Read this article and let me know what you guys think. I'm pretty sure we all agree on this, but I am just curious. I am still shaking my head over this one.
I got this from another blogsite. Sorry, Rachel! Ha!
This is about the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. The only reason I was ever in shape was because our coach made us run when we messed up. It's not bullying its called conditioning.
I saw this on yahoo and the school was addressing it as a form of 'Corporal Punishment' if we seriously are going to go down this road in a few years we are going to be so obese running might as well be termed Capital Punishment
I'm with you guys on this one. What an unbelievable thing to have to put up with as a coach. I would have turned in my resignation right then and there. What gets me the most is that this is in Iowa and not in California or some other wacky state.
Not a surprise at all in this country. Parenting is going this route too. Parents wont discipline kids because they mite hurt their selfesteem. What a joke.
Maplewood is already using that approach to discipline. It seems to be paying off!
More attempts to sissify America. When I played, I hated running, but in the end, it put me in great shape for gametime. This is so pathetic
I read that article earlier this week and it made me weep for our future.
What the link posted in the original post failed to mention was the lengths to which the athlete was punished, far beyond any reasonable standards. I don't remember the specifics or where I saw them at the moment (and am too lazy to Google in-depth for it), but I remember the punishment was at least 30 straight minutes of high intensity cardio exercise, running sprints, up-hills, etc., with no resting time or water breaks.
At first, I was like many other people in thinking this story was silly, but when you investigate the actual incident, it's far worse than it initially appears.
Furthermore, people need to begin looking big picture as well. If running is conditioned into a young person as punishment, then the young person is less likely to grow up and use running as exercise to stay healthy. This has been supported by much research. As a former athlete and coach, I absolutely understand the necessity of discipline, and the consequences which need to be assessed when that discipline is not met, but coaches should also be more creative than simply saying "go run". It's for the long-term health of the child. And every coach will tell you they are looking out for the best interests of the child. And any good coach will have a good enough rapport/respect of his team to be able to use additional punishments.
Strictly forbidding running as a punishment is asinine, but so is using running as the only consequence. Furthermore, what this coach in Iowa did should never be done, by any coach ever. Imagine if this child had had an unknown heart condition, do you imagine the narrative around this story would change dramatically? Of course it would. And some might think this child didn't suffer any negative consequences, to which I'd ask does that really comfort you? Does it make a potentially life threatening situation okay, just because it wasn't a life threatening situation?
Sports and society need to evolve. It's time we get past the archaic and rather neanderthal-like mentality of sports, and be willing to embrace science and research in ALL areas of athletics, not just the ones that allow us to compete better.
espn....I understand where you are coming from and I agree with you on a FEW points.
Yes, coaches should have rapport/respect of his team, and I also agree with your point about every coach looking out for every child's best interests. However, I don't feel that 30 minutes of cardio is out of line. When I run, I run for 30 minutes+ without a water break....yes, in the intense heat. I could understand where that argument could be made though. If the child were 10, then that would definitely be the case.
You then mentioned "potential life threatening situation." The kid is playing football. Every play is "potentially life threatening." You could say that about just about any sport. The kid could get sustain a helmet-to-helmet hit and be paralyzed or even worse making every play potentially life threatening. The kids/parents know that about football when they sign up.
You said it's asanine to forbid running as a punishment. I agree. That is exactly what the school vis-a-vis the Iowa legislature is trying to do. They consider forced running as "corporal punishment" or "bullying." Now, coaches in Iowa are going to shy away from running as punishment because they fear for their job.
You mentioned that making a child run for punishment is proven to make a person less likely to run as an adult. I happen to disagree. I think most people dislike running because it is difficult to do over a long period of time. I played sports in high school and don't run as much as I should. It isn't because I had to run extra or as punishment. My wife did not play school sports and she doesn't necessarily like running either. For her, and for me as well, it's the pounding on the joints and shin splints. I rather enjoy biking and/or using our elliptical (i.e. low impact exercises). I didn't see the study, but I would disagree with it. If that were true, one could draw the conclusion that no child that was spanked as a child would spank their own children. Not true....by a long shot. I realize my own situation doesn't make up a study in either instance, but I don't put a lot of faith in studies like that. Kind of like global warming....(not to get off subject).
You go Rocket!!!
Attaboy rocket!! 50yrs ago kids werent dying or becoming averse to running. All this psychobabble and pseudotechnology allows the so-called experts to make a name for themselves while making victims out of every wimpy mamasboy who cant take responsibility for breaking rules. Its pathetic!
