|
Post by timholycross on Mar 6, 2019 17:31:35 GMT -5
The kid soccer nonsense is unbelievable. Parents love to say that their kid is "on a travel team", which requires the parents to take the kid 100 or 150 miles in any direction for weekend tournaments where the parents rent hotel rooms and pay for meals, etc, etc, All this is done with some expectation that little Jason or Heather will land a college scholarship. Then you hear that Jason or Heather don't start on the high school team. You don't want to be cruel and ask whether their child is one of the top 5 or 6 players in the county because that's the number of kids who will land any kind of kickball scholarship each year--thousands of $$ spent chasing this elusive payoff. Of course, if the kid really loves playing, I suppose it's another story...…. Doesn’t change your point but, at least where I liive, there is “travel” soccer where towns have tryouts and form teams based on what town you live in. Those towns play other town travel teams of similar skill in the same county so half the games are in your town and half are in neighboring towns. What you’re talking about is “premier” which is totally out of control and a complete waste of time and money. Lots of people making a living off it though. You can think of soccer on 3 levels, really: Youth Local Travel- for example BAYS in Eastern Mass. Soccer. Fairly low key, relatively speaking. Club- you'll practice more than the leagues above and play on teams with better players, typically not all from the same place. A lot of games/tournaments on weekends but typically not road trips. You have to be careful in investing in one of these programs, in terms of coaching and development, they are all over the place. Academy, etc.- fanatics, although you can take it to the bank that the instruction is solid. Some of them even prohibit their players from playing high school, which if I had a standout child, is where I would draw the line. Your child better love soccer to commit to them.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 6, 2019 21:28:57 GMT -5
Gambling is bad. Lots of people have gotten into all kinds of financial problems because of gambling addictions. But people should be allowed to make their own decisions so MA has allowed casinos into the state
Marijuana is bad for you. But people should be allowed to make their own decisions so MA has legalized recreational marijuana.
Parents can't be trusted to choose which games their children play. This doesn't feel consistent.
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Mar 7, 2019 1:09:16 GMT -5
Gambling is bad. Lots of people have gotten into all kinds of financial problems because of gambling addictions. But people should be allowed to make their own decisions so MA has allowed casinos into the state Marijuana is bad for you. But people should be allowed to make their own decisions so MA has legalized recreational marijuana. Parents can't be trusted to choose which games they play. This doesn't feel consistent. gambling and marijuana involve decisions made by adults concerning their own conduct. children are not allowed to gamble or purchase marijuana. children are not usually allowed to make decisions as to what is good or bad for them on their own. children need guidance in making certain decisions/choices from either the state, parents, church, etc. this is the main distinction between gambling, marijuana v youth sports. who is in the best position to make decisions concerning potential hazards of youth sports?
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Mar 7, 2019 8:35:04 GMT -5
Banning pee wee football sounds great, but I’d not let my son play junior high or high school football without having been exposed to contact earlier. Just seems like a set up not only for a conclusion, but paralysis. Having coached 5-7 year olds in tackle football, I don’t recall a single instance of a concerning hit, probably due to the fact that the age and weight limits/stratification system and generally common sense coaching prevent this. I think the move has some PC elements to it but I’m keeping an open mind. Right now my son is focused on other sports and that’s fine with me. And I also think it is ABSURD that football starts in early August. I will not deprive my family and my children of a normal summer vacation just to play pee wee football. When I was a kid we started the first week of school and that’s how it should be today. Youth sports are completely out of control. Completely. AAU in the second grade? Yup. "Youth sports are completely out of control." thanks primarily to completely out of control parents. As a former youth coach,Totally agree....
From my experience and decades as a watcher of youth sports - the worst parent behavior....
1 Boys Ice Hockey 2 Boys basketball 3 Girls softball 4 Boys Lacrosse 5 Boys AND Girls Soccer
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 7, 2019 8:58:08 GMT -5
Gambling is bad. Lots of people have gotten into all kinds of financial problems because of gambling addictions. But people should be allowed to make their own decisions so MA has allowed casinos into the state Marijuana is bad for you. But people should be allowed to make their own decisions so MA has legalized recreational marijuana. Parents can't be trusted to choose which games they play. This doesn't feel consistent. gambling and marijuana involve decisions made by adults concerning their own conduct. children are not allowed to gamble or purchase marijuana. children are not usually allowed to make decisions as to what is good or bad for them on their own. children need guidance in making certain decisions/choices from either the state, parents, church, etc. this is the main distinction between gambling, marijuana v youth sports. who is in the best position to make decisions concerning potential hazards of youth sports? I disagree with the notion that the state is in the business of giving guidance to kids in decision making. That is just abdication of parental responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Mar 7, 2019 12:57:44 GMT -5
i am not big on the notion of the state running our lives. however, the state is in the position of providing information, statistics, etc on the risks and dangers of participating in youth sports so parents can make informed decisions on whether to allow their child to play.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 7, 2019 14:28:11 GMT -5
i am not big on the notion of the state running our lives. however, the state is in the position of providing information, statistics, etc on the risks and dangers of participating in youth sports so parents can make informed decisions on whether to allow their child to play. I have no issue with having studies and providing information. I don't like legislating behavior.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Mar 7, 2019 21:51:11 GMT -5
Re: legislating behavior--should the following be legal: (1) driving in a car without wearing a safety belt and (2) riding a motorcycle without a helmet?
|
|
|
Post by moose1970 on Mar 7, 2019 23:21:45 GMT -5
Re: legislating behavior--should the following be legal: (1) driving in a car without wearing a safety belt and (2) riding a motorcycle without a helmet? in both instances the DMV issues a license and has jurisdiction to regulate conduct. if you feel that it is your right to drive a car, ride a mc without obtaining a driver's license then go ahead and do what you want. if you submit to DMV jurisdiction then you need to follow their rules or seek to have the rules changes through the legislature. last time i looked you do not need a license to sign your child up for youth sports.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Mar 8, 2019 8:22:42 GMT -5
Re: legislating behavior--should the following be legal: (1) driving in a car without wearing a safety belt and (2) riding a motorcycle without a helmet? I say yes. Both are legal in NH. I wouldn't choose to do that but that is my choice as well. It is not uncommon to see bikers travelling on roads (other than I-95, I-93, and Rt 3) pull over at the state line and add or remove the helmet depending which way they go. This is very different than something like texting and driving where you are creating a hazard to others as well as yourself. I understand the argument that we all have to pay if someone is badly injured for not wearing a seat belt because the insurance company has to pay more for the more serious injury and we all pay higher premiums. I just don't agree with it. If safety belts were really that important, mandate cars have passive seat belts, and that neatly falls under commerce which is under the jurisdiction of the legislature
|
|
|
Post by alum on Mar 8, 2019 9:36:28 GMT -5
As I stated in the original post, I doubt that this will go anywhere. It looks like it was referred to committee and nothing more has happened in six weeks. I couldn't find evidence that a hearing has been held or scheduled on the bill. malegislature.gov/Bills/191/HD2501I don't know that we need legislation about this, I don't live in Massachusetts, I never played football, my kids never played football and I have never been involved in a youth football organization so I don't have a dog in this fight. That said, one thing I like about youth football vis a vis all of the youth sports with which I have been involved as a coach, board member or parent (baseball, softball, soccer, hockey, basketball, lacrosse) is that it is almost entirely a local sport at the youth level. I am not aware of travel/premier youth football. As far as I know, it is not a year round thing. Kids can play other sports in other seasons. In my mind, football can and should be saved from extinction and I do think that flag football at the younger ages would help.
|
|