This started the idea of this thread:

 

There's some major things soccer doesn't do for kids that football, baseball, basketball do.  It doesn't teach them the importance of focus, or for that matter even teamwork.  Especially at the younger level, half the kids on the team are just wandering around and might kick the ball if it comes near them. 

 

At the risk of taking this waaaaay off-topic (which I'll do anyways ;))..... have you never been to a pee-wee football game??  Half the kids are just trying to hold their pants up or seeing if their mouthguard fits up their nose.  Sure, at the toddler stage youth soccer rec leagues is a giant scrum, but you might be surprised how good these kids are nowadays even in the youngest travel leagues.  Soccer has exploded in popularity since we were young (DEFINITELY since YOU were young :)).  My son is 7 and playes in a U8 league.  I have frankly been shocked how much I've grown to enjoy it.  Never played a single game of organized soccer in my life, but I now have a newfound respect for the sport.  Regardless of what sport you want to play, you need good feet.  Soccer is a helluva developmental tool at a young age.

 

I've been to plenty of flag football games and a couple years of CYO when my niece (now 18) was playing.  IMNSHO opinion, flag football is better for the seven and eight year olds. 

 

Soccer's become popular for kids for a lot of the wrong reasons.  By US standards, there's simply too many people on the team and the field is too big.  That's why indoor soccer did a little bit better than outdoor commercially.  This drawback made it better for overprotective parents since not all the kids are involved and those so inclined can even avoid contact.  As it turns out, this wasn't even enough as some leagues are now trying to require helmets.

 

 

And then there's this ridiculousness....

 

http://nation.foxnews.com/2013/10/10/usps-ordered-president%E2%80%99s-council-fitness-destroy-stamps-inspired-michelle-obama%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Clet%E2%80%99s

 

Are we raising an overly risk-averse generation?  Who does that benefit?

yes

I can only imagine what kids who aren't allowed to wander off the block would think of Tom Sawyer.

yes

I can only imagine what kids who aren't allowed to wander off the block would think of Tom Sawyer.

 

Well we can only imagine in many cases because it's been banned for containing the n-word.

 

Never mind that the lesson is the precise opposite of what that word usually implies.

I'd say it's a mix of overly protective *and* overly empowering, if that makes sense. When I was much younger and even thought of throwing a tantrum in public, I'd get the stink-eye from either of my parents and that was the end of it. Nowadays, I've seen countless parents try to "negotiate" with their tantrum-throwing screaming-at-the-top-of-their-lungs three year old, because god forbid they don't praise them while disciplining them.  :roll:

As the parent of kids that occassionally throw tantrums, and surrounded by other parents of the same, I can tell you that the 'negotiation' thing may have been popular in the past, but not as much these days. I have no problem giving my son a gentle (or not so gentle) reminder of the consequences of that kind of action. Most of my friends with kids the same age feel the same. There's no negotiating with them at this age, because quite frankly, they're not rational beings. Fear is my weapon, and I wield it freely.

 

As to the overprotective nature of parenting, you may say that I'm guilty of that, but I'd counter it's based on perspective. My kids are still young enough that I wouldn't let them go anywhere without supervision, but I'm also going to point out that we're also much more aware of the potential problems out there than our parents were 30 years ago (well, my parents. Some of you weren't even gleams in the eye 30 years ago).

 

I won't let my son play football (it's a moot point, as he's a baseball kid, but nevertheless, even if he wanted to, he wouldn't be allowed). I have Dr. friends who have told me of studies by colleagues that indicate long term damaage from head trauma is beginning to manifest as early as in high school. I have a smart kid, and I'd like to keep him that way. Others may feel differently, but playing a kids game isn't worth the potential long term risks for me.

 

The same with letting my kids roam free when they get older. It won't happen without some accounting of where they're going and a means to get a hold of them. I recognize that even today, it is statistically unlikely that anything may happen to them, but I'm not taking the change on them being that statistic. I won't let it happen. Again, every parent makes their own choice in this regard, and I've made mine.

EROCC

 

I take offense to you saying soccer doesn't teach you the same teamwork as football. I highly disagree. GOOD soccer teams rely on teamwork. I played with the same group of kids for my entire career from U6 to high school graduation and beyond. I knew what they were going to do in a game before they even knew. We had great team chemistry and we kicked @ss because of it.

 

And as far as anyone saying it is a non contact sport, ive had multiple black eyes, 3 concussions, 2 sprained ankles, a broken wrist, and we had a full blown team vs team fist fight against none other than Mayday's hometown team of Salem Ohio. I guess that's just how we do it in Youngstown.

