Friday Night Tykes

[busman]

Saw my first episodes last night on Esquire Channel. If this is the future of football, I am glad I retired.

[HLinNC]

Esquire isn't on my package level with DirecTV.  I have seen the ads for it though.

Youth Fb, meh.

[Ralph Damren]

I recently heard the comment : " If football stays 'as is' ; It will go the way of Golden Gloves Boxing - in the early 1900's it was the biggest sport for youngsters, today it doesn't exist". With TV shows like this and media coverage of concussions - unless we make some radical changes - the comment may be correct.

[bossman72]

unless we make some radical changes - the comment may be correct.

I think it's the changes that people hate the most!  The more the game changes, the more they hate it.  It was perfect 10 years ago.

The fans loved hitting and the physicality of the game.  They are now legislating that out because of the concussion stuff and the players lawsuit against the NFL.  If the game actually regressed into not calling targeting like before, then I think fans would like it.  However, that's never going to happen.

[Ralph Damren]

I truly believe that we need to promote that we are all concerned about safety on a high school level and make future changes reflecting that. I fear, that if left unattended, the game will regress back to coed two-hand touch where our biggest rule concern would be : Should the "grope touch" be a disqualifying foul?" Let's hope it never gets that far!!!

[east louis]

most of these scramble brain coaches don't do a good job of teaching

[AlUpstateNY]

I truly believe that we need to promote that we are all concerned about safety on a high school level and make future changes reflecting that. I fear, that if left unattended, the game will regress back to coed two-hand touch where our biggest rule concern would be : Should the "grope touch" be a disqualifying foul?" Let's hope it never gets that far!!!

Unfortunately, most of the reporting of serious football related injury potential does not spend a lot of focus differentiating between scholastic and Professional levels of the game, which many of us understand is dramatic.  Sadly ANY TV or Motion picture presentation of a scholastic football environment, is far more atuned to the total fantasy perceptions of screenwriters allowing their imaginations to dictate their pursuit of titilation and whatever exaggeration is necessary to appeal to target audiences. 

What might be helpful, but in the very least would be clarifying, would be an indepth statistical review of trends and projections of ACTUAL SCHOLASTIC ONLY injury statistics, factoring in the enhanced observation, reporting and diagnosing skills and attention that has drawn additional focus to potential injuries as a means of effective prevention, and where appropriate, the availability of far earlier response and treatment. 

If today's sportswriters are allowed to be the only source of information regarding this subject, accuracy and rational explanation of relevant details will never make their way to public disclosure and understanding.

[Tobes]

In the first episode, they showed a coach instructing his noseguard to hit the center before the snap to "set a tone."
Is the only thing you can call on that offsides? Could it be a personal foul and could the player be ejected?

[Legacy Zebra]

Depending on the hit, I would think you might have a case for UNR. I don't know about disqualification though. It would have to be an absolutely ridiculous hit or more than once for me to DQ a player for that.

[StudyingFutureZebra]

I think it's the changes that people hate the most!  The more the game changes, the more they hate it.  It was perfect 10 years ago.

The fans loved hitting and the physicality of the game.  They are now legislating that out because of the concussion stuff and the players lawsuit against the NFL.  If the game actually regressed into not calling targeting like before, then I think fans would like it.  However, that's never going to happen.

I can only speak from my political background in terms of strategy, but I really think they've opened Pandora's Box. Ever since the media sensationalism surrounding the concussion thing, they faced pressure from both sides. Either make a rule change to cover your hide legally and for PR reasons, which many, many people, myself included, think was a knee-jerk reaction and the result a complete disaster, or do nothing and face lawsuits and parents panicking and pulling their sons out of the sport. Essentially, you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. 

I think college football loses either way. The NCAA took the route of losing its fanbase instead of getting sued out of existence. When you lose most of your fanbase, I think a lot of these schools who are losing money on their football programs, which turned out to be 106 out of 120 FBS teams in 2010, will take the opportunity to drop football. Or they could have been sued into oblivion like the NFL was, though thankfully, they haven't adopted a targeting rule, and it seems the NFL is where most of said fans are going to see the football they knew and loved.

