Tag: Recreation Sports

Entitlement has Become Part of Equal Playing Time

horvath Leave a comment

In its most pure form, the concept of equal playing time (EPT) has merit as a means of helping young athletes improve their skills. Unfortunately, there are unintended consequences associated with EPT.

Parents and players have forced their own EPT agendas on some school, club, and recreation programs. As a result entitlement has become part of the EPT mindset in these settings. For example,

  • Some players feel it is not necessary to show up for practice. When they grace the team with their presence they don’t feel it is essential to focus and work hard. EPT is guaranteed during competition.
  • Some players don’t feel the need to practice the way the coach wants, nor do they choose to execute the coach’s strategy in competition. They know they are assured as much time on the court as the players who are more talented or dedicated.
  • It is not important for players to abide by team rules because EPT policies mean their court time is guaranteed.
Equal Playing Time - Entitlement
For some parents, entitlement is part of the definition of equal playing time

Entitlement has become part of EPT.

In some cases the definition of EPT has been extended to include equal everything (EE).

The following examples illustrate how the entitlement mentality has adversely affected EPT.

  • Some parents think players are entitled to play where they want to play a portion of the time. The problem is that not all players have developed the skills to play in such positions as a baseball catcher, first baseman, hockey goalie, or center in football. Players should not be allowed to play positions where they may be a hazard to themselves or others on the field. EPT policies should not force coaches to put players in positions that may destroy the playing experience for all other players or risk damaging the mindset of the player being put in that position. Mental and physical safety of all players should trump EPT.
  • Because some coaches have been forced to adhere to EPT policies, they have created specialized roles for the weaker players so they will get “equal” time on the court. For example, in 12U volleyball, a player who can’t serve or pass may be designated as a hitter or front row player. Players who are forced into specialized roles because of EPT policies will often fall further behind the curve even if they are getting “equal” time on the court.
  • Some parents have carried the “EPT=EE” mindset so far as to expect that kids should have equal time on the bench sitting next to the coach or that players should be allowed to be team captain an equal number of times. In extreme cases, some parents feel it is important for the coach to make sure that team members get to be first in line an equal number of times for the for post-game high-fives and snacks.
  • It has become easier for parents and coaches to measure EPT with spreadsheet and apps for mobile phones. With entitlementThat should add an interesting twist
  • In an effort to adhere to EPT policies coaches may allocate playing time based on the number of minutes in game. Some parents feel that EPT should be based on the amount of quality time played, the number of points played, or the number of minutes played as a starter.

Because entitlement has become part of EPT implementation, EPT policies will often send the wrong message to young athletes. Weaker players who have shared equal time on the court with superior athletes may wrongly think they are as good as their peers. They may also feel they will always be entitled to EPT. In these cases, they failed to learn the valuable lesson that all players must work hard, have discipline, and God-given talent to improve their skills.

Do these shortcomings with EPT suggest it should be eliminated as a guiding philosophy for younger level sports programs?

NO!

There can be problems with EPT policies, especially those in programs hijacked by the personal agendas of parents; however, EPT is a reasonable philosophy for sports programs for young athletes, especially those under the age of 14.

Athletic and club directors need to review their EPT policies and understand the extent that entitlement has crept into the implementation of their EPT policies. This will allow them to understand whether their EPT policies are having their desired impact on the players. Such a review should prevent a good idea from going bad.

USTA LCB Mandates now Include Some 12U Players

horvath Leave a comment

Thanks to a mandate of the USTA/Colorado Player Development Committee, 12U players in satellite events must play their tournament matches with the green dot low compression balls (LCBs).   Most teaching professionals agree that LCBs and graduated tennis racquets are valuable teaching tools for some entry level players. For younger players, the shorter and lighter racquets are easier to control. Shorter players may find it easier to hit balls in the hitting zone because the balls travel slower and bounces lower. USTA officials claim this combination helps players develop good footwork and better strokes and learn how to be patient, construct points, and develop strategies.

