If your kids football team had over 100 on their roster, do most kids get playing time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

Good coaches rotate second string defenses in to keep the first string fresh. Are you sure your kid wasn't third string?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

Good coaches rotate second string defenses in to keep the first string fresh. Are you sure your kid wasn't third string?

I'm 100% positive. He was second on the published depth chart in his position on defense. It was not on the line, where some rotations do occur.

But lets be real, rotations like that don't typically occur at the youth level or at the JV level. They put their best 11 out there.

At least that was my experience when I played, and my experience as a parent. For example, I had to explain to him that last year, when he was a starter on his 8th grade team, he only came out when they were up by 3 scores. So for many games, he didn't come out. And now he was experiencing the other side of that coin as a JV play

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

Good coaches rotate second string defenses in to keep the first string fresh. Are you sure your kid wasn't third string?

I'm 100% positive. He was second on the published depth chart in his position on defense. It was not on the line, where some rotations do occur.

But lets be real, rotations like that don't typically occur at the youth level or at the JV level. They put their best 11 out there.

At least that was my experience when I played, and my experience as a parent. For example, I had to explain to him that last year, when he was a starter on his 8th grade team, he only came out when they were up by 3 scores. So for many games, he didn't come out. And now he was experiencing the other side of that coin as a JV play

When I played, O line and QB didn't rotate. Every other position group had at least one sub who got significant time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

I marvel at your indepth knowledge of what kids are looking at during film. Sure yore not a coach

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole point of high school football is it’s a No Cut sport that can accommodate and gobble up any student that wants to play/participate in a sport. The ones that don’t play or factor into the depth chart (many) are typically just happy to be there and be part of the football culture.

Football at the varsity level is definitely a cut sport if you have at least a semi decent steam.

Depends on the school.

I went to a power house high school and they didn't cut anyone. Bad players would stay on JV until senior year and then they'd get garbage time play if they did get a chance. Some of the kids knew they would never play but it was a big deal for them to be a part of the nationally ranked team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

I don't get it. Who is paying to play high school football?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

I don't get it. Who is paying to play high school football?

At our public school, most kids in most sports. The booster funds are relentless in asking for money and volunteer hours on top of the not mandatory, but really mandatory fees

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

I marvel at your indepth knowledge of what kids are looking at during film. Sure yore not a coach

To be fair, the reports of what the 3rd and 4th strings are doing during film study comes from kid and his friends. They are the starters and the 2nd stringers, and after film study, they'll sometimes complain about the other kids giggling, using their phones and otherwise being distracting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

Good coaches rotate second string defenses in to keep the first string fresh. Are you sure your kid wasn't third string?

I'm 100% positive. He was second on the published depth chart in his position on defense. It was not on the line, where some rotations do occur.

But lets be real, rotations like that don't typically occur at the youth level or at the JV level. They put their best 11 out there.

At least that was my experience when I played, and my experience as a parent. For example, I had to explain to him that last year, when he was a starter on his 8th grade team, he only came out when they were up by 3 scores. So for many games, he didn't come out. And now he was experiencing the other side of that coin as a JV play

When I played, O line and QB didn't rotate. Every other position group had at least one sub who got significant time.

Well, I imagine its different by area and program, but in our experience, that's not how its been. On defense, LBs and DBs have not rotated. Some interior defensive line rotations, but the ends dont rotate out.

And then, when up by 3 scores, coach yells "second team defense" and all 11 players switch

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

Good coaches rotate second string defenses in to keep the first string fresh. Are you sure your kid wasn't third string?

I'm 100% positive. He was second on the published depth chart in his position on defense. It was not on the line, where some rotations do occur.

But lets be real, rotations like that don't typically occur at the youth level or at the JV level. They put their best 11 out there.

At least that was my experience when I played, and my experience as a parent. For example, I had to explain to him that last year, when he was a starter on his 8th grade team, he only came out when they were up by 3 scores. So for many games, he didn't come out. And now he was experiencing the other side of that coin as a JV play

When I played, O line and QB didn't rotate. Every other position group had at least one sub who got significant time.

Well, I imagine its different by area and program, but in our experience, that's not how its been. On defense, LBs and DBs have not rotated. Some interior defensive line rotations, but the ends dont rotate out.

