Little League and parent arrogance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Years ago when my son was 8, he played Little League (Vienna) and had the misfortune of being on teams two seasons in a row where the dads/coaches really thought their sons were headed for the big leagues. The coaches barely played the lesser skilled kids (my son was in this group) and ignored all but a handful of players. The boys are all in high school now and the kids who were going to be Cal Ripken aren’t even playing baseball (or any sport, for some of them) anymore. I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?

When my son was 5 and we were signing him up for Little League T-Ball my brother who had kids in Little League warned us- don't sign him up unless you can be at least an assistant coach. Turned out to be excellent advice. I ended up volunteering for the Board and DH was an assistant coach for both our boys so they played the best positions, got tons of time pitching and catching, and batted at the top of the line up, played in all stars up until 10U. One son stopped playing baseball after that and the other one didn't want to take it so seriously after that and stopped playing at 13.

Absolutely no regret from the coaches. DH hung out with his coach friends. Kids are in high school and half of their kids no longer play baseball. They were talking about how they all had a good time and were glad their kids had the opportunity to play whatever position they wanted. The best kids who didn't have dads coaching really did get a lot of playing time as well.

Your son was "less skilled". Did you play catch with him, take him to the batting cages, get a batting coach? So much about life is who you know and your connections or you have to work twice as hard. Why would Little League be any different?

And people wonder why LL is declining in numbers….at least this poster’s DH and his friends openly admit it. So gross.

This is more or less how our LL was run also. No sour grapes as my DSs always made the all star teams (both pitched well at those ages) but many of their deserving friends did not, over the years.

Doesn’t end up mattering in the end (most of the dadball kids are not still playing in high school anyway) but it is truly sad that little league is this way. It is one of the reasons kid move to club ball- same issues there but at least kids are free to move to a different team if there are problems. It is also one of the reasons kids drop the sport- being parked in RF for 2 innings a game while the coaches’ kids play the more exciting roles has to be so boring at that age.

The question OP asked: I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?
And the answer is: Of course not. What parent coach is going to look sit around looking back at what happened 6-8 years ago with regret and think, " I should have played that kids who wasn't very good more".

It is a big sacrifice for most parents to coach. My husband is a teacher and there were a lot of days he did not look forward to spending all day with junior high school students, hustling away from work, then spending more time supervising rowdy kids in the late afternoon/evenings. So why is it gross? It is laughable that if he has regrets it is going to be over the kids who played RF. The vast majority of the bench/right fielders had parents who couldn't even be bothered to ever play catch with them or take them to the batting cage or merely watch a few games of baseball so they knew how baseball was played.

I would have more respect for you if you just said your husband didn't care about coaching or helping develop young players and instill passion for the game and instead was motivated by making sure his son got as many reps as possible at the expense of the other kids because his experience was the only one that mattered. Because that's what happened. This is why rec sports are in serious decline and why people just say "No, thanks!"

Two things can be true at once. Yes the coaches kids got more playing time but at the same time many players were developed. If not you can't win games. My husband had on his team a tall thin 10 who couldn't hit the ball. He was new to his team but had recognized him from previous sessions where he didn't get playing time. My husband realized he was a lefty who had some zip when he threw AND was so incredibly coachable. DH and another coach taught him to pitch and really worked with him all season. By the end of the season he still couldn't hit but wow, what a good pitcher he became. DH went to go watch him play high school and he still such a good lefty pitcher.

Kids who you could tell didn't want to be there (they admitted their parents were making them play), kids who wouldn't listen and just goofed around so they were so uncoachable, kids whose parents never bothered to watch a game of baseball with them or play catch with them so they were so uncoordinated and clueless, those kids did play way less. None of those kids are developing a passion for the game no matter what you do.

DP but it’s weird that you think your DH should get extra credit for simply doing the job he signed up for… coaching kids. But I guess just coaching one kid is a success for him.

You keep trying to blame the parents for not teaching baseball to their kids? Well that’s what the coach is for! (Did it ever occur to you that the parents may not know anything about baseball? They might not be capable of playing catch?)

I assume your husband brings this same sh!tty attitude to his teaching job, too. “Why should I be bothered to teach Timmy chemistry when his lazy parents didn’t even bother to teach it to him before he got to my chemistry class? That means I will actually have to work!” His poor students.