To date, the limited research on LCBs does not show that graduated racquets or LCBs help players learn the game more quickly; however, anecdotal evidence suggests it makes the learning process more fun and less frustrating. Most will agree that LCBs are a useful teaching tool for some players.

From a business perspective, LCBs are valuable only if players continue to play the sport after their introduction to it. There is no evidence to prove this is the case and some anecdotal evidence suggests LCBs have had no impact on participation.

Highlights from a local early season junior tournament follow:

  • The host facility had a strong 10U instructional program, yet there were not enough entrants for a 10U tournament/play day. This was the case for most of last season.
  • There were eight players in the 12U girls’ satellite event, including two open players from the state’s junior excellence program. All participants had previously played for the past year or more with real tennis balls.
  • The LCBs bounced inconsistently. On multiple occasions, shots that were hit with medium pace to midcourt often did not carry to the baseline.
  • The LCBs performed erratically in the wind and in temperatures below 50 degrees.
  • Because the ball bounced inconsistently, carried a shorter distance, and had a lower trajectory, players frequently had to lunge to hit the ball or hit it at knee level or lower. Frequently, they would push the ball because they were out of position to hit it properly.
  • As well, players began trying to hit the ball short as a means of winning points – a tactic that doesn’t work with real tennis balls.
  • Players who could hit a real tennis ball with spin had difficulty hitting the LCBs with spin.
  • Players tended to over swing on their groundstrokes because they were not able to put the ball away. This is counterproductive to development of good strokes and winning strategies.

The current USTA mandates regarding the use of LCBs for 10U and 12U satellite events are hopefully well intended.  Time will tell if the LCB mandates will “grow the game” or if they will “grow the list of failed USTA mandates.”

Where is the Tennis Industry Really Headed?

horvath Leave a comment

Spin is essential in the sport of tennis, both on and off the court.

For the past two months, the Tennis Industry Association (TIA) has been releasing information from the most recent annual TIA/USTA industry study. Like most sectors of the economy, the tennis industry felt the pain of the Great Recession. Unfortunately, the recovery has closely resembled the bounce of a dead tennis ball on a cold day.

The tennis industry has been in a mature stage since the end of the short-lived 1975 tennis boom.  Given the tradition of the sport and its global appeal, it seems reasonable to expect participation in the sport grow at a rate equal to or slightly greater than changes in the population.

Between 1999 and 2012 the tennis population expanded at a slower rate than the overall population. This would infer that Initiatives to generate interest in the sport may have prevented a decline or slower rate of growth; however, they have clearly failed to “grow the game” at or above the rate of population growth.

The tennis industry closely follows the Pareto Principle. Frequent players, those who play 21 times a year or more, account for about 70% of total spending and 17% to 25% of all players. Since 1999, this segment of the tennis population has declined, a sign that long-term efforts to “grow the game” in this critical area have not been successful.

Regular/casual players are responsible for about 30% of the total spending. Since 1999 this group has made up 75% to 83% of total players. Initiatives to generate interest in regular/casual players have had a minimal impact on long-term net increases in participation.

The growth of the tennis industry, as measured by the TEII, has been about half that of Nominal Personal Consumption and GDP for the period 2003 to 2012. The volatility of the global economy has created a challenging environment for the sport’s manufacturers and service providers.

It seems so simple looking on from the outside. Industry leaders need to develop strategies to effectively fix the problem in four areas:

  1. Retain and increase the number of frequent players. This is the easy part – Frequent players already know the merits of tennis. They simply have to be given compelling reasons to keep doing what they love to do.
  2. Convert regular player into frequent players. Again, regular players have a passion for the game. Teaching professionals should create reasons to keep them engaged. Like the age-old bumper sticker said, “Think Globally, Act Locally.”
  3. Create enough excitement about the sport that casual players turn into regular players. The onus for making this happen lies with the tennis professionals.
  4. Strategically introduce players to the game.

