Problems, comments or questions about this site?   Please email us at  webmaster (at) coachjerry (dot) com

Playing kids in sports

From Dianna:

I am currently on a Board for Youth Football. We have some people on the Board who have never been head coaches who would like to enforce a rule that says coaches have to split their team in half and have kids play either defense or offense but not both. They think that this will help the kids to win more games? I'm not so sure of that and neither are my coaches.

I do agree that coaches need to do their jobs and teach the kids the game and get them in as much as possible. This is very doable by running the ball away from the less experienced player. But I believe you have to have a core group of kids who are your stronger more experienced players who will play both sides. I agree some coaches look at kids and say you are a minimum play player and they play their six plays and they are out and sit on the bench the rest of the game. To me, that does not motivate a child to try harder for next year. But on the other hand, I don't believe that tying a coaches hands and forcing them to only play a kid one way and having one offense and defense would benefit the team. Everyone says it is a teaching level, as it is, they are taught at practice the game of football, but if there were no play-offs and no chance of going to Florida or Hawaii it might be easier to convince a coach to play a new kid the entire game because then it would not matter at all. Please let me know your thoughts as to if that type of system would work or be hurtful. 

Answer: The local Pop Warner group in our community had a rule at the Mighty Mite level a few years ago that would only allow a player to play either offense or defense in each half but not both offense and defense in the same half (i.e. the team had to be split into offensive and defensive teams for each half). A player could not play both offense and defense in a half. However, if the player played on offense in the first half he had could change and play on defense in the second half. Pop Warner rescinded that rule after a few years.

I coached in Pop Warner at the Mighty Mite level when that rule was in effect and I never really liked it because it limited the learning and enjoyment experience for the kids. But I understood the reason the rule was there.

The intent of that rule was to increase playing time for lesser skilled players by not allowing the better players to play both ways - which, by the way I totally support. Too many coaches who care only about winning, will try to do everything they can to keep their best players on the field for the maximum amount of time, usually at the expense of playing time for other players.

The rule was an attempt to offset the negative effects of "win at any cost" coaches but I believe it detracted from the kids experience and enjoyment. It was analogous to "throwing the baby out with the bath water."

I didn't need such a rule to force me to play all my players or insure that all my players got meaningful playing time.

I believe that kids should receive instruction in all positions during practice and should be encouraged and allowed to play various positions, on both offense and defense, in games. I always made sure that every player on my team played extensively ‹not just the minimum required number of plays. To do that some of the more skilled players had to sit out at times.

While I didn't need that rule to get all my players in the game, lots of other teams with overzealous coaches did. When coaching under that rule, I would let different kids play offense in the first half and defense in the second half and every player played extensively and in meaningful situations.

As I said before, this rule, like the minimum play requirement, is an attempt to mitigate poor coaching by adults who don't have the interest of all the players first and foremost - they are too focused on winning.

While on the subject of minimum play requirements, let me add; a minimum play requirement of 6 plays in a football game that is comprised of 60-80 plays is ridiculous. Players who practice three or four times a week for several hours a day and only get to play 6 plays in a game (usually less than 10% of the plays) are being mistreated by the coach. Those kids aren't playing football. They are just being used as "practice fodder" by the coach. No wonder kids are quitting sports before they are 12 years old. If youth football programs are going to have a minimum play requirement then it should be meaningful such as at least half of the game.

Because of situations similar to what you have described, I stopped coaching in Pop Warner and formed a special and unique football program in our community that focuses on fun, participation and player enjoyment and development. It eliminates the problem of overzealous coaches and playing time. I will be posting an article on my web site shortly describing this program in more detail.

I hope this answers your questions.