority. What would be the effect on the high school game? I'm not saying this will happen; it's just a logical extension based on the same line of reasoning that seeks to justify eliminating youth football. This whole thread has been filled with uninformed opinions and knee jerk reactions yet you don’t have a problem with those saying that kids won’t play football because they aren’t playing as kids. To be honest, I didn’t even make a knee jerk reaction. I just don’t agree that banning football before 12 is a bad thing, and I have witnessed nothing but terrible pee wee coaching. The fact is, I wasn’t saying something that you agreed with and that’s really all it was. To each his own, but don’t make it out like you were trying to “teach” me about anything.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 29, 2018 12:44:44 GMT -6
argument could be made that a bad youth program or experience could deter playing as much as anything. I think we can be smarter in how we do youth football though....When I played youth ball (15 years ago so still relatively not that long ago) we still played with 1) weight limits (hate it, I get it but we have had kids come through our youth league who either starved themselves to run the ball or played OL and went on to be all state tailbacks in high school go figure) 2) not much in the way of coaching education or certification major no no now a days. 3. My big complaint here....we played on the same size field as the high school. Why play youth ball or flag football on the same size field? Especially for kids under 13? Smaller kids don't play baseball on a field that has 90 foot base paths? A lot of leagues don't let kids play basketball on 10 foot goals under a certain age. Why is football so inclined to the 11 on 11 100 yard format for every age group. No offense, but when I played youth ball that was boring as chit.....tell me our game is 6-0.....not because of stellar defense or anything but because going on a 60-70 yard drive in youth ball is downright impossible without constant explosive plays. I saw a video of a USA football coach giving a presentation about changing the field dimensions for youth football. I thought it was great.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 29, 2018 12:41:25 GMT -6
If anything I made a hasty generalization because I'm not cherry-picking information. It's all the information I have. And instead of providing me with some sort of statistics that could prove me wrong or educate me you just attack the way I make my argument. I'm not saying anything is true, and it may be unfair of me to have the opinion that I have but this is the real world, not a debate.
There hasn't been a good pee wee football league anywhere I have seen. Maybe it's the same for this lady or maybe she is just trying to make a name for herself on a hot-button issue. Only time will tell.
I also never said that the magnitude doesn't have an effect. I said the argument is a moot point because the problem being addressed is repeated hits to the head not necessarily harder hits to the head. What they are saying is that by not allowing kids to play before 12 in most cases you are taking 5-6 seasons of hits off of the brain.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 29, 2018 11:09:01 GMT -6
1-I never stated it as "fact." I actually said one could assume based on the information known that it was that the majority of youth coaches have no formal training or the external motivation to get the training. And it's not really cherry picking if I'm not withholding anything. If there were evidence to prove my opinion wrong I would gladly welcome it because that means that what I have witnessed is only a small fraction of what actually happens at the youth level. Again, I'm just making an assumption based on personal experience and the information presented. I chose Pop Warner because it is the biggest youth football organization and it only covers 20% of kids 6-12 who play the game. The whole point that I am trying to make it that there needs to be some sort of a governing body over youth football whether it be state or national for things like this law to go away. 2-You can believe what you want about CTE but there have been multiple studies done that point to repeated sub-concussive hits having a huge correlation to getting CTE. link Here is one of them. It may not be "proven," but if it sounds like a duck and looks like a duck. 3-I don't understand how me saying greater momentum being a moot point means I don't understand that hits are changes in momentum. I'm saying that the big hit that you may take every now and then isn't as big of a problem as the many little hits they take on a daily basis during practice and games. Go and google youth football big hits and tell me that some of those kids aren't bringing wood. if sounds and talks like a duck, lets just outlaw it. If that is your argument, athletics is finished. You said it. I think it is all non sense. That's not my argument.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 29, 2018 8:31:24 GMT -6