I'm sure there are instances where a coach probably does over do it. However, I am confident that those cases are definitely in the SMALL, MINISCULE minority. In thoses cases, the coach should be dealt with appropriately. Running used as punishment is certainly NOT bullying or corporal punishment. It is a stretch....no LEAP....to make that assertion.
I remember a couple of times at the end of basketball practice having to run 10 laps for each missed free throw (out of 10). And as far as the vast majority of drills involving running, most coaches would urge his team. not to let another team "out-work" you. The work during those practices paid many dividends during the 4th quarter of games!
YOU ALL RACK DISCIPRINE!
Who hacked Rocket's account and made him sound coherent? Hah.
Thanks for the love, sideline.
Global Warming? Please keep the politics out of a sports blog.
When you run, are you typically running 90-95% of your body's capacity? Is your running aerobically based running, or anaerobically based like this child's was? There's a difference in intensity between jogging and sprinting, a difference between aerobic based exercise and anaerobic exercise. Are you telling me you believe the only way the coach could get his point across is with this style of punishment? If so, then the coach obviously doesn't have a good rapport with his players, or their respect. If not, then I don't understand why you're so defensive of running as a punishment.
Every time you hop in your car, you could die. Does that mean you believe driving 55 is just as unsafe as driving 95? Just as silly as my car example is the idea that because football is dangerous, we should be okay with a coach putting a child through unnecessarily dangerous exercise, just because of something they said on Twitter. Despite silly comments like those made by "cirithungol", we shouldn't be dismissive of the idea that a child could die because of comments on Twitter. And the fact people like "cirithungol" think having a heart condition leading to death by overly intensive exercise makes someone a "wimpy mamasboy" only further prove my earlier statement we need to get away from such an archaic and neanderthal-like mentality.
Again, understand my point. I'm okay with running as a punishment, but it shouldn't be the only punishment. It should be reasonably applied, not the way running, quite frankly, has stereotypically been applied in sports. We have movies like "Coach Carter" who would have people believe that running line sprints over and over is the difference between a 4 win team and a championship caliber team, which is about as silly as anything I've ever seen.
You can disagree with me that running as a punishment deters future running, but it won't change the fact studies have shown this, the fact the NASPE have said the same thing. So while I'm sure your opinion is based upon...something...it's not based upon any type of scientific research or supported by the association dedicated to Sport and Physical Education. And your spanking example is not applicable, because a person doesn't spank oneself.
You claim you don't put much faith into studies like that, but what about one of the most famous studies ever, the one conducted by Ivan Pavlov and his dog? The study which showed how animals respond to conditioning (not talking about running conditioning, but rather behavior shaping)? Behavior shaping, behavior modification, learned responses...these are real things. When you attribute running as punishment over and over again, you create an association that running is a negative thing, something to be avoided. Even ignoring anything else, this is a very logical concept.
Again, there's nothing wrong with running as a punishment in moderation, as long as it's combined with other forms of punishment. When you incorporate other punishments, then the punishment is no longer the action, but rather the coach's disapproval of the athlete's "failure". And for any coach who truly has the respect of his players, the coach's approval is a far more valuable motivation tool than fear of line drills.
esp reader, just whot in the tarnation ares yhou talkin bout Bucko? i just do thinks that the the coach could run plakers as much as he ore she wants to could not they? do just not sissy them players if you does not run them do you know Bucko?
Personally, I would use the term "consequences" instead of "punishment"
Everything we do has consequences. Good ones....and bad ones.
Attack, gotta say I'm digging the Uncle Rico avi. "I can throw a pigskin a quarter mile!"
Running can be some of the difference between a 4 win season and a better season. It's called building discipline and character it will make you more mentally tough, help teach you to play for the team instead of playing for yourself so every player is held accountable for each other. Right or wrong this is my personal feeling on this subject.
I am not telling you that running is the only punishment. I even said "I could understand where that argument could be made though." in reference to 30 minutes of cardio. However, in this case, the coach felt that it was appropriate. I would have to defer to the coach. A coach should have several things to use as punishment (i.e. playing time, dismissal from the team, etc).
I guess what I should have said is that we are making assumptions based on a a coach's decision when none of us were there. I'm not suggesting what the coach did was out of line or ok. I honestly don't know because I wasn't there. I AM suggesting that by school is trying to equate forced running with bullying....and it most certainly is not.
We will have to agree to disagree on the "unnecessarily dangerous exercise" portion of your argument. Again....I will defer to the coach.
