A friend of mines son is now an assistant coach for a CYO team and we went on Saturday to watch the 7th 8th graders play. Now this is a team that my son played on back in the day. I was shocked to see that this team had maybe 25 kids suited up. When my son played for them 11 years ago, they had somewhere in the neighborhood of 40-50 kids. Have any of you noticed the same?
Something very telling!!
- Thread starter paul from philly
- Start date
Same trend in much of New England and upstate New York. Lots of schools that used to have football teams don't have them anymore. I don't think it's all due to one thing, i.e. concern about brain injuries, but that's obviously a factor. There's also a demographic factor--the echo boom kids are nearly all past high school age now.
The numbers have continued to drop each year. In last 5 years the CYO league has lost approximately 12 teams. I know the league commissioners talked about a division for 7 man football. Bert Bell is doing at their lower levels
By "women" I presume you mean mothers. What do you think the chances are of a campaign against the influence of mothers on their sons' choice of sports? Infante, by the way, has a "mothers only" meeting where he addresses their concerns. And I don't think it's only mothers who have those concerns.
Sammy's observation is interesting. In high school now we're seeing the first group who had smart phones their entire childhoods. I have no good evidence that that has caused a decline in participation in extra-curricular activities of all kinds, but my hunch is that it has.
NFHS Data by individual sport. A steady decline in football participation is accurate.
https://www.nfhs.org/ParticipationStatistics/ParticipationStatistics/
Cheers,
Busch
https://www.nfhs.org/ParticipationStatistics/ParticipationStatistics/
Cheers,
Busch
I'm an assistant coach for my son's Rookie 7-on-7 team in Springfield. It's a pretty good set-up and a nice way to introduce kids to tackle football. Basically, on offense you need four players on the LOS. Typically, a center, two guards, and with a TE or WR. Defensively, you can line DL over the G's and over the TE if you wish. Or, use four LBs at four yards away from LOS and a safety that is at least ten yards off the ball. The field is a 40 X 35 feet and there are four 10-minute (Running clock) quarters. We practice two days a week once the season starts and can have three practices a week prior to regular season games. There was a heat acclimation period, too.
Yea, numbers are definitely dropping, but in Springfield the SYO is rather strong, IMO. We have 4 or 5 flag teams for K-1st (Roughly 15-17 kids per team), four Rookie teams (all 2nd grade kids) at a total of about 45-48 kids (Teams of 11 or 12 players), then you have a varsity and two JVs of 3rd-4th grade kids (Sophomore) with a total of like 75-80 kids. Same thing for 5th and 6th grade (Juniors) about 65-70 kids in total, and the 7th-8th grade (seniors) has a JV and varsity team. Roughly 45 kids, I think. Obviously, the numbers decrease as the kids get older.
The SYO starts losing kids to CYO by 5th grade. St. Francis. Holy Cross, and some St. Dot's off the top of head. Conversely, CYO programs aren't as deep because many townships have quality leagues.
Once high school comes Springfield kids have a bunch of choices outside of what I feel is a good option for public school. With O'Hara, Bonner, Carroll as options, plus the likes of SJ Prep, Episcopal. Haverford School, and Malvern who routinely pluck a Springfield kid.
Not nearly as telling as you may think. Days of 40 to 50 kids on a CYO youth football team are over. Days of kids practicing all year to maybe play a few B games (typically coincide with an Eagles Sunday game) have long since past. While there is no doubt that football participation is different than even 10 years ago what you are really seeing is something different at CYO.
CYO has destroyed itself. The reason you only see 25 kids is they have become massive conglomerate "parish" all star teams where all the best kids aggregate to win championships regardless where they live, if they are catholic. etc, etc. There are no rules. It's all under the guise of if we didn't allow everyone to take anyone they want there would be no teams. Best kids find there way into CYO by eighth grade by any means necessary because that is where a good deal of recruiting dollars are.
