FB: Minnesota Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[OzJohnnie]

No need to worry about football for 2nd graders, or the youngsters in general (IMO).  The kids run around, grab onto each other, and fall down together.  There isn't any real hitting for several years.

Right.  So, what's the point of rushing them into "tackle" football?  I'm of the opinion that kids these days are getting sport specific way too young, and so many parents fall into the "well, if he/she doesn't start in 1st grade, he/she will never catch up to the other kids."  I'm all for letting kids be kids and letting them try out whatever they want (Unless it's hockey.  No hockey in my household).

I'm not saying 2nd grade football should be tackle (I actually think that's too young for tackle), my message was not to worry about concussion/brain injury at that age (IMO).  A primary goal of every 2nd grade football coach should be to make it fun and have every kid want to play football the following year.  Lose a kid at a young age and he may never come back.

I took harder hits playing back yard tackle than I did in organised football until maybe 9th grade when organised football became more serious.  The hardest hit I ever took was riding a sled down the hill into the slough.  We had a great track iced up with a jump at the bottom that landed on the frozen pond.  We set that up when we were 16 or 17 so old enough to do it right and young enough to be stupid in the bobsled nightmare we created.  I took flight over that and nearly cracked my head open when I landed.  Saw stars, knocked the wind out of me and couldn't move for a couple minutes.

Mrs Oz thinks I'm a doofus, but I say that the greatest skill we can teach our kids, particularly the boys, is how to be safely stupid.  Stupid enough to feel the danger, safe enough that you're unlikely to experience death or permanent disfigurement.

[GoldandBlueBU]

No need to worry about football for 2nd graders, or the youngsters in general (IMO).  The kids run around, grab onto each other, and fall down together.  There isn't any real hitting for several years.

Right.  So, what's the point of rushing them into "tackle" football?  I'm of the opinion that kids these days are getting sport specific way too young, and so many parents fall into the "well, if he/she doesn't start in 1st grade, he/she will never catch up to the other kids."  I'm all for letting kids be kids and letting them try out whatever they want (Unless it's hockey.  No hockey in my household).

I'm not saying 2nd grade football should be tackle (I actually think that's too young for tackle), my message was not to worry about concussion/brain injury at that age (IMO).  A primary goal of every 2nd grade football coach should be to make it fun and have every kid want to play football the following year.  Lose a kid at a young age and he may never come back.

The catch on having tackling at such a young age, even a couple years older, IMO, is the discrepancy between how prepared some kids are for it.  I helped coach a 5th grade football team, and there was, as you noted, plenty of organized falling down...the problem, and again, IMO, drawback of tackle that early is that each team typically had 1-2 kids that were far more ready for speed and contact and true hitting / tackling than the others.  When these kids met up with kids that were perhaps a year behind the average kid, the results were sometimes painful to watch.

If you wait until everyone is at least 12+, there will still be some of that, but it becomes a lesser gap as the kids get a little older.

I've only got daughters, so I likely won't have to make the decision of whether to allow or not, but my feeling is that I would likely allow a son to participate, eventually.

[DuffMan]

G&B, I help coach my son's youth wrestling team, and I concur that there are big discrepancies in abilities/desire/focus/coordination in younger kids.  You hate to see those slower developers get discouraged at a young age, too.

[OzJohnnie]

No need to worry about football for 2nd graders, or the youngsters in general (IMO).  The kids run around, grab onto each other, and fall down together.  There isn't any real hitting for several years.

Right.  So, what's the point of rushing them into "tackle" football?  I'm of the opinion that kids these days are getting sport specific way too young, and so many parents fall into the "well, if he/she doesn't start in 1st grade, he/she will never catch up to the other kids."  I'm all for letting kids be kids and letting them try out whatever they want (Unless it's hockey.  No hockey in my household).

I'm not saying 2nd grade football should be tackle (I actually think that's too young for tackle), my message was not to worry about concussion/brain injury at that age (IMO).  A primary goal of every 2nd grade football coach should be to make it fun and have every kid want to play football the following year.  Lose a kid at a young age and he may never come back.

