CA HS Football Participation headed down

CA HS Football Participation headed down - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: CA HS Football Participation headed down (/thread-17910.html)

Pages: 1 2

CA HS Football Participation headed down - CowboyIndian - 08-02-2019

From our local rag here in the State of Jefferson. I imagine the decline is even steeper elsewhere.

https://www.redding.com/story/sports/high-school/2019/08/01/california-high-school-football-participation-declines-5th-year-row/1891869001/

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - OutsiderFan - 08-02-2019

A very undervalued reason for football participation rate decline is mentioned in that article. That is the focus on sports specialization, which people who understand body physiology and exercise science, believe to be unwise. Oh the irony.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - CowboyIndian - 08-02-2019

(08-02-2019, 10:48 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: A very undervalued reason for football participation rate decline is mentioned in that article. That is the focus on sports specialization, which people who understand body physiology and exercise science, believe to be unwise. Oh the irony.

Another in my old-guy list of peeves. It is delusional in almost all cases to think your kid is going to get a scholarship by playing soccer (or fill in the blank) 12 months a year with practice, camps and travel teams. The vicarious living by these parents is also pretty ugly.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Mick - 08-02-2019

(08-02-2019, 12:07 PM)CowboyIndian Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 10:48 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: A very undervalued reason for football participation rate decline is mentioned in that article. That is the focus on sports specialization, which people who understand body physiology and exercise science, believe to be unwise. Oh the irony.

Another in my old-guy list of peeves. It is delusional in almost all cases to think your kid is going to get a scholarship by playing soccer (or fill in the blank) 12 months a year with practice, camps and travel teams. The vicarious living by these parents is also pretty ugly.

I don't know that I'd agree. In my day (late 1970s), I played on a bad high school football team, a bad high school basketball team and a bad high school track and field team. I was marginally competent in all of them, though even at the time I wondered what skill level I would achieve had I stuck to one sport year-round.

I am one of those weirdo parents who paid for my sons to play a club sport year round. The practices, camps and travel teams in non-revenue sports serve a variety of purposes, scholarships are just a small part. In that sport, there are about 100 partial scholarships per year between NCAA D1, D2 and NAIA teams. While there are 13,000 senior boys who play high school ball, the 700 (give or take) who play club volleyball as seniors are the athletes who make up the college teams.

There's an enormous difference between a club player and a high school player. I guarantee you that most Stanford athletes participated in club sports year round in high school. In fact, the high school season is relaxing, it's less work and the competition level isn't as great. Club players and high school players really aren't comparable.

But it isn't just about the scholies. There are other considerations. In part, it's gaining admittance. The cliche in my sons' sport is that the first 100 (scholie) athletes get recruited, the next 500 recruit themselves. I knew my son wasn't going to get a scholarship, but I knew he could play at that level.  For his sport, the following schools had programs: Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, NYU, MIT, USC, UCLA, UC-Berkeley, UC Irvine, UC San Diego, UC Santa Barbara, and UC Santa Cruz. I contacted every coach at those teams when my eldest was in 8th grade; every coach except the Harvard coach responded positively with an e-mail and instructions on how to position my son going forward. That meant my son sent two emails each year to the college coaches.

By the time he was a junior and had some success, he was recruited by Stanford, Harvard, Princeton and UC-San Diego. He would have been the absolute last guy off the bench at Stanford. He didn't click with the UCSD coach. Harvard wanted him, but couldn't give him a "likely" letter (basically a letter of intent at the Ivies) because they were reserving those letters for a different position than the position my son played. So...Princeton. And my younger son went through the same rigmarole and also wound up at Princeton.

There are also financial considerations. Many colleges offer significant discounts to athletes. One of my son's club peers paid $17k for a $51k education at a California private school, as long as he played.

BTW, I agree that concentrating on one sport can lead to repetitive stress injuries. My son had one, had surgery, fixed it up. Younger son had back and knee injuries. Without the sport, they don't go to Princeton.

As far as the nut job parents, yes there are a few of those. I'm fairly certain I saw one in the mirror every morning... ;) .

For me, the worst part was the club owners. But that's a story for another time.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - ATLcardinal - 08-02-2019

Anecdotal evidence from my kids school in Georgia, where tackle football starts in 7th grade. 12 years ago ~70 of the 100 or so boys in the 7th grade class tried out for the team. Now the try-out rate is half that, around 35 boys. Three big reasons at this school (in no particular order):

1) Fear of concussions/injury (maybe more from parents at that age, but not sure)
2) Specialization: maybe less so than high school, but even at 12 kids are under pressure to specialize -- star player on my son's little league baseball team had to miss the occasional practice and at one point a game because of conflicts with club basketball tournaments. Coach pulled him and parents aside and said he was setting a bad example for the team and needed to decide where his priorities lie. Kid hasn't picked up a baseball since. A lot of the best young athletes now specialize in something other than football.
3) Diminished peer pressure: to be fair some portion of the kids who used to try out didn't really want to play football anyway but there was enormous peer pressure to play on the school football team. Partially a Georgia/Texas thing I think but boys (and their parents) felt they had to be on the football team to be accepted in the school. That dynamic has begun to change.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - cardcrimson - 08-02-2019

Not football related, but a quick anecdote. A few years back, I sat in on a parents meeting for one of the better swim clubs in the No Cal area that our team was affiliating with for fall swim. Was mortified when he handed out a thirty or forty page handbook, but the more and more I listened, the more I liked. Encouraged kids to swim rec league instead of jumping to year-round early. Encouraged kids to have other activities besides swimming, especially water polo, though activities outside the pool were good too. Said he'd seen too many promising kids burn out on swimming early because of the parent's desire to capitalize on early success.

