Coach/ board member/ parent / commissioner - how many hats can one person ethically wear?

Submitted by Leslie Briere on Mon, 04/20/2009 - 15:55.

We live in a relatively small town. The Recreation Board consists primarily of people who are coaches, and parents. The Rec Board also selects one board member to be a "commisioner" to make sure rules are followed and to manage any disputes that come up. So, the commissioner is a coach, a parent, and a Board Member - all at the same time. The There does not seem to be a good system of "checks and balances" to ensure neutrality / impartiality. How are other communities dealing with these type of situations? Particularly when there is no money to hire a neutral party.

5
Average: 5 (1 vote)
Coaches Conduct/ Drinking while in charge of athletes at hotel/Showering Issues ›

Wearing Too Many Hats

Submitted by Lindsay Barton on Mon, 04/20/2009 - 16:49.
It seems to me that, at the very least, the "commissioner" should not also be a board member.  Also, can't the Rec Board find someone both to serve on its board and be a commissioner who isn't a current parent or coach (such as a former parent or coach)?  With everyone wearing multiple hats, the chances that they will look out for their own narrow interests is simply too great in the system you describe.

I believe they could find

Submitted by Leslie Briere on Mon, 04/20/2009 - 17:17.

I believe they could find someone who would be willing to be the commissioner . . . the problem is, they don't seem to think it is a problem and therefore, they don't feel compelled to find a solution. When it was brought up by a parent, who was appropriate in her presentation, there was a somewhat explosive response. Those of us who have differing views are finding it uncomfortable to bring up issues . . . and we worry about impact on our children. It seems like such a simple thing . . . a "no brainer". Even if they are not actively looking out for their own interests, there is an overall appearance of things not being appropriate, and in some cases, of special treatment. I don't know if they don't understand that, or if they don't care about the outside perception.

Leslie, you should volunteer

Submitted by John Dee on Wed, 04/22/2009 - 04:17.

Leslie, you should volunteer to be on the board, or get involved somehow. I don't know your particular situation, but in my experience, no one wants to do any work. Many parents like to sign their kid up, not coach, keep score, do concessions or anything. Then they complain how the kids get coached? It's been my experience in small communities that a few people do everything because no one else steps up.
That said, I also feel there are a few times when the kids best interest isn't met, but for the most part, volunteers do a very good and fair job of running leagues. Remember, the coach's kid is typically one of the better players because that coach spends time getting the kid better. Many complain because the coach's kid gets this and that. In most cases, coach's kids are one of the better players.

Unfortunately, I did

Submitted by Leslie Briere on Wed, 04/22/2009 - 17:16.

Unfortunately, I did volunteer to be on the Board about 1 1/2 years ago, and am a member. I am not athletic myself, but contribute to fundraising, clean up, etc. One of the reasons I volunteered was that between kindergarten - 3rd grade, summer baseball was such a positive experience. Something changed in 4th grade, and it became competitive -between the local teams (for example, we typically have two local teams in the same age / grade group). The games played against other communities remained fun and stress free. Eventually, there were bullying issues, taunting at school.

I asked the board to consider "balancing" the teams. At some point many years ago, the teams got off balance so the minors team (3rd / 4th grade) would have mostly 4th graders on one team (with 1 or 2 third graders) and mostly 3rd graders on the other team (with 1 or 2 fourth graders). The same thing happens with the majors teams (5/6th graders). So you end up with a predominately older team going against a predominately younger team. It is hard on the younger team, because they feel defeated before they even start. And it is hard on the few older kids who are placed on the younger team, because they feel separated from their peers and get picked on (even if they are good athletes), and it is not healthy for the older team because they have an exaggerated sense of dominance over other teams. Basically, it is a stacked team. And, the teams we play from other communities are balanced between grade levels.
I voiced this concern at several board meetings, hoping to have the system adjusted prior to the season, but was very much shot down. One other member felt as strongly as I did, but we did not prevail. It became a mess. Some parents came in to share their views that the teams should be balanced, and most of these parents had very athletic kids who were being impacted by the imbalance (so it wasn't about "my kid isn't getting playing time).. These parents were not well received. The parents of the "stacked" team came in "en masse" and brought their kids in to protest the idea of "splitting the kids up". The issue of balancing the teams became lost in the jargon of "splitting kids up."

It is very difficult to feel like a lone voice. On the other hand, it is also difficult to watch some of this unfold in such an unhealthy way. I have decided to back off . . . mostly for my sanity. But I do wonder how other communities handle these issues. I don't know if I will choose to stay with the board or not, but if I do, I'd like to know what is considered "best practice". The odd thing is this: there is an effort made to "balance" the girls softball teams.