I would support just doing away with the ejection, and getting stricter with what you'd call unnecessary roughness. I don't see why that wouldn't be a happy medium that would satisfy everyone. While that doesn't involve going back to the good old days when this wasn't an issue and was an accepted risk of playing football, it does make an effort to make the game safer without something as ridiculous and asinine as an ejection for a big hit.

I'm just hoping NFHS doesn't make a rule like this, as I'd probably just forget I ever had this idea. But it's so sad that it's gotten to this point, when it was never an issue from the beginning.

[JasonTX]

I can only speak from my political background in terms of strategy, but I really think they've opened Pandora's Box. Ever since the media sensationalism surrounding the concussion thing, they faced pressure from both sides. Either make a rule change to cover your hide legally and for PR reasons, which many, many people, myself included, think was a knee-jerk reaction and the result a complete disaster, or do nothing and face lawsuits and parents panicking and pulling their sons out of the sport. Essentially, you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. 

I think college football loses either way. The NCAA took the route of losing its fanbase instead of getting sued out of existence. When you lose most of your fanbase, I think a lot of these schools who are losing money on their football programs, which turned out to be 106 out of 120 FBS teams in 2010, will take the opportunity to drop football. Or they could have been sued into oblivion like the NFL was, though thankfully, they haven't adopted a targeting rule, and it seems the NFL is where most of said fans are going to see the football they knew and loved.

I would support just doing away with the ejection, and getting stricter with what you'd call unnecessary roughness. I don't see why that wouldn't be a happy medium that would satisfy everyone. While that doesn't involve going back to the good old days when this wasn't an issue and was an accepted risk of playing football, it does make an effort to make the game safer without something as ridiculous and asinine as an ejection for a big hit.

I'm just hoping NFHS doesn't make a rule like this, as I'd probably just forget I ever had this idea. But it's so sad that it's gotten to this point, when it was never an issue from the beginning.

Prior to the automatic ejections, the NCAA rules have been cracking down in the rules on targeting.  The breaking point that led to the automatic ejection came about due to players not changing their ways.  The 15 yard penalty alone wasn't enough to deter them.  The ejection came as a "motivation" tool to change.  It will take another year of this rule to compare the numbers to see if it changes from one year to the next.

[Rulesman]

Ever since the media sensationalism surrounding the concussion thing...   

You've made some dumb statements in your time here. Congratulations, this one takes first prize.

 

[AlUpstateNY]

I would support just doing away with the ejection, and getting stricter with what you'd call unnecessary roughness. I don't see why that wouldn't be a happy medium that would satisfy everyone. While that doesn't involve going back to the good old days when this wasn't an issue and was an accepted risk of playing football, it does make an effort to make the game safer without something as ridiculous and asinine as an ejection for a big hit.

Going back to the good old days, means different things to different people.  As some may recall, facemasks and indestructable helmets existed for many of those formative years, where popularity had it's beginning and techniques taught specifically , and to a much greater degree successfully, avoided much of the concern for and frequency of head injuries.  Big hits weren't considered any more significant than other hits as long as they occomplished the objective.

The idea of allowing spectators and fans to determine "how much" and "how severe" in necessary doesn't always add to the success of the games.  At least it didn't help the survival of Gladitorial games, which were wildly popular. Any rule change has two basic elements; whatis the benefit to the game, and what is the overall cost, not just in finances.

"Big Hits" are exciting and have been heavily promoted over the years, while the accumulated negative cost to players (also an important necessity of the game) went largely unnoticed, until recent medical advancements exposed them.  Which can the game survive without; starr players or ridiculous "big hits" ?

[busman]

1. I understand that a couple of coaches in the league have been suspended due to teaching unsafe tactics. Like 10,000 lawyers on the ocean floor, that's a start.
2. We played in a team in junior high (twice in one season) that our coach had scouted and knew that on the first sound, the D would jump and deliver a forearm shiver (when it was legal) to our heads to "set the tone". So, the first time we played, we purposely went on a silent count the whole first series to avoid it. The second time, we all went to the line in two point stances and at the first sound, shifted the right side to the left side and vice versa. When they jumped there wasn't anyone there to hit and just stood around looking stupid on the wrong side of the neutral zone.
3. Agree totally with Albany. Fan reaction/preference cannot dictate the rules - no doubt they influence them, but it cannot be the only factor.