I don't rememember the article mentioning anything about a heart condition. If the player had a heart condition, he probably shouldn't have been playing in the first place. If the condition was unknown, the player could have collapsed during normal conditioning. We could play that could've/would've game all day. Bottom line is he did not. The coach did what he felt was appropriate. It seems like in times like this and in cases such as this, parents rush to little Johnny's aid rather than defer to the coach (an adult) who was present. I am NEVER suggesting abuse as appropriate. We just seem to disagree that 30 minutes of exercise is "over the line."
Regarding "studies".....I am not suggesting all studies are irrelevant. Obviously, Pavlov's study has passed the test of time because it is common sense. But you are suggesting that we/I believe a "study" that suggests running as punishment will cause one to dislike running in the future. I am sure there are cases where someone has stated that. I happen to disagree because it is not common sense. I dislike running because it gives me shin splints and for the jarring on my joints. Not because I had to run as punishment. People dislike running because it is difficult and effort has to be exerted. Our society, general, dislikes having to work for things. They think things should be given to them (a topic for another day and another blog). Believe me...I ran plenty for punishment. We ran so much after a loss (during baseball) I thought I was going to throw up. We ran from foul line to foul line and ran 60 yard sprints. I did almost 1,000 jumping jacks and 500 pushups during a basketball practice and then ran for 20 minutes straight....in 8th grade! I could barely walk the next day. I don't dislike jumping jacks or pushups because of that. That's silly. Also...I had to write sentences as punishment in grade school. Does that mean I dislike writing now? No, but that's the premise of the "study."
In regards to spanking....I didn't say that a person could spank themselves. I said that one could draw a coorelation with spanking based on the "study." I said that if a person is spanked as a child, then, according to the study, that same child would not spank his/her children. That is inherently untrue. I am sure there are cases, but it is not the "gospel" as you are presenting it. Again....in regards to the "study"....I realize that my experiences in of themselves do not constitute a study. I can only use them as my guidelines. I realize not everyone thinks like me. If that is what you believe, then please feel free. I just think that we are enabling our next generation with excuses and reasons as to why they should not work hard, not just in sports, but in general. Period. This story is just a good illustration of that....in my opinion.
Rocket, with the way you pass the ball and shoot it--no wonder you had to do all of those pushups/jumping jacks/sprints in 8th grade basketball practice! I think that punishment will be relevant the next time you throw a pass out the gym door and on to Pine Street!!! LOL
Chuck....what's ironic is that where we play is the same gym where those pushups/jumping jacks happened. Ha! The thing is we ALL had to do that. I don't think we got the basketballs out that practice.
All this really sounds like to me is a school district looking for a reason to get rid of their football coach.
I'd say you are on to something trainhard, I agree.
Rocket, really dude? Now THAT is some funny stuff. Just think if you had ole C. Wooden as your coach though................you would now be a MASTER of posting up below the box!!
trainhard....that's a very reasonable assessment. I didn't even think of it from that angle.
Another thing to consider is that many school systems these days, especially public schools, want every child to have the same experience so as to make certain no one gets their feelings hurt. Self esteem, after all, is all important according to the so-called "studies". "Studies" have replaced common sense. In all cases? Of course not, espn! People with common sense know this. Its people with no common sense who have to rely on scientific data that usually doesnt mirror reality, IN MOST CASES! Pavlovs dogs? Last i checked people who are disciplined dont have tails!
citing a study from 1901, 111 years, nice.
I'm sorry, but I had to laugh at your last paragraph when you buck scientifically researched studies for a version of "common sense" that is completely subjective to you. I assume, if I may traverse the political arena for only a moment, you think the theory of Evolution also doesn't mirror reality either, does it?
The fact of the matter is when it comes to understanding the human body and mind, "common sense" is a relevant as "an old wive's tale". It was only 20 years ago, for example, when all athletes were told you shouldn't drink fluids before or during athletic competition because it would make you cramp. Luckily scientific research proved that bit of "common sense" to be the complete opposite of the truth, as well as dangerous.
In contrast to your statement about people who rely on scientific data, I would argue that those who rebuke scientific research because it doesn't match their pre-conceived notions on any particular subject are the ones who are the most lacking in common sense. True common sense would tell you that we, as human beings, should always be willing to keep an open mind to new ideas, especially as our understanding of the human body and mind continue to expand.
BuckMajor: If you were complimenting me, thank you. If you were mocking me, I'd ask you A) if Pavlov's research conclusions were grossly inaccurate and B) if it has since been rendered irrelevant. Since the answer to both of those questions would be no, I'll just assume you were complimenting me on a job well done.