You are right that I don't have the statistical backing to prove my statement above but it is my personal experience that this is the norm. All 5 schools that I have been a part of(4 coaching and 1 playing) have operated exactly this way. But lets look at the numbers. There are 1.23 million kids playing football ages 6-12 as of a 2015 report Pop Warner who does require coaches to be USA certified and is the largest national youth league in the country represents 250,000 of those kids. That is roughly 20%Pop Warner is also only in 30 states and doesn't even cover the whole state in most cases. So using those numbers we can assume that Pop Warner only covers 20% of the youth coaches. Now maybe there are enough town leagues out there that require more of their coaches other than just showing up and making sure everyone plays but I would be willing to bet there aren't. Also, it has been proven that CTE comes from repeated sub-concussive hits not just the real big hits. So the fact that momentum happens at greater rates as we get older is a moot point. That's a classic cherry-picking logical fallacy. You can't cherry pick a particular data cluster in one breath, then make the assumption that the entire rest (or even most of the rest) of the population is NOT doing the same or similar. You have no basis on which to make that claim, except your own opinion (which you can't possibly substantiate). Unsubstantiated assumptions are not facts. This is a gross overstatement. It is a theory that has not been conclusively proven. They THINK this may be the case. Logically, if this were a proven causative relationship, then most everyone who experienced repetitive sub-concussive hits (not to mention, actual concussions) would end up with CTE, and that's NOT the case. I'm not saying that there is no correlation; but correlation is not the same as causation.
To call greater momentum a moot point is to not understand that hits (whether concussive or sub-concussive) are, in fact, changes of momentum and/or direction. To say that magnitude would have no effect is like saying actual proven laws of physics are not true.
1-I never stated it as "fact." I actually said one could assume based on the information known that it was that the majority of youth coaches have no formal training or the external motivation to get the training. And it's not really cherry picking if I'm not withholding anything. If there were evidence to prove my opinion wrong I would gladly welcome it because that means that what I have witnessed is only a small fraction of what actually happens at the youth level. Again, I'm just making an assumption based on personal experience and the information presented. I chose Pop Warner because it is the biggest youth football organization and it only covers 20% of kids 6-12 who play the game. The whole point that I am trying to make it that there needs to be some sort of a governing body over youth football whether it be state or national for things like this law to go away. 2-You can believe what you want about CTE but there have been multiple studies done that point to repeated sub-concussive hits having a huge correlation to getting CTE. link Here is one of them. It may not be "proven," but if it sounds like a duck and looks like a duck. 3-I don't understand how me saying greater momentum being a moot point means I don't understand that hits are changes in momentum. I'm saying that the big hit that you may take every now and then isn't as big of a problem as the many little hits they take on a daily basis during practice and games. Go and google youth football big hits and tell me that some of those kids aren't bringing wood.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 27, 2018 19:03:27 GMT -6
This isn’t about debating the benefits of youth football, it’s football being attacked by alarmist politics. This is the kind of stuff that slowly erodes the base of the game we all love and know is no where near as dangerous as some in the media and political realm want all the moms out there to think it is. I see what you’re saying and agree but if you look at all the rules changes and the emphasis on safer tackling techniques that state associations are pushing to make the game safer I don’t see youth leagues doing the same. Believe me, if every youth league was required to have coaches be certified I would be more on board but without the pay most places can only take who is willing to volunteer for the job. IMO this isn’t a horrible move and it’s sad that the the state legislation even has to get involved because nothing significant has changed in youth football.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 27, 2018 9:52:57 GMT -6
I'm not sure war is what I would call it but unfortunately if our sport isn't willing to try different things to make the game safer than we will see more of this. I know that a lot of coaches are changing the way they teach tackling and trying to have less contact in practice, but there are still things that just need to change. In a lot of places, there isn't a national youth football association and it's just put together by the towns. There is a league close to the school I'm at now that has football start in 1st or 2nd grade which, in my opinion, is ridiculous. Plus the coaching in most cases is just some dad who used to play and teaches old techniques.