Perhaps the bane of youth sports

Submitted by Brooke de Lench on Wed, 04/22/2009 - 19:48.

Over the years this is perhaps the topic that is asked the most in private -for fear of having kids benched. Thank you for asking itin public.

I strenuously disagree with the views of John, in many respects.  I don’t agree that a coach's kids are somehow entitled to more playing time, even if they are "better."  Coaches who give their kids special treatment are the bane of youth sports. I have been record for a long time in favor of equal playing time at grades six and under and significant playing time in middle school and high school at levels below varsity.  Also, how do you know a coach's son is actually a better athlete and will continue to be better when he goes through puberty?  As I have written, the current youth sports system gives unfair advantages to "early bloomers" over "late bloomers".  It is also clear from published research that “only one in four children who are star athletes in elementary school will still be stars when they reach high school. Predicting whether a preteen athlete will be a good enough high school athlete to land a college scholarship or even influence the admissions process is thus almost impossible."


In Chapter Fifteen of my book, Home Team Advantage, I list the variety of ways that parents can act to reform youth sports at the grass roots level, including term limits for board members, and take other steps to ensure transparency and accountability.  I have now posted an article on the site listing these steps.  I have also moved the article to the front page and encourage parents to print it up and circulate it to the other parents who are steaming in silence.

 

Brooke de Lench

Publisher

MomsTeam.com

Author:

Home Team Advantage: The Critical Role of Mothers inYouth Sports

Thanks for responding

Submitted by Leslie Briere on Fri, 04/24/2009 - 14:39.

Brooke, I actually saw your article on "Transparency" when I logged in to the site, and read it before coming to the forum section, so it was a nice coincidence for me to see that you had posted a response to my issue!

Your article suggested that parents be courageous about speaking out. I agree, but know from personal experience that if you are in the minority there may be some negative fall-out for the parent and the child.

I did not realize, when I raised the issue, that the idea of having balanced teams would be so contentious. I have finally had to cry "uncle" and just be quiet. I indicated that my opinion hasn't changed, but I will stop talking about it. Things finally got back to "normal" - but for a while there I felt like I had the plague! (and so did my child).

Outside of youth sports, I like these people. But their thinking around baseball seems to be distorted (although perhaps they think the same of me) and I don't think it is possible to have a healthy rational discussion. And it is not just the teams that arent balanced . . . there are sponsorship issues as well. (some teams can't afford to put the kids names on their shirts, other teams have enough money to be outrageously extravagent).

For my sanity, I've had to realize that I can't fix this. I can maybe "chip away" at it, but it is really hard to love a community so much and to feel so out of place on this issue.

I'm so pleased that I stumbled across MomsTeam because prior to this I felt pretty isolated. When you are the only one (or one of a handful) you start to question your own thinking. Thank you for helping me keep perspective. Also, the issue of "coaches kids" was not one I raised, but I agree with your sentiment on that.

Leslie, I know exactly what

Submitted by John Dee on Thu, 05/07/2009 - 17:44.

Leslie, I know exactly what you are talking about. Let me try to provide some balance. Let's say you are in a league with many other schools in your county, small and larger ones. One school has many kids, and fields 3 teams, another has enough kids for 2 teams and a small community only has enough kids for 1 team. The community with one team has all of it's players on one team, skilled and unskilled. The bigger communities have thined out their talent amoung their two or more teams.
Also, please re-read what I said about coach's kids. I did not say that the coach's kid is entitled to more playing time. I said "from my experiences, in GENERAL" coach's kids are usually some of the better players. Why? Because (again typically) the coach is someone who cares about the kids and the game and takes the time to work with their child to make them better. Yes, there are exceptions and I think it would be very, very difficult to coach a team with your child on it and they are not one of the better players. It would put some strain on the parent/ coach/ son/ daugher relationship.
In no part of my postings do I every point to youth sports leading to college scholarships. I feel the college athletic scholarship is the biggest myth with college sports. Very, very few kids ever are considered for athletic scholarships, and many are partial at best. No, no one knows how the early and late bloomers turn out, so what do you do, put everyone in the same situation and stunt the development of the gifted? In the educational model, most schools seggregate the "smart" kids and put them in upper level classes? Using Brooke's model, all kids would be in all of the same classes and no kids would get any advanced courses. Don't fit quite as well, does it?

There is a lot of misinterpretation on both sides I'm afraid

Submitted by Kirk Mango on Thu, 05/07/2009 - 22:56.