Maybe I'm cut from a different cloth but common sense tells me that if I make derogatory statements about my team (which the article says the player did) then I should be punished. If the coach decides that my punishment should be to run then I have two options. Run or quit. But common sense tells me to shut my mouth and be a team player.
trainhird, just whot commen sense do you have Bucko? how just was you cutted from a cloth Bucko? you s a alien or seomthing? if i wasj you alls coach i woud run you if you di not do whot i said now. but rainhard i get wht you are sayin pal.
there's studies that say cell phones and hot dogs cause cancer... studies that say tv makes you stupid... 75% of studies are fixed and thats a fact. i've had plenty of cuncussions playing football. you don't see me with bouts of horrible depression and suicidal thoughts. for anyone to even think that running doesn't "get the respect of a coach" then you have NO idea what you are talking about. everyone in hayti and freddy knows how coach ford was! i don't know very many if ANY former players who don't respect him, a lot may not like him, but they sure do respect him!
running sure as HECK gets a coach's point across. if we started off sluggish in practice you can bet we ran for a little bit and then started practice over! if we were doing continually doing things wrong in practice, we stopped and ran!
no running is not the only punishment a coach does. updowns, pushups, situps are all forms of "punishment" coaches use. during running back drills, if we fumbled, we did pushups. if we dropped a pass, we did pushups. if coach didn't like how practice was going, we did up downs. you know how many times i fumbled in a game? once. you want to know how many passes i dropped in a game? zero. this "punishment" does deter negative behaviors, gets a coaches point across, and corrects bad habits.
you're going to tell me 14-18 year old kids are going to respect a coach that does not "punish" them for doing things wrong? what freaking world do you live in? you can bet your butt we would have partied every weekend and showed up late all the time if all we had to do were pushups or updowns and our coach had to "be nice" to us.
what an effing joke...
definitely complimenting (insert Joe Biden smirk)
I have to laugh at espn's cramp example as he continues to shoot himself in the foot. I may be wrong but when i watched football on tv 30yrs ago i cant remember mass cramping episodes occurring. Now i see high school teams regularly lose a handful of players to cramps seemingly every game! Chalk one up for research, brother! Of course i'm overgeneralizing just to prove a point, its called hyperbole, espn. But overgeneralization of these "studies" leads to ridiculous siuations as contained in the article. Just as the THEORY of evolution or the THEORY of relativity or the big bang THEORY leads intellectuals to the delusion of having a God-like omniscience.
TheDaddy: I'm sorry, I literally quit reading when you said "75% of studies are fixed and thats a fact". I literally hung my head and laughed at you. What's sad is you probably have no idea why.
cirithungol17: Really? That's your argument? If you don't remember it, it didn't exist? Wow, so I guess all of those doctors who spent all those years in medical school were wasting their time. All those kinesiologists who have dedicated their lives to the study of the human body in motion don't know what they're talking about. Nope, the memory of some random poster on a message board should serve as the litmus test for the validity of research in any argument. By the way, what you just said was not hyperbole, hyperbole is an exaggeration, not a falsehood passed off as a truth.
But, to address the (other) non-hyperbolic section of your post, I honestly have no idea what you're trying to say. I'm not overgeneralizing anything, I'm telling you the conclusions. I'm telling you the recommendation of those who have studied this situation. I'm informing you of the position of the association dedicated to Sport and Physical Education. You can't wave your hand and dismiss the positions of the authority on the subject because you're too lazy to actually investigate them.
Those with common sense know that. Those with common sense know dismissing scientific and medical studies because you can't be bothered with anything which may not support your position is an incredibly arrogant way to present an argument. Anyone with common sense would know ignorance is never a valid argument.
At the end of the day, you cannot dispute the indisputable, which is a coach which truly has the respect of his/her players shouldn't have to rely on running as a punishment. A coach who uses running as a crutch to support his position has very little credibility in the first place. As I've said numerous times, running, when used in concert with other forms of reinforcement (both positive and negative), can be an effective punishment, but it should never be the only tool in your toolbelt, and it should NEVER go to the lengths this coach reportedly went.
What would you propose the coach to do then Espn_Reader? You can't make them run, you can't do anything that may harm them in anyway, both physically and mentally, so what do you propose a coach to do?
Here is another article on the topic
Cheese....they should bake them cookies and provide participation medals.