It is not that long of a season for a kid to come out having NEVER watched baseball on TV or every having played catch to learn how to play when they sign up for the first time as a 9 year old. There are some kids who have done other hand-eye coordination sports that end up catching on. It is laziness on the part of parents never to play any sports with their kids at all and expect a VOLUNTEER to spend extra time with their kid so the kid has a chance to play infield. I am not talking about the single mom who works two jobs, I am talking about when a kid gets dropped off by his dad who is going to play golf and the kid doesn't even have a glove or want to be there because the dad has never bothered to play catch with his kid. Or kicked around a ball or done any sport. Or the kid whose mom drops off the kid so she can go to the gym or go work out somewhere but never takes her kid to work out. Or the parents that don't parent their kids and let them do whatever they want so they are really disruptive to the team. Some parents are really lazy and entitled and think they will let volunteers do it all.

Obviously teaching school is different. It doesn't matter if the parents do nothing, or how little the student knows, or a kid is annoying because teachers are going to do what it takes to help every student. A volunteer coaching job is not the same thing.

OP said her kid was "lesser skilled". So it isn't a post about - my kids was more skilled than the coaches' kids but didn't get as much playing time. Yeah that is absolutely a valid complaint. But it is annoying to hear "my kids was lesser skilled" and should get just as much playing time as the coaches's kid. Why would any coach feel badly years later about that?

It’s not actually different. Don’t “volunteer” for a job you have no intention of doing.

You sound like a truly awful person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Years ago when my son was 8, he played Little League (Vienna) and had the misfortune of being on teams two seasons in a row where the dads/coaches really thought their sons were headed for the big leagues. The coaches barely played the lesser skilled kids (my son was in this group) and ignored all but a handful of players. The boys are all in high school now and the kids who were going to be Cal Ripken aren’t even playing baseball (or any sport, for some of them) anymore. I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?

When my son was 5 and we were signing him up for Little League T-Ball my brother who had kids in Little League warned us- don't sign him up unless you can be at least an assistant coach. Turned out to be excellent advice. I ended up volunteering for the Board and DH was an assistant coach for both our boys so they played the best positions, got tons of time pitching and catching, and batted at the top of the line up, played in all stars up until 10U. One son stopped playing baseball after that and the other one didn't want to take it so seriously after that and stopped playing at 13.

Absolutely no regret from the coaches. DH hung out with his coach friends. Kids are in high school and half of their kids no longer play baseball. They were talking about how they all had a good time and were glad their kids had the opportunity to play whatever position they wanted. The best kids who didn't have dads coaching really did get a lot of playing time as well.

Your son was "less skilled". Did you play catch with him, take him to the batting cages, get a batting coach? So much about life is who you know and your connections or you have to work twice as hard. Why would Little League be any different?

And people wonder why LL is declining in numbers….at least this poster’s DH and his friends openly admit it. So gross.

This is more or less how our LL was run also. No sour grapes as my DSs always made the all star teams (both pitched well at those ages) but many of their deserving friends did not, over the years.

Doesn’t end up mattering in the end (most of the dadball kids are not still playing in high school anyway) but it is truly sad that little league is this way. It is one of the reasons kid move to club ball- same issues there but at least kids are free to move to a different team if there are problems. It is also one of the reasons kids drop the sport- being parked in RF for 2 innings a game while the coaches’ kids play the more exciting roles has to be so boring at that age.

The question OP asked: I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?
And the answer is: Of course not. What parent coach is going to look sit around looking back at what happened 6-8 years ago with regret and think, " I should have played that kids who wasn't very good more".

It is a big sacrifice for most parents to coach. My husband is a teacher and there were a lot of days he did not look forward to spending all day with junior high school students, hustling away from work, then spending more time supervising rowdy kids in the late afternoon/evenings. So why is it gross? It is laughable that if he has regrets it is going to be over the kids who played RF. The vast majority of the bench/right fielders had parents who couldn't even be bothered to ever play catch with them or take them to the batting cage or merely watch a few games of baseball so they knew how baseball was played.

I would have more respect for you if you just said your husband didn't care about coaching or helping develop young players and instill passion for the game and instead was motivated by making sure his son got as many reps as possible at the expense of the other kids because his experience was the only one that mattered. Because that's what happened. This is why rec sports are in serious decline and why people just say "No, thanks!"

Two things can be true at once. Yes the coaches kids got more playing time but at the same time many players were developed. If not you can't win games. My husband had on his team a tall thin 10 who couldn't hit the ball. He was new to his team but had recognized him from previous sessions where he didn't get playing time. My husband realized he was a lefty who had some zip when he threw AND was so incredibly coachable. DH and another coach taught him to pitch and really worked with him all season. By the end of the season he still couldn't hit but wow, what a good pitcher he became. DH went to go watch him play high school and he still such a good lefty pitcher.