The catch on having tackling at such a young age, even a couple years older, IMO, is the discrepancy between how prepared some kids are for it.  I helped coach a 5th grade football team, and there was, as you noted, plenty of organized falling down...the problem, and again, IMO, drawback of tackle that early is that each team typically had 1-2 kids that were far more ready for speed and contact and true hitting / tackling than the others.  When these kids met up with kids that were perhaps a year behind the average kid, the results were sometimes painful to watch.

If you wait until everyone is at least 12+, there will still be some of that, but it becomes a lesser gap as the kids get a little older.

I've only got daughters, so I likely won't have to make the decision of whether to allow or not, but my feeling is that I would likely allow a son to participate, eventually.

If I had a boy he'd be playing footy (and cricket, snooze) no doubt.  From the youngest he could.  Aussie Rules doesn't have hard tackling until you hit the under 15's.  Before that, the under 13's, it's just wrap your arms around a guy and the ref blows the whistle.  The under 18's are men and a hard game.

I remember from the Pony League days that the issue was that one team always had an earlier developer.  A 12 or 13 year old the size of a 16 or 17 year old.  He would be the running back and would carry five guys along for 15 yards every play.  In three years time he was the same size as everyone else but now average and slow so would quit football.

Our guy was named Rasmussen, I remember, because the hand-it-to-him-and-let-him-run play was called "Your ass is grass with Ras". The QB simply gave it to Ras and then he rumbled forward until half the other side brought him down.  Has stuck with me all these years.

[OzJohnnie]

My other great memory from the Pony League days was that it was during practice where I finally learned to do the piercing loud whistle using my fingers.  That and making fart sounds with your hand in your armpit were the big milestones in the social development of 13-year-olds back in my day.

[DuffMan]

Oz, my 8-year old has mastered the armpit fart.  I'm quite proud.  The 6-year old (girl) is still working on it. 

[sjusection105]

It was nice to have 10 PAT kicks go through the uprights however the one 28 yard field goal attempt was nowhere close. Maybe after getting a few weeks of practice in that will improve.

In the past we've had the kickers who could make 50 yd FGs, that's not what we have right now and that's OK. What we have is a functioning kicking game, which I'll take going into the playoffs.

[TheChucker]

No need to worry about football for 2nd graders, or the youngsters in general (IMO).  The kids run around, grab onto each other, and fall down together.  There isn't any real hitting for several years.

Right.  So, what's the point of rushing them into "tackle" football?  I'm of the opinion that kids these days are getting sport specific way too young, and so many parents fall into the "well, if he/she doesn't start in 1st grade, he/she will never catch up to the other kids."  I'm all for letting kids be kids and letting them try out whatever they want (Unless it's hockey.  No hockey in my household).

Agreed. There's no need to start playing tackle footbal at an early age. Unlike technique-intense sports like hockey and baseball/softball (and several others), football techniques can be picked up rather quickly at an older more developed age; especially non throwing and catching skills. A good athlete that's new to organized tackle football in say middle school would be at minimal disadvantage to kids playing for several years. Throwing and catching can be learned playing flag football or just messing around in general ball sports.

[TheChucker]

Wow, Minnesota is up to 7th.  When is the last time MN was ranked in the top 10, much less this late in the season?

'Minnesotans' will start rowing the boat and crowd surfing the players with relish if this continues.

1962

They were ranked 5th

Man, big time boat rowing.

This article at ESPN (https://www.espn.com.au/college-football/story/_/id/28043552/college-football-power-rankings-week-11) says:

Minnesota is 9-0 for the first time since 1904, it has won 11 consecutive games for the first time since 1939-40, and it is 6-0 in Big Ten play for the first time since 1961....

It was the sixth time Minnesota has won a game as an underdog under coach P.J. Fleck, according to ESPN Stats & Information research. He is only the ninth FBS coach in the past 40 seasons to have six victories as an underdog at one school. Only former Ohio State coach Urban Meyer (2012-18) and TCU's Gary Patterson (2004-05) have more, with seven.