In the two links that have been provided I have yet to see any statement that he did something excessive. Just that a football player had to run some hills and sprints for talking bad about his team. I don't see a problem with that.
What can they do to middle aged men who talk bad about their teams?
i do know why. it's to get the results that the person who makes the study wants. that knowledge is what you refer to as "common sense." you can go to the democratic convention and survey everyone there and come up with "100% of people think obama is a great president" when 49% of the general population disagrees. you can have a survey saying 78% of people think soccer is more entertaining than football. yea of course, because the study was in europe.
nobody referred to running as a coaches way of "relying on as a punishment for respect" except for you. if anyone is "ignorant" as you propose, then it is you for thinking telling a kid to "go touch the goalpost" if he's jacking around during practice is what gives a coach credibility or not.
if you are one of those people that don't take studies with a grain of salt then i feel so sorry for you and your family... you must shelter the heck out of your family, bike everywhere, spend 100's of thousands of dollars on solar technology for your home, and do not own a cell phone or microwave, grow your own organic foods with no fertilizer or insecticides, watch tv, or do any other things that studies have shown to be detrimental to your health or the environment.
like someone said before, next thing you know, drill sergeants are going to get in trouble for making people do pushups. america is becoming a bunch of whiny vaginas right before our eyes and people like you are why other countries hate us. we're a bunch of lazy pansies who are afraid to get our feelings hurt or get punished for doing something wrong. oh my god, your kid had to run for being late because he had to kiss his girlfriend after school or he was playing grab "butt" while the first team was running plays. GET OVER IT!
It's going to get to a point to where there will be zero consequences for anything. What kind of a message does that send? It's okay if you continually mess up, continue to mis-behave, continue to not follow the rules because there will be no type of punishment. Now, I do agree with you on one thing. Some coaches I'm sure takes it to the extreme and that shoudln't be tolerated. But c'mon, since when is exercise a bad thing? Like Rocket said, if you have a heart condition, just regular drills or even just walking can cause problems for you and you shouldn't be out there playing to begin with. Fact is, everything we do on a daily basis has some sort of consequence, good or bad! That doesn't mean you go out and regulate everything that has some sort of negative consequence. That's life man, if the child's parent doesn't see anything wrong with it, what's the big deal? If they don't like the way the coach runs things, then quit, it's that simple.
For the middle aged men who talk bad about their teams you could always punish them by making them root for Notre Dame.
I am offended by the term whiny vaginas so therefore u need to run please and thank you
Obviously espn has spent way too much time in Oregon! But we must respect his opinions, this is america by golly, where liberals (espn) and conservatives (the rest of us) coexist peacefully. :))
well i walked a couple miles with the old lady before dark... is that good enough? and this is 'merica! where we smoke tires not drugs!
You all have brought a tear to my eye (sniffling). I love everything you guys have said. Awesome! Now I want to start the chant...USA! USA! USA!
Nope, sorry u called your wife?? Old lady!! Now u have to run some more!
nah she's my finace. and today i saw some idiot outside soccerin'. Pumped the shotty, smoked his sissyball and yelled, "We're in Merica, not Euroland and it's gameday son."
I can see right now your fiancÚ better get you running now u need alot of discipline. Joking have to mess with you men sometimes on here keep you in line.
i rack disciprine!
I used many different forms of punishment. Some where physical, some expressed disappointment, some related to scrimmaging, some in game time, etc. Even something as simple as forcing the player to stand in front of the rest of his team and have him apologize for criticizing his teammates and friends would get the point across. The idea the only way to get through to a kid is with running is simply inaccurate.
No, you clearly didn't understand why. You cannot give a statistic out of thin air and call it a fact. Thus, the only way you could have come to the conclusion that 75% of statistics are fixed is by...wait for it...using a study which says so.
Like I said, I'm not surprised you didn't understand why I laughed at you. As for the rest of your post, I didn't really read it, given I'm less than impressed with your intelligence. I did notice you calling Americans "whiny vaginas" which clearly demonstrates you're a chauvinist. So when I put together your inability to impress me with your intelligence and the fact you obviously believe women to be inferior to men, I really don't see how you can say anything to which any reasonable and rational person would pay attention. I suggest you stop commenting, lest you embarrass yourself further.
Exercise is not a bad thing. If you read my arguments in full, you will see where I say numerous times that running as punishment is acceptable, as long as it's reasonable and combined with other methods of reinforcement. And your slippery slope argument of "zero consequences" is not a logical argument, it is a fallacy. There will always be consequences. But why do all consequences have to be limited to mindless imposing of physical exercise?