For a full review of the latest TIA data, without the spin, read, “Where is the Tennis Industry Really Headed?“

Does Your Kid’s Coach Create Passion in the Players?

horvath Leave a comment

With summer right around the corner, kids can’t wait to hear the school bell ring for the last time so they can hit the pool, courts, track, gym, golf course, or athletic fields. Some will be trying out a sport for the first time, while others will be seeking to take their game to the next level.

There is no better way to spend the summer than playing sports – unless you have a bad coach or program instructor. Being a coach for a youth sports program sounds so easy, but working with entry level youngsters requires a special skill set. For most people this knowledge has to be acquired.

In the Spring Issue of Volleyball USA magazine, UCLA’s women’s coach Mike Sealy wrote an article entitled, “You Can’t Force-Feed Passion.” Sealy closed the article with a quote that his father, who was a high school football and basketball coach, kept on his desk.

What am I?
I am a Teacher.
What can I do?
I can expose you to ideas, but I cannot tell you what to think.
I can guide you, but you must discover the limits of your own potential.
I can encourage you, but your greatest fulfillment must come from within.
I can listen to you, but I will not tell you what to say.
I can look with you, but I cannot tell you what you will see.
I can move with you, but I cannot tell you what to feel.
I can speak with you, but I cannot tell you what to hear.
I can do some things with you, but you can do more with yourself.
I can guide you on the path of discovery, but I cannot tell you the answer.

Parents can help their kids stay passionate about sports (and life) by putting them on teams and in programs where the coaches and instructors share Coach Sealy’s vision.

Here’s to a summer filled with passion and sports and good coaching!

 

Concussions – No Joking Matter

horvath Leave a comment

With the start of the high school fall sports season, coaches, parents, and players should take a few minutes to have a discussion about concussions.

Concussions are a form of brain injury. They are caused by a bump or blow to the head. As well they can be caused by a hit to the body that moves the head back and forth rapidly.

According to the Center for Disease Control approximately 1.7 million people receive traumatic brain injuries each year. About 52,000 die, 275,000 are hospitalized, and 1,365,000 make visits to emergency facilities. It is unknown how many people do not receive treatment for their injuries.

Symptoms of a concussion may show up immediately or hours or days after the injury. The following information is from a publication by the Center for Disease Control.

Parents, coaches, and teachers may observe the following symptoms:

  • Appears dazed or stunned
  • Is confused about events
  • Answers questions slowly
  • Repeats questions
  • Can’t recall events prior to the hit, bump, or fall
  • Can’t recall events after the hit, bump, or fall
  • Loses consciousness (even briefly)
  • Shows behavior or personality changes
  • Forgets class schedule or assignments

The athlete may report the following symptoms:

Thinking/Remembering
• Difficulty thinking clearly
• Difficulty concentrating or remembering
• Feeling more slowed down
• Feeling sluggish, hazy, foggy, or groggy

Physical
• Headache or “pressure” in head
• Nausea or vomiting
• Balance problems or dizziness
• Fatigue or feeling tired
• Blurry or double vision
• Sensitivity to light or noise
• Numbness or tingling
• Does not “feel right”

Emotional
• Irritable
• Sad
• More emotional than usual
• Nervous

Sleep
• Drowsy
• Sleeps less than usual
• Sleeps more than usual
• Has trouble falling asleep

What to do if a Concussion is Expected

Seek medical attention right away. If the potential concussion occurs during a game, the athlete should be removed immediately. Note: Concussions are not limited to boys and the sport of football.

Help them take time to get better. Be patient, a brain injury will take time to heal. As well, it will likely be necessary to limit physical activities and such things as reading or computer work.

Learn more about concussions. The source of this information is http://www.cdc.gov/Concussion/ and http://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/statistics.html.

 

 

Is it Necessary to Have Equal Playing Time in Youth Sports Programs

horvath Leave a comment

Should participants in youth and recreation sports programs have equal playing time over the course of a season? There are a number of justifiable reasons for not giving young participants equal playing time and the definition of unequal time on the court varies from coach to coach.

