Coaches Must Set the Example
October 15, 2012
By Scott Westfall
MSU Institute for the Study of Youth Sports
NOTE: This is part one of a two-part viewpoint explaining the importance of coaches and parents setting proper examples for young athletes in their treatment of game officials.
In light of the recent uproar over NFL replacement officials, it seems that never before has it been so common and socially accepted to yell disgust at referees.
While this trend is prevalent in both professional and college football, it has unfortunately trickled down into the high school ranks. What is actually accomplished when a coach or fan yells at an official? Do people really believe that if they become irate, a ‘bad call’ will be erased? In all of my years watching, playing, and coaching athletics, not once have I seen a referee change his or her ruling because a coach or a fan yelled at him or her.
When adults lose control and scream at referees, who does this bad behavior really affect? Since youth learn their emotional control from adult leaders, I believe the true damage is done to the young minds that are witnessing their mentors lose their cool. After their display of anger, how can these same adults hope for kids to stay calm when things do not go their way in life? It is pure hypocrisy to expect otherwise.
Whether we like it or not, referees are the absolute authority in athletic contests; they control the game from start to finish, make the tough calls on the playing surface, and even decide who gets to stay and who is sent to the locker room. Yet, it is baffling how often their authority is disrespected.
It is the coach’s responsibility to establish his or her program as one that respects authority. Since players watch all of the moves their coaches make, it is imperative that coaches respect the officials – especially when the calls do not go their way. If a player sees his or her coach going berserk due to a ‘bad call,’ the same player will think it is OK to act like this down the road when upset or faced with adversity. Even more detrimental to these kids is hearing their coach preach a message but contradict it by not backing it up with actions.
Great high school coaches will use the playing surface as an extension of their classroom. In my years as a head coach, I tried my hardest to set a good example for my players and told them to never question, back-talk, or disrespect an official. However, I made the mistake of breaking my own rule on one occasion by questioning the referee’s judgment.
When I was a younger coach, I may have attributed my actions to the heat of the moment, or defended myself on the criteria that I was trying to stick up for my team. However, being a veteran leader who wanted to practice what I preached, I saw my mistake as a teaching moment.
The next practice, when we conducted team discipline conditioning, “Reminders” (usually reserved for players with unacceptable school behavior or poor grades), I asked my players what I had taught them about respecting authority and if I had broken my own rule. The players agreed that I had broken my rule and had not respected the referee.
I let them know that this rule applied to me as much as them. I then lined-up on the goal line and ran my own set of wind sprints as the players, assistant coaches, and managers watched in disbelief. Afterward, to even my surprise, several players thanked me for holding myself accountable.
One kid even had tears in his eyes, and said that after watching my self-imposed discipline, he wanted more than ever to be a man of his word and do the right thing.
Scott Westfall has spent the last 10 years as a teacher, coach, and athletic director in Fort Collins, Colo. He currently is working on his Doctorate at Michigan State University, with an emphasis in Sport Psychology and Athletic Administration, and assisting the MHSAA with its student leadership programs. Westfall is a former athlete who participated in football, wrestling, tennis and cross country at the high school level, and rugby at the collegiate level. He can be reached at [email protected].

PHOTO: Scott Westfall celebrates with his football team while serving as a coach at Boltz Middle School in Fort Collins, Colo.
Specialization Not the Only Pathway
April 21, 2015
By Eric Martin
MSU Institute for the Study of Youth Sports
Specialization is not a new topic facing athletes and parents.
In a 1989 study by Hill and Simons, athletic directors indicated that the three-sport athletes of the past were being replaced by athletes who only participated in a single sport. Multiple athletic directors indicated that the decrease of multi-sport participation was a concern for all involved in the sport environment as increased emphasis on sport specialization was not in the true vision of high school sports.
Even though the distress concerning sport specialization is not a new topic, the rise of club sports and year-round travel teams have increased the number of youth athletes who are forced to make a choice between playing multiple sports or focusing their time and training efforts solely on one sport. The decision to focus solely on one sport sometimes is done by athletes (or their parents) who believe that quitting other sports is the sole way to earn a coveted college scholarship.