[VALJ]

Yeah, some of the "coaches" on that show should be shot.  I could only watch about 10 minutes of one episode, before I turned it off and sent an email to the network protesting that they're glorifying these... jerks.

[AlUpstateNY]

Sadly it seems there's really not any great expansion in the number of idiots at youth football games, either along the sideline or watching the game, but a lot fewer normal people who seem willing to suggest an idiot blowing off steam, simply shut up.  Unfortunately, that silence only feeds the idiot's imagination that they are making themselves look important.

[TXMike]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Friday-Night-Tykes-coaches-suspended-5190766.php

There has been some disciplinary action leveled already and I suspect there will be more as the series plays out.  This is all recorded footage from last football season so what was done was done.  Whatever these idiots did and whatever they allowed to be recorded is going to be played out in every episode.

[VALJ]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Friday-Night-Tykes-coaches-suspended-5190766.php

“The show has given us somewhat of a black eye,” Morgan said. “If they talk to us about another season, I'll have a lot of reservations.”

Why not have another season and show how you've cleaned things up since these were filmed?

[Magician]

Why not have another season and show how you've cleaned things up since these were filmed?

Because that would not be interesting TV

[Curious]

You've made some dumb statements in your time here. Congratulations, this one takes first prize.

 

WOW, Rulesman; that was harsh!  However, "Studying", in all good consciousness I have to say that to minimize (or ignore) the "concussion thing" is a MAJOR MISTAKE!  To truly understand the depth of this problem, we should all read the book entitled "League of Denial", by Mark and Steve Fainaru, which chronicles the NFL's initial rejection, subsequent reluctant acceptance, and, in the end, financial capitulation (although not formally admitting responsibility) to the lawsuit brought by former NFL players.

While the circumstances surrounding the deaths of the likes of Mike Webster, Junior Seau, and others are truly tragic, the scariest part to me is the suggestion by the powers-that-be at the higher levels of football preached from the mountain top that there is still "no significant problem" - especially at the little league and high school levels.

True we have toughened rules regarding hits to the head and "concussion protocols"; but for one who has  watched this great game for a long time, I really have seen little change in the teaching of butt blocking, punishing the opponent above the shoulders, face tackling, and outright spearing.  I firmly believe there are many folks (and parents) out there who would love to outlaw football.  The movement is growing; and we as officials and coaches must take it into our own hands to strictly enforce and stop teaching these types of acts - or we all should take up officiating and coaching water polo.   

[AlUpstateNY]

I would support just doing away with the ejection, and getting stricter with what you'd call unnecessary roughness. I don't see why that wouldn't be a happy medium that would satisfy everyone. While that doesn't involve going back to the good old days when this wasn't an issue and was an accepted risk of playing football, it does make an effort to make the game safer without something as ridiculous and asinine as an ejection for a big hit.

Rather than do away with the ejection, enforcing it might do a lot better to eliminate garbage that has nothing to do with the game.  If you want to see crippling collissions, I'd suggest Demolition Derby.  Playing football at the higher levels REQUIRES a lot of skill, that's attained through a lot of hard work.  Do you want to see the game evolve into specialists (assassins) taking out the oppositions better players, because that is exactly where your idea would lead. 

Succumbing to purely "Fan" (short for FANATIC) preferences didn't improve the Gladitorial Games, for more than the short term.  Why would we want to encourage people of lesser talent to "take out" opponents of greater talent?  Want to eliminate something?  Focus on "Trash Talking" at the Collegiate and Professional levels, it adds nothing positive to the game and is a childish method of trying to frustrate an opponent, which often serves as the catalyst for subsequent problems.

There's only room for one mind inside a football helmet, and a player's concern should be what's going on inside his own helmet rather than his competition's.