I find it amusing you think looking out for the best interests of a child's health, both in the short and long term future, is something of which to be derisive. I think it shows you clearly are not interested in the health of children, but rather in some silly concept of sport. I hope you never were, and never are, a coach. A coach's responsibility is to the child, first, last and most. It's not catering to some old-school mentality which modern society has shown to be an inferior way.
To all who are making light of this:
I find it sad that adults are willing to sacrifice the well-being of a child, simply to preserve their old-school notions of sports. I can't even begin to express how sad it makes me how little you care about children.
You say "Even something as simple as forcing the player to stand in front of the rest of his team and have him apologize for criticizing his teammates and friends would get the point across."
I would argue that would embarrase the player. Wouldn't that also be some form of abuse? I would think so! As far as missing game time. Just say it's a star player. You make him miss game time and you end up losing the game. That reflecks on the coaches record, not the player. A coach could lose his job over that. I'm sure the fans base, and the administration at the school could care less if he was just following the rules. Lot's of what if's involved!
Kids can be cruel. If he were forced to do that, they would pick and make fun of him. That is not looking out for the well being of a child!
Again, neither of the two links provided say one thing about excessive running, or running that is putting anyone in danger. Did you write a different article we haven't seen espn?
i literally laughed out loud when you said that espn. you remind me of frances madeson, a crazy liberal who came to madison county thinking she could make fun of a marine's accomplishments in her "newspaper" and call out everyone who thought she was in the wrong for being "uneducated" and "closed-minded". if you really think i'm a chauvinist, then you sir (or madam), are laughably mistaken! to say i believe women are inferior to men is also one of the funniest things i have heard said about me in a LONG time! i actually enjoy reading your recent posts because of the unbelievable assumptions you are making about me! and since this board (and the entire united states) has to apparently be politically correct then fine... i will correct myself... america is a bunch of whiny penises. i guess now i am a sexist against my own sex? oh jesus...
i'll tell you this. when i was playing a fellow player and i got into a fight during practice and we had to apologize to the whole team and that was 100% more embarrassing than having to run.(this is a self conducted survey by the way) i would have rather ran 200 hills than get called out in front of the entire team and apologize. do you think a kid that gets an MIP is going to feel more comfortable running or apologizing to the whole team? you don't have to conduct a survey to know the answer to that! as cheesehead said, high school kids are going to have a field day with a kid that had to apologize to the whole team for something. i know i sure would have at that age!
making a kid run a few hills or a few laps around the track for being late is not "sacrificing the well-being of a child" it's called discipline.
you are the type of person that has allowed the kids of today to be the greedy, lazy, and spoiled brats that they are today. because god knows we can't spank our kids, put them in time-out, or yell at them anymore or it's child abuse.
and this is all coming from a college kid. not some old **** who played football in leather helmets. (no offense guys)
Hey! I'm not in my 30's yet so I'm not that old Daddy! LOL
Apologizing for a mistake is not embarrassing as much as it is uncomfortable. There's a difference between being uncomfortable having to look the guys you insulted in the eye, and being embarrassed. And the other kids wouldn't pick on him. He'd apologize, the others would accept it, the coach says the issue is done and buried, and we go on with practice. This isn't hypothetical, I've done this on a few different occasions. I know how it works.
And as far as sitting the star player goes...the job of a coach at the high school level is not to win, it's to teach. It's to teach the sport, it's to teach character, it's to teach value, it's to teach hard work. It's not to win. And if a school district really wants to fire a coach for teaching a child the right way to live life, then the school doesn't deserve the coach.
"The Des Moines schools' investigation determined that the Lincoln sophomore football player ran at least 20 hill sprints, completed 20 up-down drills, ran two laps around the practice field and did more hill sprints -- all in 25 to 30 minutes. The Lincoln athletic trainer said the student was not given a water break.
Running as punishment may be a casualty of evolving standards in education and athletics. In 1954, Texas A&M University football coach Bear Bryant subjected his squad to a grueling 10-day camp in which players who sought water were considered soft. Today, such a practice is considered dangerous and criminal, in part because of better understanding of how the human body works and also because of several deaths related to dehydration in football camps."
That's straight from the Des Moines Register.
I knew a long time ago you were a kid who doesn't have proper perspective and understand what it's like to care about a child. That was no revelation to me. To be clear, I don't hold that against you, when I first entered college, I didn't understand it either. But I do now, and hopefully you will someday soon.