Kids who you could tell didn't want to be there (they admitted their parents were making them play), kids who wouldn't listen and just goofed around so they were so uncoachable, kids whose parents never bothered to watch a game of baseball with them or play catch with them so they were so uncoordinated and clueless, those kids did play way less. None of those kids are developing a passion for the game no matter what you do.

DP but it’s weird that you think your DH should get extra credit for simply doing the job he signed up for… coaching kids. But I guess just coaching one kid is a success for him.

You keep trying to blame the parents for not teaching baseball to their kids? Well that’s what the coach is for! (Did it ever occur to you that the parents may not know anything about baseball? They might not be capable of playing catch?)

I assume your husband brings this same sh!tty attitude to his teaching job, too. “Why should I be bothered to teach Timmy chemistry when his lazy parents didn’t even bother to teach it to him before he got to my chemistry class? That means I will actually have to work!” His poor students.

It is not that long of a season for a kid to come out having NEVER watched baseball on TV or every having played catch to learn how to play when they sign up for the first time as a 9 year old. There are some kids who have done other hand-eye coordination sports that end up catching on. It is laziness on the part of parents never to play any sports with their kids at all and expect a VOLUNTEER to spend extra time with their kid so the kid has a chance to play infield. I am not talking about the single mom who works two jobs, I am talking about when a kid gets dropped off by his dad who is going to play golf and the kid doesn't even have a glove or want to be there because the dad has never bothered to play catch with his kid. Or kicked around a ball or done any sport. Or the kid whose mom drops off the kid so she can go to the gym or go work out somewhere but never takes her kid to work out. Or the parents that don't parent their kids and let them do whatever they want so they are really disruptive to the team. Some parents are really lazy and entitled and think they will let volunteers do it all.

Obviously teaching school is different. It doesn't matter if the parents do nothing, or how little the student knows, or a kid is annoying because teachers are going to do what it takes to help every student. A volunteer coaching job is not the same thing.

OP said her kid was "lesser skilled". So it isn't a post about - my kids was more skilled than the coaches' kids but didn't get as much playing time. Yeah that is absolutely a valid complaint. But it is annoying to hear "my kids was lesser skilled" and should get just as much playing time as the coaches's kid. Why would any coach feel badly years later about that?

It’s not actually different. Don’t “volunteer” for a job you have no intention of doing.

You sound like a truly awful person.

That PPs kids were clearly so bad at baseball they never played past 10 and 13 despite a dad paving the way with all the reps, pitching time, top of the order, etc. What was the point? Delusional. There is no future for rec baseball with garbage people like this at the helm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Years ago when my son was 8, he played Little League (Vienna) and had the misfortune of being on teams two seasons in a row where the dads/coaches really thought their sons were headed for the big leagues. The coaches barely played the lesser skilled kids (my son was in this group) and ignored all but a handful of players. The boys are all in high school now and the kids who were going to be Cal Ripken aren’t even playing baseball (or any sport, for some of them) anymore. I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?

When my son was 5 and we were signing him up for Little League T-Ball my brother who had kids in Little League warned us- don't sign him up unless you can be at least an assistant coach. Turned out to be excellent advice. I ended up volunteering for the Board and DH was an assistant coach for both our boys so they played the best positions, got tons of time pitching and catching, and batted at the top of the line up, played in all stars up until 10U. One son stopped playing baseball after that and the other one didn't want to take it so seriously after that and stopped playing at 13.

Absolutely no regret from the coaches. DH hung out with his coach friends. Kids are in high school and half of their kids no longer play baseball. They were talking about how they all had a good time and were glad their kids had the opportunity to play whatever position they wanted. The best kids who didn't have dads coaching really did get a lot of playing time as well.

Your son was "less skilled". Did you play catch with him, take him to the batting cages, get a batting coach? So much about life is who you know and your connections or you have to work twice as hard. Why would Little League be any different?

Well there’s your answer PP. No they apparently do not regret it.

My DH currently coaches LL and this is the exact opposite of his approach. He makes sure all kids get an opportunity to play all positions. Batting lineups are randomized every time. He volunteers b/c he is athletic and likes being involved with our DS and his friends. He wants to see all the kids do well.

I don't know about older ages, but I absolutely think this is how younger teams should be run. At this age, kids should be in LL to learn to be part of team, learn sportsmanship, improve at the sport (from whatever skill level they're at) and have fun! This isn't training to go into the Majors or even to make high school teams, so why limit playing time based on scoring?

