Simple version. Kids need to be taught the game and how to prepare their bodies to play it. Two weeks in the Fall would help everyone involved. It would not be a threat to any other sport.

 

Simple enough?

 

 

2 weeks is enough time to teach the game and prepare their bodies?

 

It would not be a threat? How about football, cross country, and soccer. Plus basketball conditioning starts sometime during the fall as well.

2 weeks is enough time to teach the game and prepare their bodies?

 

It would not be a threat? How about football, cross country, and soccer. Plus basketball conditioning starts sometime during the fall as well.

 

Myself (as well as Bulldog77) could get a TON done in ten days. If you can't teach anything in ten days, why does football need it? They obviously accomplish things from it. You might not be able to teach "the game" however, you very much could get the kids in a workout regiment that you are otherwise not allowed to do in the offseason...ie throwing.

 

As for it being a threat. If you let your football players, soccer players or CC runners go to fall baseball instead of practicing for their season well, that's your problem.

Clearly those opposed to ten simple days of F~~~ baseb~~~ have very little knowledge about, or understanding of the physiological and/or training aspects of the modern game. Baseb~~~ players are clearly the least "conditioned" athletes among the major sports at the high school level. That doesn't mean there is no conditioning, just that the physical demands "appear" less than say, footb~~~ of basketb~~~, but it doesn't mean there aren't physical training needs for baseb~~~ athletes. Lawsuits by the hundreds are now lining up in the courts to argue everything from lack of coach training to "little league elbow." In light of ~~~ this, what is wrong with ~~~owing a short period to take those athletes who are available and/or willing and give them an opportunity to work with the coach to learn work-out regimens for the winter. Stretching execises, arm strengthening work, etc., etc., etc. Whats wrong with being able to assess the progress of some players after three months of summer baseb~~~ (in which more than 90% of high school coaches DO NOT participate)? Who are you harming by ~~~owing this short period of practice that you aren't harming with, oh, say, Spring footb~~~? You have the weather, you have the field availibility, you have the kids who are willing, you have the umpires available. If F~~~ baseb~~~ is a threat to footb~~~, then why do we ~~~ow Spring footb~~~? If players need a break form the sport, then why do we have year-round soccer? Summer basketb~~~? Club team volleyb~~~? no, those arguments hold no water. Good athletes want more opportunities to improve, to learn and to play.

 

Very well said. And every bit the truth.

Simple version. Kids need to be taught the game and how to prepare their bodies to play it. Two weeks in the Fall would help everyone involved. It would not be a threat to any other sport.

 

Simple enough?

 

If it were only that simple. No threat to bigger schools but try doing it in the fall at the Class A schools and several football and soccer players would miss out on what you seem to think is very important instruction. Once again advantage BIG SCHOOL..

If it were only that simple. No threat to bigger schools but try doing it in the fall at the Class A schools and several football and soccer players would miss out on what you seem to think is very important instruction. Once again advantage BIG SCHOOL..

 

 

I happen to know a thing or two about coaching at a small Class A school. Sorry, certainly nothing personal here but you're wrong on this one. And yes, it is important instruction and conditioning that some players (those NOT playing football or soccer) aren't getting from other sports. There is no bigger proponent of multi-sports participation than me, but there ARE kids who don't play fall sports. And by the way, many class A schools don't have boys soccer. Most of our players play football, then basketball, then baseball and some even combine multiple Spring sports at our urging! It can be and is done! But should that prevent others from reaping the benefits of off-season instruction? Again, who or what is the harm?

I happen to know a thing or two about coaching at a small Class A school. Sorry, certainly nothing personal here but you're wrong on this one. And yes, it is important instruction and conditioning that some players (those NOT playing football or soccer) aren't getting from other sports. There is no bigger proponent of multi-sports participation than me, but there ARE kids who don't play fall sports. And by the way, many class A schools don't have boys soccer. Most of our players play football, then basketball, then baseball and some even combine multiple Spring sports at our urging! It can be and is done! But should that prevent others from reaping the benefits of off-season instruction? Again, who or what is the harm?

 

:thumb: :thumb:

I happen to know a thing or two about coaching at a small Class A school. Sorry, certainly nothing personal here but you're wrong on this one. And yes, it is important instruction and conditioning that some players (those NOT playing football or soccer) aren't getting from other sports. There is no bigger proponent of multi-sports participation than me, but there ARE kids who don't play fall sports. And by the way, many class A schools don't have boys soccer. Most of our players play football, then basketball, then baseball and some even combine multiple Spring sports at our urging! It can be and is done! But should that prevent others from reaping the benefits of off-season instruction? Again, who or what is the harm?

