^It took awhile but the Pee Wee league finally aligned teams by high schools. Cooper has joined the BCPWFL starting this season. At the same time, with closed enrollment things are very cyclical.

 

I think what makes it hard to gauge is how opening new schools changes things. I think when a new high school opens there is a quickly built in community spirit and high level of involvement from kids, parents, and administration. If you look at Conner, Ryle, and Cooper you see very similar early success in football and I think a lot of it has to do with the newness. Also, with each opening the county became less rural and I think that helped each successive school opening have quicker success.

On the flip side, removing a substantial amount of students guts a school and strips the sense of community and makes it hard to recover from. When Conner opened it took Boone years to recover, Ryle opening hurt Boone again, Cooper opening took a large chunk of kids from Conner.

I think you misinterpreted what he said. His point was with one middle school team you have one quarterback, two running backs, etc. With multiple schools (not consolidated) you have multiple quarterbacks, running backs, etc. That means more kids are playing and developing, which could in turn strengthen your high school program. But if they get cut from the one middle school team or get limited playing time, they are likely to look at a different sport, which hurts the high school team before they ever even had the chance to help.

 

That is exactly what I was saying.

I will also add a couple of points:

- If a program has a MS, then the MS HC IS the 2nd most important person in the program.

- Quality coaching is the X factor for ANY youth program, whether it is Little League OR MS.

- Coordination b/w the HS program & the youth programs are important regardless.

 

I have coached on the MS level - so I don't have anything against middle school... However, I agree exactly with gchs_uk9... It is just a numbers game.

It depends on the coaches, parents, players and programs. Any situation can be bad or good pending who is in charge of them.

I will use Scott HS/Woodland/Taylor Mill Eagles as an example. I don't think it is coincidence that the past couple of years Scott HS has turned around their football program that was dismal. They built a true feeder system with Taylor Mill Eagles who do not have a Senior division because they promote playing at Woodland. The terms are the save from Starter to HS and the HS coaches are involved all the way to the bottom.

My kids do not go there but my older some played line in NKYFL and is not a lineback in HS. My younger son was RB in NKYFL because the coaches wanted the ball in his hands and is now a WR. But they also understand the game good from other positions which helps them now.

Too much emphasis is put on "running the system" and we run the same playbook as the high school. The most important thing is that the players learn fundamentals, become more athletic (agile and quick), and want to continue playing football (keep it fun: Dale Mueller principle).

 

When you move into larger Middle School Roster sizes and even Freshman rosters, there is a hindrance that some boys who may develop late will not get the reps to keep them interested. There is a risk of losing some boys if they are not able to get some "field" time and this is unfortunate. The past few years though, NKY has done some additional games for the developing players and this helps the program. Statewide it is different and more difficult in rural areas, but NKY has programs begging for middle school players to come join the non school leagues. Possibly a working together relationship would be beneficial to get more kids on the field.

I think most programs lose kids in the following points:

 

1) After 6th grade - especially if they are playing MS... Not a lot of 6th graders are ready for MS football. Not ready for the contact, not ready for conditioning, etc. IMO, almost all 6th graders should play youth league.

 

2) B/W 8th & 9th - You lose those 8th graders who didn't play as much as they'd like. One school of thought is, "If they aren't playing they must not be that good." However, kids' bodies change a lot from 14-17 years of age. You never know what a kid will or won't develop into.

 

3) After Freshman/Sophmore Year. I put this one together, because it all depends upon the expectations. If a freshman realizes that a lot of playing time is unlikely, and accepts it & works, then they typically stick around another year. After the Sophmore year is critical because the kids actually kind of know what is going on, they realize they have improved, but may be frustrated with playing time...

 

I think 1 & 2 would be alleviated somewhat by more teams, and thus more opportunities to play. The thing that middle schools did was eliminate the K-8 school - thus eliminating youth (12-14 yrs old) teams affiliated with multiple elementary schools in a district.

 

#3 is all about what you do with those young guys... Do you beat them to death on the scout team? Do you have a full freshman/JV schedule? Do they have dedicated coaching or are they standing around? So on and so forth.

Obviously, success is based upon WHAT you do with the system that exists...

 

It just seems to me that, all other things being equal, MORE kids playing MORE football is better for all involved.

I think most programs lose kids in the following points:

 

1) After 6th grade - especially if they are playing MS... Not a lot of 6th graders are ready for MS football. Not ready for the contact, not ready for conditioning, etc. IMO, almost all 6th graders should play youth league.

 

2) B/W 8th & 9th - You lose those 8th graders who didn't play as much as they'd like. One school of thought is, "If they aren't playing they must not be that good." However, kids' bodies change a lot from 14-17 years of age. You never know what a kid will or won't develop into.

 

3) After Freshman/Sophmore Year. I put this one together, because it all depends upon the expectations. If a freshman realizes that a lot of playing time is unlikely, and accepts it & works, then they typically stick around another year. After the Sophmore year is critical because the kids actually kind of know what is going on, they realize they have improved, but may be frustrated with playing time...

 

I think 1 & 2 would be alleviated somewhat by more teams, and thus more opportunities to play. The thing that middle schools did was eliminate the K-8 school - thus eliminating youth (12-14 yrs old) teams affiliated with multiple elementary schools in a district.

 

#3 is all about what you do with those young guys... Do you beat them to death on the scout team? Do you have a full freshman/JV schedule? Do they have dedicated coaching or are they standing around? So on and so forth.