[Anonymous]

So many of the problems outlined in this thread could be easily solved if the league itself established ground rules that all teams must follow.

Every kid gets 50% infield and outfield positions, batting orders must give each kid 1/3 in the top 4, 1/3 in middle 4 and 1/3 in bottom 4, etc.

Yeah, maybe it shouldn’t have to be this way…but it solves a lot of problems if every team has to compete on the same basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Years ago when my son was 8, he played Little League (Vienna) and had the misfortune of being on teams two seasons in a row where the dads/coaches really thought their sons were headed for the big leagues. The coaches barely played the lesser skilled kids (my son was in this group) and ignored all but a handful of players. The boys are all in high school now and the kids who were going to be Cal Ripken aren’t even playing baseball (or any sport, for some of them) anymore. I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?

When my son was 5 and we were signing him up for Little League T-Ball my brother who had kids in Little League warned us- don't sign him up unless you can be at least an assistant coach. Turned out to be excellent advice. I ended up volunteering for the Board and DH was an assistant coach for both our boys so they played the best positions, got tons of time pitching and catching, and batted at the top of the line up, played in all stars up until 10U. One son stopped playing baseball after that and the other one didn't want to take it so seriously after that and stopped playing at 13.

Absolutely no regret from the coaches. DH hung out with his coach friends. Kids are in high school and half of their kids no longer play baseball. They were talking about how they all had a good time and were glad their kids had the opportunity to play whatever position they wanted. The best kids who didn't have dads coaching really did get a lot of playing time as well.

Your son was "less skilled". Did you play catch with him, take him to the batting cages, get a batting coach? So much about life is who you know and your connections or you have to work twice as hard. Why would Little League be any different?

Well there’s your answer PP. No they apparently do not regret it.

My DH currently coaches LL and this is the exact opposite of his approach. He makes sure all kids get an opportunity to play all positions. Batting lineups are randomized every time. He volunteers b/c he is athletic and likes being involved with our DS and his friends. He wants to see all the kids do well.

I don't know about older ages, but I absolutely think this is how younger teams should be run. At this age, kids should be in LL to learn to be part of team, learn sportsmanship, improve at the sport (from whatever skill level they're at) and have fun! This isn't training to go into the Majors or even to make high school teams, so why limit playing time based on scoring?

Ideally yes, but people are driven out of LL by the daddy ball types like the PP and her husband who lord it over everyone else because they coach the team or are on the board. There are some good coaches who treat everyone fairly and with respect. And then there are those who coach only as an afterthought to get their kid batting top of the order. This is why people flock to travel teams you have to pay for appropriate coaching the volunteers can't or won't deliver.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many of the problems outlined in this thread could be easily solved if the league itself established ground rules that all teams must follow.

Every kid gets 50% infield and outfield positions, batting orders must give each kid 1/3 in the top 4, 1/3 in middle 4 and 1/3 in bottom 4, etc.

Yeah, maybe it shouldn’t have to be this way…but it solves a lot of problems if every team has to compete on the same basis.

The sad thing is that bad LL coaches will find a way to abuse the spirit of the rules as much as possible anyway, and rules like the above just make managing a team so much more difficult for the GOOD coaches (it is hard enough to find a volunteer to track pitch counts etc much less tracking innings per kid at each position etc). Add in shortened games/run rules and then it is really a mess.

LL moved to a continuous batting order with free substitution last year to make things easier on the coaches (no more managing subs etc). But of course the bad ones used this new rule as a license to bench kids defensively for full games…on my kid’s all star team last year they benched the same 2 kids full game after full game (even in blowouts- they really can’t stick the kid in RF for a few innings?)

Most coaches in our league make sure kids playing minors see some infield time every game. Majors is a little more competitive but the good coaches look for opportunities to get weaker players regular time in the infield or their turn to pitch a few innings. My son’s coach did an excellent job of that last year- every single kid on the team got infield time and every single kid who wanted to pitch got to pitch at least once. And they still won the league tournament anyway. But the bad coaches don’t care- as long as it is technically within the rules, anything goes.

I don’t know what the solution is, but the bad coaches sure ruin things and it is sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Years ago when my son was 8, he played Little League (Vienna) and had the misfortune of being on teams two seasons in a row where the dads/coaches really thought their sons were headed for the big leagues. The coaches barely played the lesser skilled kids (my son was in this group) and ignored all but a handful of players. The boys are all in high school now and the kids who were going to be Cal Ripken aren’t even playing baseball (or any sport, for some of them) anymore. I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?

