Logo

Youth Sports Dropouts

October 16, 2012

Depending on the study, we’re told that 80 to 90 percent of all youngsters who ever participate in organized youth sports have stopped doing so by the age of 13.  Before they reach 9th grade.

High school sports never gets a chance with eight or nine of every 10.

There are many reasons for this, and of course not all of them are bad.  Some kids find something better to do, or at least more fitting for them.  But a lot of them have barely begun to mature and cannot possibly know what they might like to do or be good at doing with some coaching and encouragement.

Research tells us that much of the reason for the early dropouts has to do with an unhappy or unfulfilling or “unfun” youth sports experience.  Some of that has to do with too much too early, or at least too much structure too soon; too much practice, competition and travel too soon; and too much screaming too soon.

That environment drives some youth from team sports in favor of individual sports.  Some drop traditional sports in favor of alternative sports.  Some leave sports altogether.

Stacking

December 19, 2014

Many in the interscholastic tennis community of this state have complained for years about the unethical practices of a small number of coaches who “stack” their lineups so that their better players compete in lower flights to increase their chances of success in advancing and earning points for their teams.

The current meet scoring system, which fails to reward teams for placing players at the highest levels, invites the problem. Appealing to personal integrity works with most coaches, but not all; so the issue of stacking festers, and it frustrates many coaches.

Hearing this pain, in 2009 the MHSAA convened a group of tennis coaches to discuss stacking. We utilized a paid professional facilitator. One obvious outcome was very little support to solve the problem by restructuring the tennis meet scoring system to disincentivize stacking.

The simple solution – to modify the meet scoring system to provide more team points for Number 1 singles than Number 2, and for Number 2 more than Number 3, etc. – was a double fault with the clear majority of the coaches assembled in 2009.

Of course, simple solutions rarely are so simple. And with this scoring system solution comes the likelihood that stronger teams move even further out of reach of their challengers. Other critics are uncomfortable with giving one student-athlete a higher potential team point value than another.

If those and other objections are the prevailing sentiment, then a new scoring system won’t be in our future. And stacking still will be.