The old "I'm a coach and I know more then you" answer. Nothing personal bulldog77 but I know and respect a great many coaches but I've never met one that didn't think he was always right. Sort of goes with that whole ego thing that coaches seem to need and crave.. In closing You make several valid points just most of which I disagree with.. :thumb: :walk:

I happen to know a thing or two about coaching at a small Class A school. Sorry, certainly nothing personal here but you're wrong on this one. And yes, it is important instruction and conditioning that some players (those NOT playing football or soccer) aren't getting from other sports. There is no bigger proponent of multi-sports participation than me, but there ARE kids who don't play fall sports. And by the way, many class A schools don't have boys soccer. Most of our players play football, then basketball, then baseball and some even combine multiple Spring sports at our urging! It can be and is done! But should that prevent others from reaping the benefits of off-season instruction? Again, who or what is the harm?

 

I see no harm if Fall Baseball were similar to Spring Football.

 

In small Class A schools Spring Football gives the kids that do not play Baseball or run track 10 days to participate in their sport. Sometimes that isn't a whole lot of kids and sometimes you may not have a QB, and sometimes schools opt not to even have Spring practice.

 

Fall baseball could be the same thing for kids who don't play Football or Soccer. Even if you only have 8 players you could work on baserunning, hitting, and defense for 10 days.

How is this not disgrimination against baseball/softball?

How is this not disgrimination against baseball/softball?

 

 

How is it?

The old "I'm a coach and I know more then you" answer. Nothing personal bulldog77 but I know and respect a great many coaches but I've never met one that didn't think he was always right. Sort of goes with that whole ego thing that coaches seem to need and crave.. In closing You make several valid points just most of which I disagree with.. :thumb: :walk:

 

 

 

No ego involved whatsoever. No hint either that I feel I "know more than you." You brought up the whole idea that class A schools would be at a disadvantage in comparison to "big schools." I am merely pointing out I, and many other coaches at smaller schools that I personally know, disagree with that logic. You want to make this personal, that's your choice. And by the way, if I was always right, I wouldn't be coaching.

No ego involved whatsoever. No hint either that I feel I "know more than you." You brought up the whole idea that class A schools would be at a disadvantage in comparison to "big schools." I am merely pointing out I, and many other coaches at smaller schools that I personally know, disagree with that logic. You want to make this personal, that's your choice. And by the way, if I was always right, I wouldn't be coaching.

 

I beg to differ. See BIGZIG, I am always right and I do know more than you about the situation.

 

If everyone looks at the three major sports collectively and tries to figure out which would be more beneficial by having an off-season 10 day workout period, has to think baseball. Baseball is the most individual sport out of all of them.

 

Let's take for example Chris Curley. He stopped playing football and basketball to concentrate on baseball. Now, we know that if he wasn't playing football that he would join in on a fall workout for baseball. Everyone knows that if you have one dominant pitcher you can go a long way. If you don't think that a guy like Curley would benefit from being with his coaches for 10 days in the fall and getting into a workout routine until Feb. 15th well, there's really no reason to try and explain it to you.

 

To say it would benefit only the big schools is just another excuse IMO.

 

BIGZIG... :banana:

How is it?

 

How can you allow one sport to have the additional 2 weeks and not the other?

 

If baseball was allowed something but not softball, there would be lawsuits.

 

So whats the difference? Football can, baseball can not.

I beg to differ. See BIGZIG, I am always right and I do know more than you about the situation.

 

If everyone looks at the three major sports collectively and tries to figure out which would be more beneficial by having an off-season 10 day workout period, has to think baseball. Baseball is the most individual sport out of all of them.

 

Let's take for example Chris Curley. He stopped playing football and basketball to concentrate on baseball. Now, we know that if he wasn't playing football that he would join in on a fall workout for baseball. Everyone knows that if you have one dominant pitcher you can go a long way. If you don't think that a guy like Curley would benefit from being with his coaches for 10 days in the fall and getting into a workout routine until Feb. 15th well, there's really no reason to try and explain it to you.

 

To say it would benefit only the big schools is just another excuse IMO.

 

BIGZIG... :banana:

 

How can anyone argue against this?

No ego involved whatsoever. No hint either that I feel I "know more than you." You brought up the whole idea that class A schools would be at a disadvantage in comparison to "big schools." I am merely pointing out I, and many other coaches at smaller schools that I personally know, disagree with that logic. You want to make this personal, that's your choice. And by the way, if I was always right, I wouldn't be coaching.

 

 

Besides, he has it all backward anyway. Coaches are not always right.

 

Coaches, my friend, Are never wrong.