Soccer - "The Un- American Activity"

I'm guessing, though, that youth sports when you were a kid did not start as young as they do now. I don't have a problem with 6- and 7-year-olds just learning a sport playing in a no-score-kept league, because the whole purpose is instructional. In my league, for example, say the ref calls traveling. He or she then explains to the kid what the rule is, and why it was called. Yeah, we covered this stuff in practice, but there was only one practice per week, and there is no guarantee a 6- or 7-year-old will remember this stuff come gametime. (Then again, there are some pros who are the same way). There are a lot of coaches and adults who will stop worrying about instruction and worry more about the score if it's kept, which isn't conducive to teaching kids a sport when they're, say, five to eight years old. And you think kids innately don't care about winning and losing? Have you ever seen two toddlers fight over a toy?

By age 9 or 10, at least where I live, the no-score-kept leagues are gone. Believe me, there are plenty of opportunities then to learn that life stinks and that there are winners and losers. I don't remember trophies being handed out after my son's baseball and soccer teams were eliminated in their playoffs. If the twentysomethings in your office don't have the competitive drive or felt like all they had to do was show up, that's not the fault of their sports leagues -- it's the fault of their parents.

 

Not odd at all. Simple understanding tells you all you need to know.

 

And I'm stating that this didn't begin with soccer. It isn't confined to soccer. This is a youth league issue, not a specific sport issue.

I fall into that decade younger demo. I never played in a "no score kept league." Thus, I think this is some newer phenomenon or something that occurred in the more white-bread, wealthier towns.

 

I'm older than most here so I can pretty much tell you that North American youth sports hasn't been "pussified" in the last twenty years, it's gone in the exact opposite direction.

I played hockey from about age 7 and right through  high school. House leage, travel team, high school team. I was a pretty good goalie but I would never be confused with Jacques Plante. I played at about the highest level at the time and although I sure wasn't junior hockey calibre, I never thought anything about it.

In all the  years I played my mother didn't come to a single game and my father would come if his shift work permitted. I didn't think anything of it--neither did my friends whose parents rarely showed up. We played the game, we'd go home, our moms would ask us how we did and that was it. We played, we won, we lost, we forgot about it.

Nowadays (and I was guilty of this) every parent thinks their  Gord and Doug playing is going to be drafted. The parents are ferocious and little Johnny, who doesn't give two shits about hockey other than it's a chance to play with his buddies, drops out.

Tim Horton's hockey, one of the most successfull house league hockey programs in Canada for four to eight year olds is a "don't keep score" league to act as a counterbalance to the "win at all costs" mentality of the hockey universe. Trust me, put your kid in a AA or AAA hockey program when they're 12 and tell me sports is "pussified".

There's nothing wrong with "participation" medals at at certain age group and at a certain talent level.
Kids know that it's bullshit but they get to stick it on their bookshelves. I don't think for one minute it gives me the idea that t hey have any sense of entitlement.

 

Damien - what you wrote in your first post - you're either training your kid relentessly for greatness in something, or your kid is doomed to be a shit-shoveler.  hits the nail on the head of the parental dilema of the 21 century.

I spend a lot of time with my niece and nephew coaching their teams and every said on this thread is dead on when it comes to youth sports.

The problem I see is that their seems to be no middle ground anymore for the " average kid". The situation applies more to boys than to girls as the expectation is lower.

For most team sports unless the boy has started with the instuctional leagues at ages 6/7/8 there is no way from them to catch up at age 9 when things start getting serious. For hockey if a kid is not on skates by age 5 forget about them even trying to play at age 9 or 10. They will never catch up.

Part of problem is things move so fast coaches do not have enough time to work with kids on basics after the instructional leagues. Starting at age 9 its implied that boy should have a basic understanding of the sport.

The other part of problem is that many of the kids have such refined skills, the kids that do not, stand out and they are too embarrised to dig in an catch up.  

I grew with a "Chip Hilton" existiance playing 3 sports.  It's something I look back on and will always treasure.  In today's world said existance is pretty much impossible unless you have the skills of Bo Jackson.

 

"Pussyificiation" may not be the apt term for youth sports today after all.

But what I think HAS happened is that the gap has widened between the young athlete and the youngster who plays sports for something to do.

It's a decision that has to be made earlier than ever before, because if you don't, there's no catching up. Take basketball. If you're going to be a solid high school contributor, you'd better be working into the AAU programs by fourth grade. (Make exceptions here for tiny high schools; I think for this, we're talking more about the medium- to large-sized schools.)

And believe me, if you've ever seen AAU/travel team youth sports, there's no resemblance between that and touchy-feely, no-score-kept youth sports. In other words, you want your kids to learn the hard lessons about winning and losing? You have a clear route to travel. And if you DON'T want that for your kid, then you deal with the other end -- the "let's make every kid feel good" camp -- like Boom says.

I expect some to disagree with me, but I believe that the argument used for years against intense sports at a young age -- early burnout -- is being debunked to some extent. You can raise a happy, well-adjusted kid either way, with intense sports or without. The factors in a youth's maladjustment are more often based in something else.

I also think we're tougher on the intense sports family than most, because oft-times we're at odds with them in terms of coverage, how important it is in the big picture, etc.

 

Welp, I'm a member of the 1981 club and I can damn well remember keeping score all through my days in youth sports. However, youth soccer wasn't as popular and I opted to play pee wee and midget football over summer soccer anyway. Regardless, score was kept, kids were pissed, parents did some consoling, and coaches did some bitching at players.

I don't think I ever got a trophy for 'just participating. I believe we got a few 1st or 2nd place trophies, gameballs, etc..

 

JR - Hockey is one of few sports that has not been "pussified". I think part of reason is that those getting into the sport understand the level of commitment that it takes.

Also think that those running youth level hockey programs are very solid hockey guys that will just not allow it to happen.

 

What ethnicity is Reyna if he is not Latin American ?