When my son was 5 and we were signing him up for Little League T-Ball my brother who had kids in Little League warned us- don't sign him up unless you can be at least an assistant coach. Turned out to be excellent advice. I ended up volunteering for the Board and DH was an assistant coach for both our boys so they played the best positions, got tons of time pitching and catching, and batted at the top of the line up, played in all stars up until 10U. One son stopped playing baseball after that and the other one didn't want to take it so seriously after that and stopped playing at 13.

Absolutely no regret from the coaches. DH hung out with his coach friends. Kids are in high school and half of their kids no longer play baseball. They were talking about how they all had a good time and were glad their kids had the opportunity to play whatever position they wanted. The best kids who didn't have dads coaching really did get a lot of playing time as well.

Your son was "less skilled". Did you play catch with him, take him to the batting cages, get a batting coach? So much about life is who you know and your connections or you have to work twice as hard. Why would Little League be any different?

Well there’s your answer PP. No they apparently do not regret it.

My DH currently coaches LL and this is the exact opposite of his approach. He makes sure all kids get an opportunity to play all positions. Batting lineups are randomized every time. He volunteers b/c he is athletic and likes being involved with our DS and his friends. He wants to see all the kids do well.

I don't know about older ages, but I absolutely think this is how younger teams should be run. At this age, kids should be in LL to learn to be part of team, learn sportsmanship, improve at the sport (from whatever skill level they're at) and have fun! This isn't training to go into the Majors or even to make high school teams, so why limit playing time based on scoring?

Ideally yes, but people are driven out of LL by the daddy ball types like the PP and her husband who lord it over everyone else because they coach the team or are on the board. There are some good coaches who treat everyone fairly and with respect. And then there are those who coach only as an afterthought to get their kid batting top of the order. This is why people flock to travel teams you have to pay for appropriate coaching the volunteers can't or won't deliver.

+1

The most telling this is: in our area, there are tons of dads who played baseball in college, the minors, even some former pros. Usually these guys are the good coaches in rec ball- developing all the kids, treating everyone fairly etc. They seem to understand the purpose of rec ball, and know it is a long path from LL to even play HS ball much less anything more. It is usually the “I’ve never even played baseball” dads that are the Painting with a broad brush yes, but it is the trend I have seen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Years ago when my son was 8, he played Little League (Vienna) and had the misfortune of being on teams two seasons in a row where the dads/coaches really thought their sons were headed for the big leagues. The coaches barely played the lesser skilled kids (my son was in this group) and ignored all but a handful of players. The boys are all in high school now and the kids who were going to be Cal Ripken aren’t even playing baseball (or any sport, for some of them) anymore. I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?

When my son was 5 and we were signing him up for Little League T-Ball my brother who had kids in Little League warned us- don't sign him up unless you can be at least an assistant coach. Turned out to be excellent advice. I ended up volunteering for the Board and DH was an assistant coach for both our boys so they played the best positions, got tons of time pitching and catching, and batted at the top of the line up, played in all stars up until 10U. One son stopped playing baseball after that and the other one didn't want to take it so seriously after that and stopped playing at 13.

Absolutely no regret from the coaches. DH hung out with his coach friends. Kids are in high school and half of their kids no longer play baseball. They were talking about how they all had a good time and were glad their kids had the opportunity to play whatever position they wanted. The best kids who didn't have dads coaching really did get a lot of playing time as well.

Your son was "less skilled". Did you play catch with him, take him to the batting cages, get a batting coach? So much about life is who you know and your connections or you have to work twice as hard. Why would Little League be any different?

Well there’s your answer PP. No they apparently do not regret it.

My DH currently coaches LL and this is the exact opposite of his approach. He makes sure all kids get an opportunity to play all positions. Batting lineups are randomized every time. He volunteers b/c he is athletic and likes being involved with our DS and his friends. He wants to see all the kids do well.

I don't know about older ages, but I absolutely think this is how younger teams should be run. At this age, kids should be in LL to learn to be part of team, learn sportsmanship, improve at the sport (from whatever skill level they're at) and have fun! This isn't training to go into the Majors or even to make high school teams, so why limit playing time based on scoring?

Ideally yes, but people are driven out of LL by the daddy ball types like the PP and her husband who lord it over everyone else because they coach the team or are on the board. There are some good coaches who treat everyone fairly and with respect. And then there are those who coach only as an afterthought to get their kid batting top of the order. This is why people flock to travel teams you have to pay for appropriate coaching the volunteers can't or won't deliver.