Yeah... I never played soccer myself, but I highly disagree with E Rocc's assessment.  Too many kids on the field?  Youth soccer typically plays 5 in the field and one in goal.  At least everyone is minimally involved, unlike all the unathletic kids they simply hide on the lines in youth football.

 

Re the overprotection issue, it's a constant struggle for me.  I agree that the complaints about negotiation are way overblown.  I really don't know any parents that use negotiation to solve temper tantrums.  But the physical safety concerns are difficult.  I recently told my 7 year old son he could lose the helmet as long as he rides his bike on the sidewalk on our street.  I never made him wear one for his scooter or his skateboard.  On the other hand, we have neighbors who have their toddlers wear helmets while on their tricycles.  That's beyond ridiculous, IMO. 

The world according to Erocc:

 

Erocc prefers football to soccer

Therefore football must be better than soccer

Therefore there's something wrong with parents whose kids play soccer

Erocc fears the sissification of America

QED: the fact that soccer became a popular youth sport (several decades ago, mind you) means "we are getting way too overprotective."

 

Did I get that about right?  In my best MyTwoSense voice: Ay dios mio.

Talk about over-protective... Why do football players have to wear motorcycle type helmets when playing?  Rugby players have tackling and they don't have the ridiculously over-sized shoulder pads and hard plastic helmets. 

^ WCPN had a panel discussing this earlier this week. One of the panelists indicated that the origin of the helmet was to prevent skull fractures, which apparently was becoming an issue with pre-helmet football. Helmets do nothing to protect the brain. The analogy used was the head is like an egg. The helmet may protect the shell from breaking, but the stuff inside gets scrambled nonetheless. There didn't seem to be a consensus as to whether it was possible to design a helmet that protects against concussions. Maybe a giant dome filled with some gel? That would certainly reduce the number of collisions, as the dork factor increases.

Perhaps people like the game of soccer. Soccer isn't any more un-American than football. 100 years ago, there was baseball and there was everything else. We had a real cornucopia of sports back then, but of course a lot of people make it try to sound like the USA was founded in 1950.

^^^Ironically, the more padding and protection you add, the more vicious the hitting becomes.  It's simple human nature.  Wrap someone up in a full football uni and they will run straight into a brick wall.  That is why the hits are so much more violent in football than they are in rugby.  Overall, rugby might be a rougher sport, but the hitting itself doesn't even come close to comparing.  The style of tackling also differs, which makes a difference.  A textbook football tackle is when you run straight through the other player, putting your facemask right on the numbers on the jersey and bringing two uppercuts up through the armpits.  It is more of a hit, then a tackle.  Rugby is closer to a wrestling take-down.

Also one of the biggest pushers of soccer here is FOX.

^^^Soccer is too European. It didn't originate in the US, so it's not exceptional. We didn't like cricket, so we made baseball. We didn't think rugby was good enough, so we evolved it into football. Basketball, well that's just all our own. Soccer...well, how do you evolve running around and kicking a ball? Maybe if it exploded?

EROCC

 

I take offense to you saying soccer doesn't teach you the same teamwork as football. I highly disagree. GOOD soccer teams rely on teamwork. I played with the same group of kids for my entire career from U6 to high school graduation and beyond. I knew what they were going to do in a game before they even knew. We had great team chemistry and we kicked @ss because of it.

 

And as far as anyone saying it is a non contact sport, ive had multiple black eyes, 3 concussions, 2 sprained ankles, a broken wrist, and we had a full blown team vs team fist fight against none other than Mayday's hometown team of Salem Ohio. I guess that's just how we do it in Youngstown.

 

Soccer can be played with any number of people on a team actually participating, up to 11.  Therefore, youth soccer can be (and IMO often is) a sort of excuse to wander around a field for awhile.  When it's played by that size team, that is.    At a higher more intense level, that’s certainly not the case. 

 

Tackle football, basketball, baseball, or hockey can’t really be played like that.  In softball, you can hide precisely two unskilled players:  right field, and catcher.  In football, any weakness on the defense or  offensive line will be exploited by the other team.  Basketball and hockey have smaller fields and smaller teams.

 

Dude, that can be any sport. You ever see a kid sitting in the outfield during a baseball game, just chilling? I used to be that kid, and I wasn't the only one.  And basketball is really a one or two man sport anyhow; that leaves a lot of bored supporting players out there just jogging back and forth.