However like anything else along these lines it has extreme unintended consequences. First inside the programs chasing a championship that take anyone your average CYO player in one of the 8 parishes these teams have don't even bother to play for CYO because they aren't good enough. Or they only play 8th grade. They play middle school etc. So the 50 player teams in past still have 40 kids playing just not there. Second the guys who follow no rules and are allowed to take anyone within 30 miles absolutely destroy teams that are still operating under the old have to be Catholic and/or restrained by boundaries. A lot of the guys who go by the we have no rules and take anyone are the actual commissioners who make the rules which is a whole other topic/issue.
So after getting beat 55-0 six times a year these older places vanish and the three kids who were really good move to next conglomerate. If your priest won't take non Catholic, non boundary kids you basically have no shot to do more than be 4-6 and you might get some kids maimed along the way. It's an abject disaster. Something unfortunate will happen and archdiocese will get out of CYO football business. It's a shame but too much disparity between programs and no real standards enforced across the board. As we have known forever if you leave it in the hands of coaches to police themselves they will sell their soul for a windbreaker. AT EVERY LEVEL.
CYO has destroyed itself. The reason you only see 25 kids is they have become massive conglomerate "parish" all star teams where all the best kids aggregate to win championships regardless where they live, if they are catholic. etc, etc. There are no rules. It's all under the guise of if we didn't allow everyone to take anyone they want there would be no teams. Best kids find there way into CYO by eighth grade by any means necessary because that is where a good deal of recruiting dollars are.
However like anything else along these lines it has extreme unintended consequences. First inside the programs chasing a championship that take anyone your average CYO player in one of the 8 parishes these teams have don't even bother to play for CYO because they aren't good enough. Or they only play 8th grade. They play middle school etc. So the 50 player teams in past still have 40 kids playing just not there. Second the guys who follow no rules and are allowed to take anyone within 30 miles absolutely destroy teams that are still operating under the old have to be Catholic and/or restrained by boundaries. A lot of the guys who go by the we have no rules and take anyone are the actual commissioners who make the rules which is a whole other topic/issue.
So after getting beat 55-0 six times a year these older places vanish and the three kids who were really good move to next conglomerate. If your priest won't take non Catholic, non boundary kids you basically have no shot to do more than be 4-6 and you might get some kids maimed along the way. It's an abject disaster. Something unfortunate will happen and archdiocese will get out of CYO football business. It's a shame but too much disparity between programs and no real standards enforced across the board. As we have known forever if you leave it in the hands of coaches to police themselves they will sell their soul for a windbreaker. AT EVERY LEVEL.
GG you have been paying attention. In the case of CYO it is the trickle down effect from years of tacit approval at the hs level. The CYO programs are operating the way they feel the hs's are. And it has made it very easy for the big programs to come and look at these kids. You reap what you sow man. I am seeing some positive signs out there....much much less transfers, some return to developing kids from ground up. But we'll see. Serious damage has been done. Lot's of talk here about how the central league has really sought to meet the needs of its students....and the points look valid. Not sure if the genie left the bottle, or if CYO can deliver what it used to for the kids.
Bux-Mont Pop Warner down a bunch of teams from as recently as last year. Flag Football is flourishing though.
This is not just a football problem. The New York Times recently had an article about how Iceland with 400,000 people could beat Argentina in the world cup. They pointed out that last year there was a soccer participation decline of 14% among children 6-12 in the USA. I believe the problem is because kids are getting involved to early, bad coaching and committing to 1 sport. Everybody has travel teams that play to long a season. Pop Warner starts in August and goes to Nov. What 9 year old wants to do that? Now there are 7 year old baseball travel teams and kids show up with baseball bags with 2 bats, batting gloves etc. So the kids who 5'7' father & 5' mother who put him on a travel basketball team really expect him to play on a varsity HS team.! Yes football numbers and other sports are down (except cheer leading) but I think the problem is parents & youth coaches who think if their child commits to one sport they will get a scholarship. No child should play football before age 12, its not a life sport. On a positive note, those who stay with it in HS will get playing time with fewer numbers and be a part of a team which is to often forgotten. When your grand son ask if you really played on a team you just have to open the year book!