Fleck has another chance to get an underdog win this week. The Gophers are a 2.5 point underdog to Iowa right now.

[Mr.MIAC]

No need to worry about football for 2nd graders, or the youngsters in general (IMO).  The kids run around, grab onto each other, and fall down together.  There isn't any real hitting for several years.

Right.  So, what's the point of rushing them into "tackle" football?  I'm of the opinion that kids these days are getting sport specific way too young, and so many parents fall into the "well, if he/she doesn't start in 1st grade, he/she will never catch up to the other kids."  I'm all for letting kids be kids and letting them try out whatever they want (Unless it's hockey.  No hockey in my household).

Agreed. There's no need to start playing tackle footbal at an early age. Unlike technique-intense sports like hockey and baseball/softball (and several others), football techniques can be picked up rather quickly at an older more developed age; especially non throwing and catching skills. A good athlete that's new to organized tackle football in say middle school would be at minimal disadvantage to kids playing for several years. Throwing and catching can be learned playing flag football or just messing around in general ball sports.

Our son is two. My in-laws are strongly against the football idea and it would be difficult to convince them otherwise. My mother-in-law was the one who sent me the NYT article. My father-in-law has offered to fully fund youth rugby for our son. One problem is that out here most of the competitive rugby programs are found at private schools. I think asking him to pony up for the $45K per year in tuition might be a bridge too far.

[OzJohnnie]

No need to worry about football for 2nd graders, or the youngsters in general (IMO).  The kids run around, grab onto each other, and fall down together.  There isn't any real hitting for several years.

Right.  So, what's the point of rushing them into "tackle" football?  I'm of the opinion that kids these days are getting sport specific way too young, and so many parents fall into the "well, if he/she doesn't start in 1st grade, he/she will never catch up to the other kids."  I'm all for letting kids be kids and letting them try out whatever they want (Unless it's hockey.  No hockey in my household).

Agreed. There's no need to start playing tackle footbal at an early age. Unlike technique-intense sports like hockey and baseball/softball (and several others), football techniques can be picked up rather quickly at an older more developed age; especially non throwing and catching skills. A good athlete that's new to organized tackle football in say middle school would be at minimal disadvantage to kids playing for several years. Throwing and catching can be learned playing flag football or just messing around in general ball sports.

Our son is two. My in-laws are strongly against the football idea and it would be difficult to convince them otherwise. My mother-in-law was the one who sent me the NYT article. My father-in-law has offered to fully fund youth rugby for our son. One problem is that out here most of the competitive rugby programs are found at private schools. I think asking him to pony up for the $45K per year in tuition might be a bridge too far.

For rugby and against football?  Um, contact sports without helmets are far more injurious.  Can't help inlaws.

[hazzben]

Why do your in-laws have any say at all?

[OzJohnnie]

Why do your in-laws have any say at all?

Ha!  As per one of John Gagliardi's better lines: "Behind every successful man... is a very surprised mother-in-law."

[DuffMan]

At two years old, I was more concerned with potty training than which sports my kids were going to be involved in. 

[GoldandBlueBU]

For rugby and against football?  Um, contact sports without helmets are far more injurious.  Can't help inlaws.

I was a little surprised to see that Rugby does indeed have a higher head injury rate than football.  https://completeconcussions.com/2018/12/05/concussion-rates-what-sport-most-concussions/

Men's rugby match play (3.00/1,000 AE)
Men's American football (2.5/1,000 AE)
Women's ice hockey (2.27/1,000 AE)
Men's Ice hockey (1.63/1,000 AE)
Women's soccer (1.48/1,000 AE)
Men's football (or soccer) (1.07/1,000 AE)

My personal experience was that I took more jarring hits playing football than rugby, but perhaps that's because D3 MN club rugby doesn't have the level of athlete that is encountered at the higher levels.  I felt like the fact that nobody has a helmet / shoulder pads on led to players not using themselves like a missile / battering ram.  There's no blocking, so you don't have to worry about getting blindsided that way, players have to stay onside, so you have a much better idea of where the opposing players are coming from, and you're required to wrap when you tackle, not just plow people over, as happens in football.