John,

When I peruse the posts, articles, and comments on the board I do tend to see a good deal of misinterpretation on both sides of issues that are presented, it has happened with me as well. Case in point, I agree with you that you did not say that a coaches kid deserves more playing time. Your comment, if I read it correctly, is more along the lines that coaches kids tend to be better because of the vested interest and time the coach probably spends with their own child outside of practice. Now I cannot attest to whether this is actually true or not so I will not state one way or the other. Not enough information for me to fall on either side, even though I have observed both (where the coaches kid was not as good and where they where most definately near or at the top). So yes I do believe, based on what you have written here that your statement was taken out of context.

However, you are also interpreting Brooke's model incorrectly - at least as I understand it. One of her main concerns centers on finding ways to keep more kids playing and competing in sports they would like to play, thus, giving late bloomers a chance to excel or fall to the wayside if they themselves so choose. That is accomplished by keeping all, or as many as possible, members who try out. Then dividing up the teams into groups or levels where all can practice, play, and compete at their level giving them a chance to develop. She stresses this most assuredly at the younger levels expanding some form of it into high school. So instead of having a team with only Varsity, JV, and Freshmen A & B you might have 3 or 4 Varsity levels with each level being better then the next level below, same at JV, same at Sophomore, Same at Freshmen. Basically, you keep everyone and divide them up by skill, let them all compete, and possibley move kids up or down as the season progresses. Playing time in a situation like this would be easier to earn based on development, effort, and skill because all have an equal chance at the level they were put at, and could be much more easily distributed evenly.

Of course, this does lend itself to other issues, http://www.momsteam.com/home/no-cut-polices-absolute-or-independent-prac..., but it is much different than the "model, all kids would be in all of the same classes and no kids would get any advanced courses" that you are suggesting she supports.

Then again I could be incorrect in my interpretation of Brooke's model as well, however, that is what I read out of what she writes.

Kirk Mango
Becoming a True Champion

Kirk, Brooke's model is fine

Submitted by John Dee on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 15:10.

Kirk,
Brooke's model is fine for youth sports. In high school, in theory it's fine, but I like to look at things in terms of reality. Many schools are struggling to just provide a decent education and a few extracurriculars, this model is more like a club sport or YMCA model. All of these kids have to have uniforms, coaches', busses, and officals for home contests. Also, at most schools, there is only one, possibly two sports (football and boys basketball)that actually generate revenue. Your lucky if they break even (volleyball, girls basketball, wrestling, track) and most lose money (swimming, hockey, lacrosse, etc. )

John

Yes

Submitted by Kirk Mango on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 15:37.

The link to the post I left in my last response references a lot of what you talk about. What is funny though is that there are high school programs out there, one in tennis that I know of, that actually use that model and have been very successful. I mean REALLY successful. At least that is their portrayal of what they are doing. However, I certainly do agree that there are very big hurdles, some of which you point out (and that are listed in my post link), to overcome.

Kirk Mango
Becoming a True Champion

Do exclusive programs work?

Submitted by Brooke de Lench on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 16:28.

Perhaps the real question we need to be asking is: If we are offering a limited group of kids a chance to play in high school --while cutting many potential athletes off before they are fully grown and have a chance to exhibit their full potential are we as a Nation fielding the best athletes? If we are, then why do our colleges need to look to foreign countries to fill out their rosters?  And our pro teams--why is the NBL comprised of close to 40% foreign born athletes? Don't we have the talent in this huge country? Could it be that the european model (of keeping all kids moving to the top and in the programs long enoug) produces superior athletes?

 

Brooke de Lench

Publisher

MomsTeam.com

Author:

Home Team Advantage: The Critical Role of Mothers in

I'm not sure what you mean

Submitted by John Dee on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 16:46.

I'm not sure what you mean by the NBL?? Do you mean NBA (National Basketball Association) or MLB (Major League Baseball) or some other entity?
I feel again (in general, not in every circumstance) that a kid is progressed far enough by the time they are 14-15 years old that you can make a pretty good judgement of their skills. There aren't a huge group of 14 year old non-basketball players who suddenly grow 6 inches and become Divison 1 basketball prospects. It does not happen that way. That certainly does not mean a kid can't continue to play basketball. Most towns have rec leagues or the local YMCA has leagues for kids to play in.
I'm not sure where you are going with colleges looking to fill out their rosters? Most American colleges and universites have mostly American players. Once you get to the professional level, if a foreign player is better than an American player, they'll take that spot, it's not about where they are from, it's about results.
Most foreign countries do the exact opposite of what you propose. They'll take a kid at 8, determine through DNA that he's going to be 6'10", then put him in basketball academy schools and that's all they do. That's how the NBA has been infiltrated with so many foreign players. They do "hand pick" certain players and train them up to a point where they are elite athletes. Many Olympic athetes are done the same way. In your model of "everyone plays" this style would contradict that.