No child should play before age 12? I played from age 7 through college and my best friends still to this day came from those pound ball teams. Where I learned leadership skills, mental toughness, teamwork, commitment, so on and so forth. I think it’s funny that you don’t hear about problems in youth boxing or ice hockey or MMA nationally in comparison to football. It’s a joke... 20 years ago when I was playing pound ball the hitting drills is what needed to change and it did. For some children and families football isn’t for them but for others, those who truly love the game I can’t sit here and say some ignorant crap like “no child should play before age 12” it’s such a joke I’m so sick of hearing this crap. Speak for yourself and your children.
Or if your child is to soft to play the game well sorry welcome to life and football. Every year, especially during pound ball our coach would say “you guys are a special breed because everyone isn’t meant to play this game”. That statement is so true on so many levels... any mothers or fathers who legitimately go out of their way to try and sabotage this great sport because of what happened to them or their family bothers me. You know what you were signing up for. It’s a tough, rough sport.
Last edited:
There was a player from GW, I forget his name did not play football till junior year, was all state, went to Florida, all sec, I believe he was a first round draft pick of Vikings.
My son did not start playing till 7th grade and played 4 years in college. Most of the kids who play midget football never see the field by 12th grade because they have had enough, or cannot compete, not because of their parents. I am sure you were a real stud during your playing days.
My son did not start playing till 7th grade and played 4 years in college. Most of the kids who play midget football never see the field by 12th grade because they have had enough, or cannot compete, not because of their parents. I am sure you were a real stud during your playing days.
VERY few mothers and fathers are trying to sabotage the sport, but lots are worried about brain injuries--and there's nothing wrong with that. The same is true of hockey and--in countries where it is a major sport--rugby. The emphasis should be on trying to make the sports safer, and that's happening in all those sports. But in the meantime people have to make the decisions they think are best for themselves (if they're older players) or their children (if they're parents). We've seen a growing number of very good college and NFL players calling it quits when they are looking at huge contracts ahead of them because of what they've seen or learned about. Do you think they too are trying to sabotage the sport?
I loved playing football and now enjoy watching it. Being part of a football team can have many important benefits, but I honestly don't know if my sons were now starting to play sports if I'd allow them to play football. From what I've read and heard--I'm a GP--I'm sure I wouldn't let them play where there is real hitting till they were at least 12--just as I wouldn't let them play hockey where there is body-checking till the same age. I respect parents who make a different choice.
No I don’t think a player calling it quits is trying to sabotage the sport, where did I ever suggest that? I didn’t. However, I’ve seen a protest against youth football in the city I lived in during the organizations summer camps. I’ve read countless times mothers, fathers, people without children negatively speaking about football or commenting on local boards/forums etc. Why? Then don’t sign your kid up or if he had taken bad hits take him out I get it I’m not arguing against that but the audacity to say when a child that’s not yours (generally speaking) should or shouldn’t start playing to me is whack. Having a opinion is 1 thing I respect that but that statement bothers me. I was offering another view point from 1 which I experienced. Starting younger #1 for his want to and/or love of the game or curiosity to real football. #2 taught basic technique at a early age opposed to older Where kids are bigger, faster, stronger. Honestly, playing younger prepared me for high school and college. So there’s multiple view points here and I’m addressing my opinion towards them all agree or disagree. I’m not challenging anyone in this here thread so don’t take what I said personally or out of context. I tend to get carried away but I see some ignorant stuff it bothers me.
Last edited:
I’m not debating that a player who starts later cannot be successful. I’m not arguing against those who make their child wait or don’t let him/her play at all. I’m arguing against those who speak negatively whether they or their child or kin or whoever had a bad experience. There was a full on protest, it was really sad. The kids who were in the organization were confused it was just messed up. Just google it. It’s everywhere.
Ignorance of the current climate seems to drive a lot of the anti-football movement. Some parents still think it's 1985 and youth football organizations are running hours of Oklahoma drill to rid the kids of weakness - sure, some organizations are behind the times, but attend some practices and games of one that employs USA Football's Heads-up Techniques. Youth football isn't for everyone, but there is no doubt in my mind that the benefits far outweigh the risks.
Obviously, we should all be mindful of the physicality of the game and it's potential long-term effects. With that said, I think there is a bit of a witch hunt against the game.