+1

The most telling this is: in our area, there are tons of dads who played baseball in college, the minors, even some former pros. Usually these guys are the good coaches in rec ball- developing all the kids, treating everyone fairly etc. They seem to understand the purpose of rec ball, and know it is a long path from LL to even play HS ball much less anything more. It is usually the “I’ve never even played baseball” dads that are the Painting with a broad brush yes, but it is the trend I have seen.

Agree. I live in Arizona. It's all former MLB players. They are the most relaxed about it. They coach because they love the game. It's the overweight out of shape dads who never did much of anything, or maybe a little high school ball, who are screaming at the kids, living vicariously through their own kid who they hope and dream will go further in life than he did, and trying to win at all costs no matter the age. They are the worst coaches. They often scream at the umps too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Years ago when my son was 8, he played Little League (Vienna) and had the misfortune of being on teams two seasons in a row where the dads/coaches really thought their sons were headed for the big leagues. The coaches barely played the lesser skilled kids (my son was in this group) and ignored all but a handful of players. The boys are all in high school now and the kids who were going to be Cal Ripken aren’t even playing baseball (or any sport, for some of them) anymore. I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?

When my son was 5 and we were signing him up for Little League T-Ball my brother who had kids in Little League warned us- don't sign him up unless you can be at least an assistant coach. Turned out to be excellent advice. I ended up volunteering for the Board and DH was an assistant coach for both our boys so they played the best positions, got tons of time pitching and catching, and batted at the top of the line up, played in all stars up until 10U. One son stopped playing baseball after that and the other one didn't want to take it so seriously after that and stopped playing at 13.

Absolutely no regret from the coaches. DH hung out with his coach friends. Kids are in high school and half of their kids no longer play baseball. They were talking about how they all had a good time and were glad their kids had the opportunity to play whatever position they wanted. The best kids who didn't have dads coaching really did get a lot of playing time as well.

Your son was "less skilled". Did you play catch with him, take him to the batting cages, get a batting coach? So much about life is who you know and your connections or you have to work twice as hard. Why would Little League be any different?

Well there’s your answer PP. No they apparently do not regret it.

My DH currently coaches LL and this is the exact opposite of his approach. He makes sure all kids get an opportunity to play all positions. Batting lineups are randomized every time. He volunteers b/c he is athletic and likes being involved with our DS and his friends. He wants to see all the kids do well.

I don't know about older ages, but I absolutely think this is how younger teams should be run. At this age, kids should be in LL to learn to be part of team, learn sportsmanship, improve at the sport (from whatever skill level they're at) and have fun! This isn't training to go into the Majors or even to make high school teams, so why limit playing time based on scoring?

Ideally yes, but people are driven out of LL by the daddy ball types like the PP and her husband who lord it over everyone else because they coach the team or are on the board. There are some good coaches who treat everyone fairly and with respect. And then there are those who coach only as an afterthought to get their kid batting top of the order. This is why people flock to travel teams you have to pay for appropriate coaching the volunteers can't or won't deliver.

+1

The most telling this is: in our area, there are tons of dads who played baseball in college, the minors, even some former pros. Usually these guys are the good coaches in rec ball- developing all the kids, treating everyone fairly etc. They seem to understand the purpose of rec ball, and know it is a long path from LL to even play HS ball much less anything more. It is usually the “I’ve never even played baseball” dads that are the Painting with a broad brush yes, but it is the trend I have seen.

Agree. I live in Arizona. It's all former MLB players. They are the most relaxed about it. They coach because they love the game. It's the overweight out of shape dads who never did much of anything, or maybe a little high school ball, who are screaming at the kids, living vicariously through their own kid who they hope and dream will go further in life than he did, and trying to win at all costs no matter the age. They are the worst coaches. They often scream at the umps too.

Worst coach we had was a former MLB player. Didn’t know how to teach the kids and zero patience. Only coached because his own kid played. Often very talented players aren’t great coaches because they don’t know how to relate to kids that aren’t great athletes.

Our LL created three new rules because of the actions of this guy. Great example…he used to abuse the umps because he thought it was his job to “advocate for his team”.