And yes, your comment was incredibly sexist. The fact you think making a sexist comment is funny says a lot about you.
Even if I were to accept your proposition that apologizing is "abuse", which I don't as it's absurd, if I have to choose between the abuse of apologizing for a wrong or the abuse of putting a child in physical danger, I'll choose the first one every time.
You said "The job of a coach at the high school level is not to win, it's to teach."
Please tell that to the coaches who were fired because they couldn't get the job done winning. I agree, the coach should teach but to say winning isn't important is crazy.
As Daddy said, he was put through the embarrassment of apologizing and he chose running. No kind of study can decide what each individual feels is embarrassing or "uncomfortable" Some may think it's embarrasssing, some not so much! We can go all day on this but it looks as if we are not ever going to agree with on the subject. As I said, I agree that an extreme punishment is not right but it's coming to that line of what we think is right and what we think is wrong. Please don't tell us we don't care about the kids because that is far from the case. No one on here wants to see kids hurt or being put through extreme abuse both physically and mentally. You saying we don't care about the kids and not knowing us personally is kinda careless.
oh, it just does no good arguing with this guy...
i agree that his job is not to strictly win, but his "teaching" job is in the classroom. the "teaching" he does on the football field is teaching kids life lessons (i.e.: consequences of screwing up, being punished for misbehaving, and that life isn't fair) as cheese said, go tell that to coaches that get the boot for losing seasons. (perryville's coach a few years ago)
i take offense to you belittling me for being a college student! you are an ageist!
if i am sexist, then my god we are living among the most sexist women of all time! i know tons of women (of all ages) that use the term "douche bag", which since that is a feminine product, that would be sexist, correct? if i said the kids were a bunch of whiny babies, would i be an ageist like you?
like cheese said, how are you going to sit there and say we don't care about kids when you literally know nothing about us except that i'm in college and we think running is a good tool for discipline? the only way you are going to get anything out of a kid, ESPECIALLY in today's society, you HAVE to push them to their max. sometimes you've got to break a kid like a wild horse (not in the literal sense). sometimes you gotta get in a kid's head to get him/her to be at his/her max. you can still be a caring individual and/or coach by pushing a kid to their max to reach their full potential. but not overdoing it of course. isn't that what we (you) want as a parent? for our kids to reach their full potential? you can't reach your full potential going at 50%.
Okay since we are talking about new rules and things, I had one Iv been wanting to run by the Semoball community. My cousin plays little league football (9-10 year old) in Atlanta. If one of the teams beats another team by +32 points, the team gets fined $500. Thoughts!? Agree or disagree!?
I should add, these are not your rural southeast Missouri little league teams. They are in Atlanta. The teams are sponsered, my cousins is under armour. They also have their last names sown onto the back of the jerseys. Way nicer jerseys than any high school in this area. They also have 30-40 kid rosters, with 2 strings.
i can see a punishment, but not $500!!!! playing at that age is to get fundamentals down. but it's the other team's defense's job to stop them from scoring... so i guess if they are up by 31 in the 2nd quarter they take a knee for the rest of the game? if they get an interception and have a wide open field for a pick 6 they run out of bounds? that doesn't teach kids anything...
eh, make it a grand......they can afford it!
I ALSO said that a district which fires a coach for sitting his star player and losing a game doesn't deserve that coach. Please don't ignore the entire context of my statement. A truly great coach at the high school level or lower understands his job is not to win, but to educate. When you coach, you coach for the benefit of your kids, not for your win/loss record. If you're in coaching for "personal glory", you're in it for the wrong reason.
You have seemed fairly reasonable, which is why I'm discussing this with you, as opposed to dismissing you like Daddy. Please tell you are not equating the hypothetical embarrassment of apologizing for a mistake (which, by the way, for those people who want to talk about the degradation of America, what does it say about America when people think they should not have to apologize for mistakes?) to the hypothetical situation of physical danger. We know of many instances where a child (or even NFL players like Korey Stringer) has died from intense conditioning and/or exercise without water. I don't believe I've ever heard of a child dying from giving an apology.
As far as not caring about the kids, when you are arguing for intense physical exercise as the only form of punishment, despite the inherent health risks and over the objections of several different authorities which warn against it, how else can I view your position? I've already said running as punishment is fine in moderation and when combined with other punishments. The fact you're still disagreeing with me seems to suggest you're arguing for running to be acceptable as the only punishment. So how else can I view your position?