Most athletes in college are American kids

Submitted by Kirk Mango on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 23:27.

There are select sports that do recruit athletes from foreign countries, however, if you were to take athletes as a whole. Football, Basketball, Baseball, Volleyball, Softball, Swimming, etc. - ALL SPORTS. I believe that American athletes far and away outnumber their foriegn counterparts in our programs. I would need some very hard evidence that proves this otherwise.
In addition, some sports - like soccer, have generations upon generations of kids playing through programs in other countries where that particular sport is a much newer phenomenon here in the US. This would lend itself to a bigger talent pool coming from other countries.

Also, it is seen as an advantage to come to the US and go to college by most foreign students and athletes. They most assuredly seek out opportunities like this.

Colleges will, of course, look for the best athletes no matter where they can find them. And certainly there are very good programs and athletes outside of the US worthy of recruitment. However, I do not believe that is the norm.

As far as the NBA, if there are 40% of the athletes who come from other countries then 60% are from the US - and we are comparing the US athletic basketball population to the rest of the World athletic basketball population. In addition, the rest of the World is starting to catch up with basketball. Something they were very weak in a couple decades ago. In fact, the World is catching up in all sports not just basketball making a larger recruiting pool for coaches to look at.

The model that John describes was very common in communist countries at one time. I do believe that there are still many countries who track their kids like he explains but I have no hard evidence that this is still true. However, I am sure there are other sports - soccer in particular - that use a more developmental approach to training where they allow late bloomers to develop. To me this is a good thing.

Bottom line is we need to get more facts on the issue before jumping into statements that predict one approach superior to another. At this time, in my opinion, there are too many generalizations being used to support both sides.

Me personally, I still contend that the best approach centers on focusing on developing a love for the game and fundamentals of the game at the youngest stages, not pigeon-holing athletes (especially when young), a gradual increase of the competitive aspects of sports as athletes mature, focusing on the process over the outcome - at all levels, teaching and supporting intrinsic value development in young athletes over "winning at all costs" type of approaches (basically an inside out approach), and finding ways to inspire the "will" in the athlete to develop their potential - to name a few. In the end, everything else being equal, it will be the choices the athlete makes and the "inner will" he or she possesses, and\or develops, that ultimately creates for them the opportunity to succeed in sports.

Kirk Mango
Becoming a True Champion

I'm a little late on this one

Submitted by Jerry Harris, Jr on Thu, 03/04/2010 - 01:00.

Just started playing with the blogging software and I found this thread.

I'm a board member, actually president, of a club and the problem is finding volunteers.  I have over 800 members and can't get 6 people to help run our divisions.  It's very sad. I see that you did step up and take charge, which is how to bring about change in any organization.

As for your problem, it appears those in control of the organization have no care of balance or not.  They want to develop their superstar teams and everybody suffers.   They have a very shallow sense of winning if your beating an inferior team week after week.  I think the comments kinda lost the gist of your question, because these are 8-9 year olds! If this is a recreational league or "house-ball" all kids are entitled to play equally, I don't care what their ability is.  The coaches should focus on team development not just their "superstar" players.

You could approach the township or community that sponsors the league.  If it is a register baseball little league, they could be forced to change or lose their charter.  It is unacceptable to allow a league to be run like that, voice your opinion, have others support you and then see it go nowhere.  Usually the problem is nobody says anything, they just grumble amongst themselves!

I'm very involved in our program and very focused on balancing the teams.  I have four kids myself and they run the gammit of athletic ability.  I'm not a sports person myself.  My kids have been on those superstar teams (for soccer) and basically had to play keep away from the other teams by half-time because it was so badly skewed. And my kids have been on the teams that were so bad, we couldn't put a ball in our own goal!

I have a blog/website (http://www.youthsportsparity.org) which I'm working on.  It shows some of the things I've done to help out the league.  Our league is not perfect, we still have some superstar teams at times, but I'm always striving to make it better!  We've gotten rid of commissioners, coaches, and other volunteers who are trying to stack teams.  I'd rather beg and entire new group of parents to help out than put in someone I know is bad.

Hope something has changed.

Good Luck!