[Anonymous]

This entire thread reminds me of why I am so glad DS quit baseball. We made the mistake of starting little league at age 7 instead of 4. DH worked with DS on catch and hitting at home before the season started and we took him to a couple baseball camps. DS wasn’t even bad when he started. However, the coaches only ever played their own kids at in field. DS spent his time in right or left field where he was bored out of his mind and rarely saw a ball. I think there was a rule about innings and DS would get a mandatory one inning at in-field. The whole experience was terrible and the stereotype of it being ruined by overweight or unathletic dads who barely played is unfortunately very true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So many of the problems outlined in this thread could be easily solved if the league itself established ground rules that all teams must follow.

Every kid gets 50% infield and outfield positions, batting orders must give each kid 1/3 in the top 4, 1/3 in middle 4 and 1/3 in bottom 4, etc.

Yeah, maybe it shouldn’t have to be this way…but it solves a lot of problems if every team has to compete on the same basis.

The sad thing is that bad LL coaches will find a way to abuse the spirit of the rules as much as possible anyway, and rules like the above just make managing a team so much more difficult for the GOOD coaches (it is hard enough to find a volunteer to track pitch counts etc much less tracking innings per kid at each position etc). Add in shortened games/run rules and then it is really a mess.

LL moved to a continuous batting order with free substitution last year to make things easier on the coaches (no more managing subs etc). But of course the bad ones used this new rule as a license to bench kids defensively for full games…on my kid’s all star team last year they benched the same 2 kids full game after full game (even in blowouts- they really can’t stick the kid in RF for a few innings?)

Most coaches in our league make sure kids playing minors see some infield time every game. Majors is a little more competitive but the good coaches look for opportunities to get weaker players regular time in the infield or their turn to pitch a few innings. My son’s coach did an excellent job of that last year- every single kid on the team got infield time and every single kid who wanted to pitch got to pitch at least once. And they still won the league tournament anyway. But the bad coaches don’t care- as long as it is technically within the rules, anything goes.

I don’t know what the solution is, but the bad coaches sure ruin things and it is sad.

My kid had a softball coach like this (and our league has fairness rules). Worked her way around the rules with the biggest smile and peppiest attitude so it was hard to notice. Daughter played that team recently and she's still at her old tricks - abiding by the technical letter of the law while completely violating the spirit and definitely not developing players well. We were so glad we requested a different coach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many of the problems outlined in this thread could be easily solved if the league itself established ground rules that all teams must follow.

Every kid gets 50% infield and outfield positions, batting orders must give each kid 1/3 in the top 4, 1/3 in middle 4 and 1/3 in bottom 4, etc.

Yeah, maybe it shouldn’t have to be this way…but it solves a lot of problems if every team has to compete on the same basis.

The batting order thing is the easiest thing to fix at the younger ages.

Whoever was on deck when the last out was made, leads off the next game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Years ago when my son was 8, he played Little League (Vienna) and had the misfortune of being on teams two seasons in a row where the dads/coaches really thought their sons were headed for the big leagues. The coaches barely played the lesser skilled kids (my son was in this group) and ignored all but a handful of players. The boys are all in high school now and the kids who were going to be Cal Ripken aren’t even playing baseball (or any sport, for some of them) anymore. I occasionally wonder if the dads ever think back on how they coached those teams and regret being so myopic. Just wishful thinking on my part?

When my son was 5 and we were signing him up for Little League T-Ball my brother who had kids in Little League warned us- don't sign him up unless you can be at least an assistant coach. Turned out to be excellent advice. I ended up volunteering for the Board and DH was an assistant coach for both our boys so they played the best positions, got tons of time pitching and catching, and batted at the top of the line up, played in all stars up until 10U. One son stopped playing baseball after that and the other one didn't want to take it so seriously after that and stopped playing at 13.

Absolutely no regret from the coaches. DH hung out with his coach friends. Kids are in high school and half of their kids no longer play baseball. They were talking about how they all had a good time and were glad their kids had the opportunity to play whatever position they wanted. The best kids who didn't have dads coaching really did get a lot of playing time as well.

Your son was "less skilled". Did you play catch with him, take him to the batting cages, get a batting coach? So much about life is who you know and your connections or you have to work twice as hard. Why would Little League be any different?

Well there’s your answer PP. No they apparently do not regret it.

My DH currently coaches LL and this is the exact opposite of his approach. He makes sure all kids get an opportunity to play all positions. Batting lineups are randomized every time. He volunteers b/c he is athletic and likes being involved with our DS and his friends. He wants to see all the kids do well.

I don't know about older ages, but I absolutely think this is how younger teams should be run. At this age, kids should be in LL to learn to be part of team, learn sportsmanship, improve at the sport (from whatever skill level they're at) and have fun! This isn't training to go into the Majors or even to make high school teams, so why limit playing time based on scoring?