 

Your softball comment did make chuckle. Frankly, I have no clue where you came up with that factoid about catchers and right fielders, but hey, you learn something new every day.

 

A helmet for handstands?

Aren't you more likely to hurt your wrists?

I did hear someone advocating for helmets for pedestrians.

As the parent of kids that occassionally throw tantrums, and surrounded by other parents of the same, I can tell you that the 'negotiation' thing may have been popular in the past, but not as much these days. I have no problem giving my son a gentle (or not so gentle) reminder of the consequences of that kind of action. Most of my friends with kids the same age feel the same. There's no negotiating with them at this age, because quite frankly, they're not rational beings. Fear is my weapon, and I wield it freely.

 

As to the overprotective nature of parenting, you may say that I'm guilty of that, but I'd counter it's based on perspective. My kids are still young enough that I wouldn't let them go anywhere without supervision, but I'm also going to point out that we're also much more aware of the potential problems out there than our parents were 30 years ago (well, my parents. Some of you weren't even gleams in the eye 30 years ago).

 

I won't let my son play football (it's a moot point, as he's a baseball kid, but nevertheless, even if he wanted to, he wouldn't be allowed). I have Dr. friends who have told me of studies by colleagues that indicate long term damaage from head trauma is beginning to manifest as early as in high school. I have a smart kid, and I'd like to keep him that way. Others may feel differently, but playing a kids game isn't worth the potential long term risks for me.

 

The same with letting my kids roam free when they get older. It won't happen without some accounting of where they're going and a means to get a hold of them. I recognize that even today, it is statistically unlikely that anything may happen to them, but I'm not taking the change on them being that statistic. I won't let it happen. Again, every parent makes their own choice in this regard, and I've made mine.

 

That's pretty much how I look at it. 

 

I particularly love being lectured about upsetting kids, or causing anxiety.  In a three year old, that's what happens when they are told "no". 

 

The worst is when parents give in whenever the child throws a tantrum.  Once they learn that works, guess what?

One thing that's different about soccer vs. football and basketball is that the soccer coaches don't seem to rage out as much on kids. Kids today don't like to be raged out upon.

I think everyone knows what happens when you give in.  The confusion/disagreement, I believe, is more about what happens when you beat your kid like a dog when he/she throws a tantrum.

One thing that's different about soccer vs. football and basketball is that the soccer coaches don't seem to rage out as much on kids. Kids today don't like to be raged out upon.

 

I suspect it's more that many of their parents don't like it. 

I think everyone knows what happens when you give in.  The confusion/disagreement, I believe, is more about what happens when you beat your kid like a dog when he/she throws a tantrum.

 

Don't count on it.  I've seen examples.  Ardyn's cousin is one of them.

I'm not saying people don't give in.  I'm simply saying that virtually nobody thinks it is a good thing to give in.  Of course there will be exceptions, but generally people understand the consequences.  The other issue, however, is where you will find people who would ardently suggest that if you don't beat your child with a blunt object (such as a "rod") then the child will end up spoiled. 

cut yourself down a switch!

cut yourself down a switch!

 

Wooden spoons are perfect.  They sting like hell but break long before you can do any real harm.

That was Mom's weapon of choice.

dad used one open palm across the face - never took more than once.

That was Mom's weapon of choice.

 

You could probably have moved that apostrophe to the end, in this case....

American Football becomes too specialized for those playing.  Most players will likely only play offense or defense, unless they are a star athlete then they may play both just so the team always has their best player on the field.  But a wide receiver likely only has one responsibility, catch the ball.

 

Soccer players have to play offense and defense continuously, switching from one to the other at the drop of a hat.  It takes much more discipline and awareness in order to play.  Much more communication and recovery to ensure that you are in the right spots going forward or in support. 

 

Soccer is very close in style of play to Hockey, especially due to the continuous nature of play, and basketball kind of.  While you can "hide" poorer players at a few positions (depending on formation, but generally one of your outside midfielders and one of the forward positions, also maybe a center back if you have strong central midfield)  you could easily do the same with America Football too (Guard, Tight End, one Wide Receiver, Free or Strong Safety, and one of the D-line spots).  Really in either sport, assuming you are playing a full 11 per side, you need to have 7-8 of your best players on the field.

While you can "hide" poorer players at a few positions (depending on formation, but generally one of your outside midfielders and one of the forward positions, also maybe a center back if you have strong central midfield)  you could easily do the same with America Football too (Guard, Tight End, one Wide Receiver, Free or Strong Safety, and one of the D-line spots).

 

The Browns are trying to hide their worst player at QB.