And then, when up by 3 scores, coach yells "second team defense" and all 11 players switch

If I was an opposing coach and knew your secondary never rotated, I'd be rotating receivers and having them run post routes at a sprint any time they aren't directly involved in the play

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

Good coaches rotate second string defenses in to keep the first string fresh. Are you sure your kid wasn't third string?

I'm 100% positive. He was second on the published depth chart in his position on defense. It was not on the line, where some rotations do occur.

But lets be real, rotations like that don't typically occur at the youth level or at the JV level. They put their best 11 out there.

At least that was my experience when I played, and my experience as a parent. For example, I had to explain to him that last year, when he was a starter on his 8th grade team, he only came out when they were up by 3 scores. So for many games, he didn't come out. And now he was experiencing the other side of that coin as a JV play

When I played, O line and QB didn't rotate. Every other position group had at least one sub who got significant time.

Well, I imagine its different by area and program, but in our experience, that's not how its been. On defense, LBs and DBs have not rotated. Some interior defensive line rotations, but the ends dont rotate out.

And then, when up by 3 scores, coach yells "second team defense" and all 11 players switch

If I was an opposing coach and knew your secondary never rotated, I'd be rotating receivers and having them run post routes at a sprint any time they aren't directly involved in the play

sure. A decent strategy, for sure.

And maybe our coach got away with bc our DEs were absolute studs, both recording multiple sacks pretty much every game.

But also, yeah, our d-backs did get burned on deep passes a lot. Probably more so than the better teams in our area. But his strategy of having defensive teams, instead of individual rotations isnt crazy. You see it in youth football everywhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am old enough to remember when kids played both ways.

Even on a roster that size, there's still kids that play both ways. Especially on JV.

My son's JV roster was around 60, but only about 25 saw the field on a regular basis.

And tbh, the kids that never saw the field seemed okay with it. They were usually small. Usually new to the sport. And occasionally when they got out there, they looked completely lost and at times unsafe being out there.

It was probably 2/3 freshman and I expect half of that group won't return as sophomores.

Its just the way it works

Thise kids wouldn't be out there if the team had real tryouts and cuts, like other teams do.
So why isn't the coach holding tryouts with cuts? Football coaches aren't known for being softies. They're not holding tryouts and making cuts because there is a benefit to them. That benefit is fundraising.

Keeping a bunch of kids on a team that are never going to walk out on the field so they get their hopes up and get disappointed week after week just to soak them for funds is exactly the kind of weak ass garbage some coaches are known for.

Yeah, maybe. But I'd challenge your statement that kids are getting their hopes up.

They aren't. There may be one or two that think they deserve more playing time, that are on the cusp of first team vs second team. But those kids would have made the cut anyway.

all the other kids standing around know where they stand. They aren't getting their hopes up. They are just happy to be there. They're not dumb. They look at the starters, and see how much bigger, faster, stronger and more experienced they are. They know. There's no real disappointment

You must be a football coach telling yourself bs to make yourself feel better about screwing over a bunch of kids. Stop stealing their money and make cuts.

No.

I'm a parent of a freshman who was second string defense. The team also had 3rd string defense and 4th string defense (which was really a mix; it had kids on 3rd string defense as well). There were a lot of kids on the team.

My son would get frustrated bc he felt he deserved a shot on the field to show he could hang with the first string. The kids on the 3rd string D joked at practice. Goofed around on the sidelines at games. Looked at instagram during film study.

They wanted to be on the team, bc it gave them a little status, or made the transition to HS a little easier, or just liked hanging out after school.

But it was clear where they stood, and they could depart at any point. In fact, some did leave after a few weeks.

But don't act like those kids didn't get anything out of it just because they got zero minutes. They were on the team for different reasons

I marvel at your indepth knowledge of what kids are looking at during film. Sure yore not a coach

To be fair, the reports of what the 3rd and 4th strings are doing during film study comes from kid and his friends. They are the starters and the 2nd stringers, and after film study, they'll sometimes complain about the other kids giggling, using their phones and otherwise being distracting.

I know of exactly zero coaches who would let that fly. If they do, they shouldn't be coaching.
Not every kid has a parent who instills (or knows themselves) proper team behavior. That doesn't mean a coach should bring them on and let them goof off for the extra dollars.