Seriously, just stop. The more you post, the more you embarrass yourself. 1) Re-read my entire section on the coach's responsibility again. 2) I'm not belittling you because of your age, I'm belittling you for the absurdity of your comments. I'm using your age to explain the absurdity of your comments. 3) Since I haven't called you a d-bag, I'm not sure what you're point is. Just because other people do it, it's okay for you to do it? Do I need recite the famous "jumping off the bridge" example for you?
As far as "pushing kids to be their best", how does 30 minutes of intense anaerobic exercise, with little resting time and no water break teach maximizing potential? It doesn't. You train your players to go 100% in competition. Running as punishment has nothing to do with pushing a child to be their best, it's intended as a corrective action instead. Finally, you have to understand I'm not arguing players shouldn't run as conditioning, I'm arguing that running as punishment should never be extreme, and should be used in concert with other punishments. I have this sneaking suspicion you don't even fully understand my argument.
Just stop. Let Cheesehead argue your position, because he's doing a far better job, even though we are not in agreement.
I disagree with an automatic team fine. An automatic team fine does not take into consideration circumstance. If I play my worst players for the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters calling nothing but runs up the middle, and we still beat you by 40 points, what else is the team supposed to do? A coach does what he can to avoid running up the score on children, but at the same time, you never tell your team to not play hard.
The better solution would be for the "commissioner" of the league, or whomever is in charge, to evaluate each lopsided game to determine if a coach was running up a score.
I think we are on the same page like I said. I agree 100% with you as far as not giving a kid a water break and making the punishment extreme. We are just not on the same page as far as what level constitutes as "extreme". I'm not for extreme physical punishment by any means. There is a limit IMO.
For the comment about a kid not dying from giving an apology. While the kid doesn't die for the act of giving the apology. One would say that if he is picked on enough, or bullied enough for the embarrassment of giving the apology, kids have been known to commit suicide over being picked on. We have no way of knowing how fragile each kids minds are. Everyone is different. What may seem like a simple act of apologizing to us, may be a big deal in the mind of a kid. I'm just saying look at it from both angles. There are more forms of extreme abuse that just physical and In my opinion, being forced to stand before your classmates and coaches and give an apology could affect a kid in a negative way as well. Maybe not instantly, but in the long term.
only because you have to be politically correct and try to talk like you are above me. just because i don't capitalize my words doesn't mean i don't know what i'm talking about. i really don't know how i am embarrassing myself. i'm not embarrassed to not be politically correct.
the only things you have to go back on about me is that i'm in college and post absurd, irrational comments. also that i'm apparently sexist. unbeknownst to me (and apparently everyone i've ever had a conversation with.) i even had a feminist professor in college that never even hinted that i was sexist. and trust me we had some discussions.
i never said you called me a d-bag so i do not know where you are getting that from... i said you are ageist because you used my age as reasoning for "the absurdity" of my comments. i said i apparently know a lot of women that are sexist, by your standards, for using "douche bag" as a derogatory term. unlike you with me, i have read the entirety of every one of your posts.
i am also in agreement with you that running should not be the ONLY punishment for unwanted behavior. like i have stated before, pushups, situps, and updowns are ALL acceptable forms of discipline. do i think a kid should run 100 hills for dropping a pass or being late to practice? no. but some sort of physical discipline should happen. little johnny isn't going to say "well by golly i'm never kissing my girlfriend after school so i'm late to practice again!" if all he gets is 10 pushups or having to apologize to the team. that won't deter that behavior. if you think that, then THAT is absurd.
almost everything you have came back on me for has been you putting words in my mouth. i have never once posted that kids should have intense, 30 minute anaerobic punishment with no water breaks. i have said that kids deserve to suffer the consequences of negative behavior. whether that is running, situps, pushups, or updowns.
i do believe that making a kid run hills for a fumble in practice or having a brain flatulent about a play call during practice is a bit extreme. but having a kid run 50 hills for getting thrown out of a game for telling the ref to "throw the f***ing flag!" i consider that a reasonable punishment. instead of writing the ref a b.s. letter telling him he's sorry and telling the team he wont do it again.
and you can't tell me that a coach saying "boys will you please be quiet so i can go over the scouting report?" or "ok guys, let's have a better start to practice tomorrow." is going to affect a kid more than making them run 10 hills for starting off practice sloppy, or talking to each other back in the back while the coach is going over the scouting report.
i believe the only 2 things we do not agree on is that i am a sexist and that running is a way to punish kids for negative behavior. correct?
Posting a comment requires free registration.
If you already have an account , enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.
(Forgot your password?)
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.