However, even though counter intuitive, sport specialization may be hampering their pursuit to play at the next level.
Elite level achievement in sport is rare, with statistics showing that only 0.12 percent of high school athletes in basketball and football eventually reach the professional level. To combat these odds, many in popular media including Malcolm Gladwell have forwarded Anders Ericcson’s proposal that to become an expert in a field, an individual must accumulate 10,000 hours of practice.
To achieve this aim, many parents and athletes disregard other sports believing that extra exposure to a single sport may result in accumulating these hours quicker and increase an athlete's chances of elite skill achievement. Reducing the achievement of sport excellence to solely practice hours overlooks the importance that developmental, psychosocial, and motivational factors play in the achievement of high level success in youth. Further, several research studies have found that elite athletes typically fall short of this 10,000 hour milestone.
Simply accumulating a magic number of hours does not guarantee sport success, and in fact, trying to accumulate these hours too early can lead to many different negative outcomes for youth.
Sport specialization has been shown to have a variety of negative physiological and psychological outcomes for youth athletes. Typically, athletes who specialize in one sport play that sport year-round with little or no offseason. In these cases, athletes who continually perform repetitive motions such as throwing or jumping can experience overuse injuries that can range from tendinitis to torn ligaments.
In addition to the increased risk of injury, youth who specialize and play a single sport year-round are at risk for psychological issues as well. Youth who play a single sport are less likely to allow for proper recovery and face the increased chance of burnout or decreases in motivation that may result in leaving sport entirely. Additionally, as practice time demands and multiple league involvement increases, youth may feel added pressure to succeed due to the increased time and financial costs incurred by parents.
Finally, youth who specialize early in only one sport do not develop the fundamental motor skills that help them stay active as adults, instead only developing a very narrow skill set of a single sport.
If the dangers of sport specialization do not encourage multisport participation, a majority of studies have shown that sport specialization does not increase long-term sport achievement. In fact, most studies indicate that athletes who reach the highest level of sport achievement typically played a variety of sports until after they were well into high school.
For example, a study with British athletes found that youth who played three or more sports at the ages of 11, 13, and 15 had a significantly higher likelihood of playing on a national team at ages 16 and 18. These athletes had a more rounded set of skills, were more refreshed for their chosen sport, and were more psychologically and emotionally ready to perform due to their experiences in a number of sports.
A study recently conducted by the Institute for the Study of Youth Sports with collegiate athletes showed similar results as the British athlete study. In the ISYS study, 1,036 athletes from three Division I universities were asked to report their past youth sport participation. On average, youth participated in three or more sports in elementary and middle school. The number of sports youth participated in decreased with each year of high school, but even with the decrease of participation, a larger number of individuals played more than one sport during every year of high school including senior year than those who played a single sport.
Even though a majority of athletes did play at least two sports throughout high school, several athletes did indicate that they specialized in one sport indicating that there are multiple pathways to elite sport achievement.
Athletes were also asked for their perception of how important it was to specialize in one sport in order to earn a college scholarship. On a scale of 1-9, athletes felt that specializing in one sport prior to high school was neither important nor unimportant (4.97).
Sport specialization is not a new issue, but that does not minimize the damage that can occur if athletes are overtaxed early in their development. Each athlete is unique, and each situation requires care. If an athlete does decide to play in only one sport, the decision should be made in regards to the athlete’s interest and development, not just in the pursuit of a college scholarship. Additionally, if athletes specialize in one sport, it is critical to understand that youth are developing and proper recovery is critical both physically and psychologically.
Early specialization in sport is an issue that is not going to go away, but for coaches, parents, and athletes this decision should be made with a long-term perspective and with the athletes’ long-term well-being central to the choice.
Martin is a fourth-year doctoral candidate in the Institute for the Study of Youth Sports at Michigan State University. His research interests include athlete motivation and development of passion in youth, sport specialization, and coaches’ perspectives on working with the millennial athlete. He has led many sessions of the MHSAA Captains Leadership Clinic and consulted with junior high, high school, and collegiate athletes. If you have questions or comments, contact him at [email protected].