Where I live you pay a flat fee for the year to play sports like soccer, basketball, baseball, and lacrosse. Football is organized by another organization. My son who is playing Rookie (7-on-7) tackle football also plays soccer. It's once a week on Sundays. They have been out one time so far and in that game I witnessed two kids collide and bump heads going after the ball. They were down for a bit, but eventually seemed to be ok. During the 7 weeks football has been going I haven't seen one head injury. We have played one scrimmage and four games to date. Plus, we have had roughly 15 practices over that time. Sure, some kids have hurt fingers/hands getting stepped on, caught in the pads, banged on a helmet, etc, but I haven't witnessed one violent collision involving the heads in seven weeks. Maybe, we've been fortunate. I don't know. I'd like to think that we're coaching/teaching the kids the best we can and that they are understanding the proper way to tackle and respect the game.
At the youth level are the risks of football really all that much greater than that of soccer, lacrosse, hockey, etc?
For us football will be a year-to-year thing. If my son wants to play and I think he's safe and in a good situation then he can continue.
Also, to be honest with you but at the youth level (4th or 5th grade and younger) the collisions and physicality really aren't that prevalent from what I can see. 99% of the kids just aren't big enough, strong enough, fast enough to create such an impact. Again, based on my experience to date.
Where I live you pay a flat fee for the year to play sports like soccer, basketball, baseball, and lacrosse. Football is organized by another organization. My son who is playing Rookie (7-on-7) tackle football also plays soccer. It's once a week on Sundays. They have been out one time so far and in that game I witnessed two kids collide and bump heads going after the ball. They were down for a bit, but eventually seemed to be ok. During the 7 weeks football has been going I haven't seen one head injury. We have played one scrimmage and four games to date. Plus, we have had roughly 15 practices over that time. Sure, some kids have hurt fingers/hands getting stepped on, caught in the pads, banged on a helmet, etc, but I haven't witnessed one violent collision involving the heads in seven weeks. Maybe, we've been fortunate. I don't know. I'd like to think that we're coaching/teaching the kids the best we can and that they are understanding the proper way to tackle and respect the game.
At the youth level are the risks of football really all that much greater than that of soccer, lacrosse, hockey, etc?
For us football will be a year-to-year thing. If my son wants to play and I think he's safe and in a good situation then he can continue.
Also, to be honest with you but at the youth level (4th or 5th grade and younger) the collisions and physicality really aren't that prevalent from what I can see. 99% of the kids just aren't big enough, strong enough, fast enough to create such an impact. Again, based on my experience to date.
In a sept. 2017 article in the NYT it discusses a Boston Univ. study where the interview former HS/College& NFL players. There conclusion was that those that played football before age 12 had behavioral & cognitive problems later in life. Wake Forest school of Medicine also in a study determined that those who played football between the ages of 8-13 had a diminished drain function in parts of their brains. Starting last year Ivy league schools no longer tackle in practice.
My concern was not primarily with injuries. Soccer, rugby, ice hockey and baseball which I believe records show have more fatal injuries then other sports also have declining participation. My argument is that football is not a life sport and we need to keep it simple so the interest is their when players reach HS. Youth seasons in all sports is way to long. Again keep it simple and kids will be there later.
My concern was not primarily with injuries. Soccer, rugby, ice hockey and baseball which I believe records show have more fatal injuries then other sports also have declining participation. My argument is that football is not a life sport and we need to keep it simple so the interest is their when players reach HS. Youth seasons in all sports is way to long. Again keep it simple and kids will be there later.
That all makes sense, but it's important to remember that the younger the person the more damaging will be any impact to his or her brain from a collision, a fall, etc. It's why it's more important for kids than for adults to wear helmets when riding a bike.
One big difference at the high school level between when I played and now is that back then more linemen were under 200 lbs than over it, and players were generally not as strong. We didn't spend nearly as much time in the weight room. So now, when linemen are in general 15-50% bigger than they were then and all players are much stronger (and therefore hit with more impact) there is more danger to the brain of the player who's hit because however big and strong he is, his skull offers no more protection than the skulls of players did when I played.
I played 67-70 in high school.
Just saw this from the other side of the border: https://www.recorder.ca/sports/loca...-of-area-schools-closing-its-football-program