I honestly don't believe that football should be played before you are twelve anyway. While I agree with some of what you said above, specifically with respect to our willingness to change the way we do things as coaches, the portion that I have highlighted is just a baseless assumption. Are there some dad coaches that fit that mold? Sure. Many? Based on the sheer number of kids playing youth football, I'd say that's probably correct. Most? I'm not sure you have the actual statistical backing to substantiate that statement. MANY youth football organizations (including teams, leagues, and national associations) require their coaches to be USA Football certified. Is that a guaranteed solution? No, but it is a good place to start. Add to that that MANY youth coaches regularly attend coaches clinics, lurk on forums like this one, watch film, spend out of their own pockets for books, DVD's memberships, etc., and your characterization doesn't really hold water. Go over to Dumcoach.com and you'll find a whole community of youth football coaches who are dedicated to honing their craft. There is no data that I am aware of that points to playing youth football resulting in CTE. In fact, in all of the high profile cases of which I am aware, the individuals played college or professional football or both. Now I'm no physicist, but I was in school the day we learned that Momentum = Mass x Velocity. Both mass (size and weight) and velocity (speed) increase the older and more physically developed the players get; this creates an exponential increase in momentum. Given that, which level of football is more likely to cause the larger collision? A bunch of second graders, or a group of weight trained, grocery-depleting, testosterone filled 12th graders? I know where I'd put my money. Does that mean we should eliminate high school football? The point I'm making is that eliminating football before age 12 won't accomplish squat. Let's stick to what we can control: teaching proper technique, controlling the level of contact, and anything else that places the safety of the players first and foremost. Blaming one group or another is counter-productive. You are right that I don't have the statistical backing to prove my statement above but it is my personal experience that this is the norm. All 5 schools that I have been a part of(4 coaching and 1 playing) have operated exactly this way. But lets look at the numbers. There are 1.23 million kids playing football ages 6-12 as of a 2015 report Pop Warner who does require coaches to be USA certified and is the largest national youth league in the country represents 250,000 of those kids. That is roughly 20% Pop Warner is also only in 30 states and doesn't even cover the whole state in most cases. So using those numbers we can assume that Pop Warner only covers 20% of the youth coaches. Now maybe there are enough town leagues out there that require more of their coaches other than just showing up and making sure everyone plays but I would be willing to bet there aren't. Also, it has been proven that CTE comes from repeated sub-concussive hits not just the real big hits. So the fact that momentum happens at greater rates as we get older is a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 26, 2018 11:06:23 GMT -6
I'm not sure war is what I would call it but unfortunately if our sport isn't willing to try different things to make the game safer than we will see more of this. I know that a lot of coaches are changing the way they teach tackling and trying to have less contact in practice, but there are still things that just need to change.
In a lot of places, there isn't a national youth football association and it's just put together by the towns.
There is a league close to the school I'm at now that has football start in 1st or 2nd grade which, in my opinion, is ridiculous.Plus the coaching in most cases is just some dad who used to play and teaches old techniques.
I honestly don't believe that football should be played before you are twelve anyway.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 26, 2018 10:28:24 GMT -6
Have any of you read this yet? I think this is unbelievable that this administration acted this way. I do not understand why so many administrations are so opposed to football, at all levels. My opinion is that their hatred for the sport stems from political ideology, but that discussion is not for this thread. My question is this. How many of you have dealt with bad administration? And what strategies did you use to deal with them? Could Coach Smith have done anything in this situation other than resign? I have dealt with poor administration at 1 college and 2 high schools. And at the college level there was very little that could be done, unless your Nick Saban or Urban Myer, if they don't like you or football, your fighting an unwinnable battle. At the high school level I bypassed the administration and went straight to the parents for my needs. Avoided the administration at all costs. footballscoop.com/news/official-resignation-letter-coach-explains-really-going-d-ii-humboldt-state/In my opinion, he did the right thing because that place is about to go downhill athletically. It's a sinking ship and he got off before it took him down with it. It's a true illustration of how important administration is at all levels of athletics.
|
|
|
Post by CS on Jan 25, 2018 12:00:22 GMT -6
can of dip, maybe something to spit into, snickers wrapper so you can leave it under your seat, cell phone ringer turned to 11
|
|