Ideally yes, but people are driven out of LL by the daddy ball types like the PP and her husband who lord it over everyone else because they coach the team or are on the board. There are some good coaches who treat everyone fairly and with respect. And then there are those who coach only as an afterthought to get their kid batting top of the order. This is why people flock to travel teams you have to pay for appropriate coaching the volunteers can't or won't deliver.

+1

The most telling this is: in our area, there are tons of dads who played baseball in college, the minors, even some former pros. Usually these guys are the good coaches in rec ball- developing all the kids, treating everyone fairly etc. They seem to understand the purpose of rec ball, and know it is a long path from LL to even play HS ball much less anything more. It is usually the “I’ve never even played baseball” dads that are the Painting with a broad brush yes, but it is the trend I have seen.

Agree. I live in Arizona. It's all former MLB players. They are the most relaxed about it. They coach because they love the game. It's the overweight out of shape dads who never did much of anything, or maybe a little high school ball, who are screaming at the kids, living vicariously through their own kid who they hope and dream will go further in life than he did, and trying to win at all costs no matter the age. They are the worst coaches. They often scream at the umps too.

Worst coach we had was a former MLB player. Didn’t know how to teach the kids and zero patience. Only coached because his own kid played. Often very talented players aren’t great coaches because they don’t know how to relate to kids that aren’t great athletes.

Our LL created three new rules because of the actions of this guy. Great example…he used to abuse the umps because he thought it was his job to “advocate for his team”.

I should have clarified. I'm talking about travel teams with former MLB coaches. This isn't LL daddy ball where the parent thing trumps the MLB background. There isn't a lot of daddy ball in travel teams. Never play on a team where the coach has a kid. It's almost impossible to be unbiased and fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many of the problems outlined in this thread could be easily solved if the league itself established ground rules that all teams must follow.

Every kid gets 50% infield and outfield positions, batting orders must give each kid 1/3 in the top 4, 1/3 in middle 4 and 1/3 in bottom 4, etc.

Yeah, maybe it shouldn’t have to be this way…but it solves a lot of problems if every team has to compete on the same basis.

Yes, but if a pitcher actually throws strikes and balls are put in play, if the infield defense is terrible, outs will not be made. Pitcher's pitch count goes up, hits max, now onto a different/lesser pitcher. The game will drag on and no one will have any fun, learn any skills, or get any practice.

Who plays in the infield and when can be huge. Especially if you're trying to build confidence in a young pitcher. If he gives up a ton of runs and doesn't get outs because the a ground ball was missed, a pop up was dropped, wild throw, third basemen not paying attention, second basemen didn't cover 2B. Well, now you've got a dejected kid. You want to put pitchers and players in the field with the opportunity to succeed. Heavens knows baseball is full of failure anyways.

You can't just plug in players like they're all the same. There's a time and place to let certain kids play infield and there's not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So many of the problems outlined in this thread could be easily solved if the league itself established ground rules that all teams must follow.

Every kid gets 50% infield and outfield positions, batting orders must give each kid 1/3 in the top 4, 1/3 in middle 4 and 1/3 in bottom 4, etc.

Yeah, maybe it shouldn’t have to be this way…but it solves a lot of problems if every team has to compete on the same basis.

The coach of my daughter’s kid pitch little league softball team (minors) told them at the beginning of the season that everyone was going to play every position including pitcher and catcher. It sounded nice in theory, but there are some girls that have no interest in pitching and, more importantly, he has provided 0 instruction on how to pitch.

His daughter pitched 2 innings last game. She had an illegal pitch almost every time - a double wind up, or swinging her arm back and forth a couple of times or pulling the ball in and out of her glove. He said nothing and the umpire and other team’s coach let it go while she walked in the max runs (5) each inning and recorded no outs in 2 innings. Everyone else (batter included) stood around.

How is that good for anyone? Especially the girls on the team who really want to pitch! My daughter’s worked at pitching since last summer. Her coach last year (same level) primarily pitched the experienced girls and she wasn’t there yet. She worked in the off season on it, did evals as a pitcher and was placed on this team as one of the pitchers. She was the starting pitcher in the first game, but doesn’t think she’ll have another chance until everyone else has their “turn.” It’s a short season, so she may get 1 more chance.

It’s incredibly frustrating especially when hers is the only team like this.

In short, make sure your players have a clue before putting them in certain positions.