The following reasons are based on past experience, a review of literature on the topic, or discussions with other coaches, parents, athletes, or experts in the field.
• Winning is the top priority. In other words a coach makes a decision to play the strongest team in hopes of maximizing the number of wins.
• It is fair to give more inexperienced players playing time after the outcome is determined.
• There are many life lessons to be learned from unequal playing time – one of them is that the team takes precedence over the player.
• Unequal playing team teaches players that you have to earn when you get. In other words, the better players often work harder than the benchwarmers.
• Playing time is a privilege that is earned, not a right.
• The majority of learning occurs during practice. Unequal playing time is a non-issue.
• Organized sports are not designed to facilitate equal playing time. Equal playing time is more likely to occur in unstructured play.
• Unequal playing time teaches players to appreciate teammates with stronger skills. As well it provides them with an opportunity to learn to respect those with lower skills.
• Volunteer parent coaches often have difficulty monitoring and ensuring equal playing time. They shouldn’t have the burden of equal playing time placed on them.
• Playing time should be allocated based on attendance at practice.
• Players who show the strongest commitment or hustle should have the most playing time.
• Injured or ill players should be rested until they are well enough to play.
• Players who have violated team rules will not have equal playing time.
• Playing time may be awarded based on classroom performance.
• Players who are not emotionally or physically developed should not play as much.
• A player who is not in condition may not have the stamina to play a full game.
• At some point, kids note that they have inferior skills. Inexperienced players are not likely to benefit from situations where they are getting beat soundly.
• Team chemistry is essential; the group of players that produce the best team chemistry should play a majority of time.
• In individual sports, league rules may dictate that players must play a certain number of matches at their level to qualify for a conference championship at that position. This may be relevant in individual sports like tennis.
• Players may be specialists, which dictate they only play in certain circumstances. For example, a linebacker may be most effective in passing situations and play primarily on third downs.
• Players who have demonstrated poor sportsmanship will receive less playing time.
• Players may be required to play a minimum amount of time to receive rankings or be acknowledged for awards or statistics.
• Playing time may be determined by head-to-head competition (individual sports), skills tests (team sports) or some other type of selective process.

There are successful programs with varied philosophies about playing time. For a look at the justifications for equal playing time go to the post on July 23, 2011, entititled “Should Participants in Youth Sports Programs Have Equal Playing Time?”

 

 

Should Participants in Youth Programs Have Equal Playing Time?

horvath Leave a comment

Should participants in youth and recreation sports programs have equal playing time over the course of a season? There are a number of justifiable reasons for giving young participants equal playing time. Among those who believe in equal playing time, there is a consensus that it should be a part of youth sports until the age of at least 12.

The following reasons are based on past experience, a review of literature on the topic, or discussions with other coaches, parents, athletes, or experts in the field.
• Players best learn the technical and tactical fundamentals of the game by playing it.
• The only way to learn to win and deal with mistakes is to be on the court or field.
• Players will learn the true meaning of teamwork when they find they can perform (and win) when the better players are on the bench.
• When you give kids a chance to play, inevitably they will make a big play that wins a game.
• The only way to learn the love of sport is to play the sport.
• Players must play to learn to perform under the pressure of competition.
• Some believe that practice is a necessary evil and the game is the icing on the cake that is the reward for putting up with practice. All should enjoy the rewards.
• Equal playing time reduces conflict between coaches and parents.
• Some parents expect a return on their investments or contributions, which may mean they expect equal playing time. Comparable playing time may reduce conflict between parents.
• Equal playing time may reduce conflict among players.
• Players are less likely to become exhausted or hurt.
• Team depth is improved when all players are given an opportunity to gain playing time.
• A team may value a win more if everyone participated in the process.
• Coaches who can develop all the players on a team are recognized as the top coaches.
• Because all players contribute, team chemistry is improved.

There are successful programs with varied philosophies about playing time. For a look at the merits of not equal playing time go to the post on August 4, entitled, “Is it Necessary to Have Equal Playing Time in Youth Sports Programs?”