Very, very refreshing. FWIW, several Olympians have gone through his (and his twin brother's) program--some in swimming, some in water polo. . . .

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Phogge - 08-02-2019

Our local HS in the People’s Republic of West Marin has gone to an 8 man league. Latinos and town kids playing soccer, farm boys playing football.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Goose - 08-02-2019

One very big reason a lower percentage of kids try to play high school football today is that high school football is at least two orders of magnitude more "advanced" than it was in the 60's and 70's. The coaches are more professional, the kids have played lots of Pop Warner, they are bigger, they are faster, and they have had lots of coaching. Back in the day, most kids trying out for football had played a bit of sandlot, and that was it. Coaches would take warm bodies and keep them on the team because they needed practice players. Today, most kids in that category know they are not in the same class as the athletes that will actually play, so they don't bother trying out. If you are just "some guy", are you seriously going to try out for De La Salle or even Woodisde? I doubt it.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Mick - 08-02-2019

(08-02-2019, 04:20 PM)Goose Wrote: One very big reason a lower percentage of kids try to play high school football today is that high school football is at least two orders of magnitude more "advanced" than it was in the 60's and 70's. The coaches are more professional, the kids have played lots of Pop Warner, they are bigger, they are faster, and they have had lots of coaching. Back in the day, most kids trying out for football had played a bit of sandlot, and that was it. Coaches would take warm bodies and keep them on the team because they needed practice players. Today, most kids in that category know they are not in the same class as the athletes that will actually play, so they don't bother trying out. If you are just "some guy", are you seriously going to try out for De La Salle or even Woodisde? I doubt it.

Along those lines, I noted that the size and weight of my son's freshman football team in 2006 was the same as my high school team in 1979.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - BostonCard - 08-02-2019

(08-02-2019, 08:59 PM)Mick Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 04:20 PM)Goose Wrote: One very big reason a lower percentage of kids try to play high school football today is that high school football is at least two orders of magnitude more "advanced" than it was in the 60's and 70's. The coaches are more professional, the kids have played lots of Pop Warner, they are bigger, they are faster, and they have had lots of coaching. Back in the day, most kids trying out for football had played a bit of sandlot, and that was it. Coaches would take warm bodies and keep them on the team because they needed practice players. Today, most kids in that category know they are not in the same class as the athletes that will actually play, so they don't bother trying out. If you are just "some guy", are you seriously going to try out for De La Salle or even Woodisde? I doubt it.

Along those lines, I noted that the size and weight of my son's freshman football team in 2006 was the same as my high school team in 1979.

True, but chances are that the mean weight of the freshman class in 2006 is comparable to that of the junior/senior class back in 1979.

BC

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Goose - 08-02-2019

(08-02-2019, 08:59 PM)Mick Wrote: Along those lines, I noted that the size and weight of my son's freshman football team in 2006 was the same as my high school team in 1979.

(08-02-2019, 09:04 PM)BostonCard Wrote: True, but chances are that the mean weight of the freshman class in 2006 is comparable to that of the junior/senior class back in 1979.

BC

Interesting points. I had started to go there, but didn't elect to include the data. In that regard, I graduated from Bishop Gorman High School in 1967. Our heaviest defensive lineman weighed in at 206 lbs. The next heaviest lineman weighed 180. I looked at Gorman's 2018 roster. Their heaviest offensive lineman weighed in at 260. They have five guys in the 210 range. We had one. Our starting wingback weighed 154 lbs. So, there is no question that the size of the current team would dwarf ours. Just to ensure readers realize that we were not chopped liver then, David Humm was a freshman when I was a senior. So we did have some talent. However, it was the talent of the time, not today. When football season was over, the team members returned to regular PE. Yes, they were better trained than the rest of us, but they could be had. One of our guys lost four teeth, but we did beat the varsity. Granted, only once in nine tries, but I assure you that wouldn't happen today.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Mick - 08-02-2019

(08-02-2019, 09:50 PM)Goose Wrote: True, but chances are that the mean weight of the freshman class in 2006 is comparable to that of the junior/senior class back in 1979.

Don't disagree as such, but my father graduated high school the exact height and weight as I did (he was Bob Berry's receiver at Willow Glen High school, the team that won 43 games in a row until they lost to a Bill Walsh-coached high school team), and my oldest was also my size, though my youngest was three inches taller and 15 pounds heavier than me.