I agree !! Well said !! I think it is very important that the JV kids , or backups and freshman squads and some cases froshmore . Should have a full schedule to play and opportunity to develop and utilized in practices . The teams that can manage that, will keep numbers at a higher end.

I agree !! Well said !! I think it is very important that the JV kids , or backups and freshman squads and some cases froshmore . Should have a full schedule to play and opportunity to develop and utilized in practices . The teams that can manage that, will keep numbers at a higher end.

 

Too many coaches beat underclassmen to death on scout teams... I know numbers don't always dictate that you can completely split off Froshmores, but a lot of coaches do a poor job of using these kids intelligently.

 

You don't have to kill each other every day to be a physical team.

Middle school football is just another step in the development of a football player. Unfortunately it is the end of "feel good" sports where everyone is guaranteed playing time and everyone gets a participant ribbon. Players play and those who don't have the physical skills and the ability don't get a lot of playing time. It is a time for kids to learn how to work hard, compete and get better. You learn whether you have the desire to play or would your time be better spent on other pursuits. My oldest son had 30 kids on his 7th grade team and there are 15 left for his senior season.

 

Is this an indictment of middle school sports? No. It is reality.

Certainly seems the same attrition of players happens in varsity.

 

It's just natural to lose players. A normal 3a school should have 30-35 enter middle school and 20-25 leave. Normally after four years if you have 15-20 seniors you feel like you are on top of the world!

Middle school football is just another step in the development of a football player. Unfortunately it is the end of "feel good" sports where everyone is guaranteed playing time and everyone gets a participant ribbon. Players play and those who don't have the physical skills and the ability don't get a lot of playing time. It is a time for kids to learn how to work hard, compete and get better. You learn whether you have the desire to play or would your time be better spent on other pursuits. My oldest son had 30 kids on his 7th grade team and there are 15 left for his senior season.

 

Is this an indictment of middle school sports? No. It is reality.

 

I think my point is that whether a kid is great at 13 is not really always an accurate indicator of whether or not he will be good at 17.

 

I have seen an awful lot of marginal MS players hit growth spurts, gain some maturity, and turn into really good HS football players. Conversely, I have seen a lot of really good MS players stop growing, see everyone around them catch-up, grow discouraged, and become marginal HS football players.

 

I also don't think it is helpful for athletes when we treat youth football like the BCS. I am not talking about a "feel good," Kumbaya mentality - ensuring as much participation as possible has a practical benefit. Sure, you want to put a good product on the field, but I think the zero-sum idea that is creeping down into middle school is sometimes detrimental to individual athletes and their possible FUTURE growth. We have to remember that, just because it is a school team, doesn't change the reality of what it is - YOUTH football. What would things be like if we applied the same type of logic to other areas of life... If you weren't great at something for a few months when you were 12 years old - maybe you should move on to something else??? Seems short-sighted to me.

The 12 year old today is not the 12 year old of 30 years ago. 30 years ago we played every sport offered because there were seasons. Football started in July and ended in November or December. Last year, my son started football lifting 2 weeks after the season ended so he had 6 weeks last year away from football. Now with sports being year around, that 12 year old has to make decisions like what is the best way to get a college scholarship. They are under a lot of pressure from the coaching staff as well. An acquaintance, whose daughter attended a small private school, told me that her volleyball coach gave her an ultimatum, volleyball or fast-pitch softball. She retired from softball in the 8th grade.

The 12 year old today is not the 12 year old of 30 years ago. 30 years ago we played every sport offered because there were seasons. Football started in July and ended in November or December. Last year, my son started football lifting 2 weeks after the season ended so he had 6 weeks last year away from football. Now with sports being year around, that 12 year old has to make decisions like what is the best way to get a college scholarship. They are under a lot of pressure from the coaching staff as well. An acquaintance, whose daughter attended a small private school, told me that her volleyball coach gave her an ultimatum, volleyball or fast-pitch softball. She retired from softball in the 8th grade.

 

If you're relying on sports to get you into college, you are setting yourself up for failure. The absolute best way to get a college scholarship is to work hard in school, get good grades, and apply for the many academic scholarships that are available. Sports and specializing won't mean a thing for most high school athletes. 95% of high school athletes will not play college sports, and a good chunk of the 5% who do, don't play all 4 years. Play the sports that you want to play in high school. Specialization only matters for a very, very small percentage of high school athletes. I'd say if you are making (or letting) a 12 year old make that sort of decision, your priorities aren't where they should be.

The 12 year old today is not the 12 year old of 30 years ago. 30 years ago we played every sport offered because there were seasons. Football started in July and ended in November or December. Last year, my son started football lifting 2 weeks after the season ended so he had 6 weeks last year away from football. Now with sports being year around, that 12 year old has to make decisions like what is the best way to get a college scholarship. They are under a lot of pressure from the coaching staff as well. An acquaintance, whose daughter attended a small private school, told me that her volleyball coach gave her an ultimatum, volleyball or fast-pitch softball. She retired from softball in the 8th grade.

 

1) The arguments about specialization and scholarships are bunk, in my opinion. First, the percentage of athletes who will receive a college scholarship in ANY sport is pretty small... And those who get them are often multi-sport athletes.

 

2) If your son is MS aged, I would argue that his coach has lost some perspective. This is exactly what I mean when I say "treating youth football like the BCS."

 

3) That girl's coach has definitely lost perspective.