We had a guy a year ahead of me who was in a 49ers camp (230 in HS, 270 at the 49ers), a guy behind me who played for the Rams during the strike season (6'8", 290), a couple of college players. And that was all on a bad team. And the QB played in MLB for nine years as a catcher. Had a rifle for an arm, leading the NL in runners caught stealing in 1984. Couldn't hit a lick. 6' even, 180 pounds.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - 81alum - 08-03-2019

There could be many reasons why high school football is declining, but the main reason has to be parental concern about CTE, spurred by headlines like these:
https://time.com/4871597/degenerative-brain-disease-cte-football/
I've talked to one former college Athletic Director who swore he would never let his sons play football. Just one anecdote, true, but football seems to be declining fastest in the more highly educated parts of the country.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - martyup - 08-03-2019

(08-03-2019, 08:49 AM)81alum Wrote: . . . but football seems to be declining fastest in the more highly educated parts of the country.

And where would that be? You might be suprised by the answer.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/26/the-10-most-and-least-educated-cities-in-the-united-states.html

California has 5 of the bottom 10

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - PalmTree - 08-03-2019

(08-03-2019, 12:27 PM)martyup Wrote:
(08-03-2019, 08:49 AM)81alum Wrote: . . . but football seems to be declining fastest in the more highly educated parts of the country.

And where would that be? You might be suprised by the answer.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/26/the-10-most-and-least-educated-cities-in-the-united-states.html

California has 5 of the bottom 10

Marty - love ya, bud - but it's 6 of the bottom 10.....

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Mick - 08-03-2019

(08-03-2019, 12:42 PM)PalmTree Wrote:
(08-03-2019, 12:27 PM)martyup Wrote:
(08-03-2019, 08:49 AM)81alum Wrote: . . . but football seems to be declining fastest in the more highly educated parts of the country.

And where would that be? You might be suprised by the answer.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/26/the-10-most-and-least-educated-cities-in-the-united-states.html

California has 5 of the bottom 10

Marty - love ya, bud - but it's 6 of the bottom 10.....

I see that Porterville (Visalia) was the lowest rated in the country. That's where my sister (PhD. from SUSE, Stanford University School of Education, pronounced "Suzy") had her first job. Basically a hellish existence, an unbelievably impoverished area, hard by the fast food capital of the country, Fresno. Ironically, she now runs secondary education in Santa Clara Unified School District, the #3 best area in the country, per the same report.

BTW, I note that Ann Arbor is #1. Great place, my favorite place in Michigan.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Nan3cy - 08-04-2019

(08-02-2019, 08:59 PM)Mick Wrote:
(08-02-2019, 04:20 PM)Goose Wrote: One very big reason a lower percentage of kids try to play high school football today is that high school football is at least two orders of magnitude more "advanced" than it was in the 60's and 70's. The coaches are more professional, the kids have played lots of Pop Warner, they are bigger, they are faster, and they have had lots of coaching. Back in the day, most kids trying out for football had played a bit of sandlot, and that was it. Coaches would take warm bodies and keep them on the team because they needed practice players. Today, most kids in that category know they are not in the same class as the athletes that will actually play, so they don't bother trying out. If you are just "some guy", are you seriously going to try out for De La Salle or even Woodisde? I doubt it.

Along those lines, I noted that the size and weight of my son's freshman football team in 2006 was the same as my high school team in 1979.

We were just on a Stanford Alumni trip in the Adriatic and got to know a guy who grew up in Honolulu and played high school football in the ‘60s — played linebacker. He’s Chinese, maybe 5’9”, probably played at 170. He said it wasn’t a great team (never beat Punahou, though they came close once)...

Actually, my kid’s dentist for years was on the offensive line under Walsh 1. I teased him once that he would have been considered a tasty lunch by the guys playing on Stanford’s line at the time, and he acknowledged that the players have gotten a lot bigger. “But,” he said with a smile, “let’s put it this way — WE protected our quarterback.”

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - fullmetal - 08-06-2019

As better nutrition (and perhaps the indirect effects of hormone-influenced beef take effect on kids--mostly kidding), the big kids get bigger...and those who would have kept playing in earlier years might be taking notice of the size difference and deciding that no, they'd rather not go toe-to-toe with very large players every day in practice.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - Goose - 08-06-2019

(08-06-2019, 09:59 AM)fullmetal Wrote: As better nutrition (and perhaps the indirect effects of hormone-influenced beef take effect on kids--mostly kidding), the big kids get bigger...and those who would have kept playing in earlier years might be taking notice of the size difference and deciding that no, they'd rather not go toe-to-toe with very large players every day in practice.

I think you are absolutely correct. These bigger guys are also, I think, much more skilled at an earlier age due to more and better coaching, so an "average" person who is not totally dedicated to football isn't wanted.

RE: CA HS Football Participation headed down - OutsiderFan - 08-08-2019

Apparently, it's not just football:

https://www.aspenprojectplay.org