Jump to content

The state of HS football in America


HSFBfan

Recommended Posts

Just now, BanThisMan said:

But you're telling us how the game was better in your day?

You can't make up this kind of stuff.

I'm young but I'm before the time of what hs sports are today. The transfers from my area to the boscos and such of the world were just starting. Going to bosco and such wasnt a big deal when I was in hs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BanThisMan said:

Yes, you are.

You're wrong about a lot of things.

In fact, I don't think I've ever seen you post something smart. Or insightful. Or even correct.

How am I giving anyone advice? Nobody is taken advice from anyone on this board. 99.9% of people dont even read this board 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

Its a board not an English paper. Go thru anyone posts I'm sure you'll find many issues on said subject. 

Yea, but it's all of yours.

I've never known any literate person who just ignores their normal grammar just because they're posting on a message board.

You probably sound this stupid in person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

How am I giving anyone advice?

 

38 minutes ago, HSFBfan said:

Winning is a big part of competing but athletes today and you see it from the pros to hs dont want to grind it out on the bad team to help make it better so they jump ship. 

It would be better if they learned how to deal with the program they are at and help make it a more successful program and the wins then are more fulfilling.

Unfortunately in reality it's not like that. Its get to the best program you can get too in order to chase the almighty scholarship and of course win games without the year in year out struggle to win. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, BanThisMan said:

Yes, totally and unequivocally.

Programs fall into cultures of losing because the administrations hire and fire the wrong people. The coaches themselves bail on the programs frequently. The coaches that do stick around aren't given any support.

That's why kids leave and seek out better and more stable programs.

Don't forget the parents.  They also do their part. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Belly Bob said:

Is high school sports about coaching kids to be the best they can be and preparing them for college and for life?

Yes.

The fact that Jason Negro and the majority want to win more football games isn't what it's about.

Says the guy who backs a team with a 300 game winning streak in its region 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said:

https://amp.theguardian.com/sport/2019/jan/30/high-school-football-numbers-drop-brain-trauma

 

As I read this article, I was not surprised by which states saw the largest percentage drops. 

While brain trauma is certainly one major concern, I still think there is an elephant in the room with competitive equity. 

Coaches like Negro basically saying he doesn't know whether what his program is doing is hurting the sport, but then remaining unapologetic, basically is saying he doesn't really care. Just keep his checks coming. Hey, business is business after all. Right up until your business starts a huge wildfire and you become bankrupt.

 

We've often heard that athletes are gonna athlete... this explains increases in other sports while football experiences decline. Those athletes are gonna athlete.

It's ok though. We can keep pointing fingers at all sorts of stuff while the sport withers away on the vine.

At the end of the day Coach Negro only plays a handful of teams and can only win a championship in the Southern Section Division 1 (I know they can compete in the Open, but that's not a true playoff format) which is comprised of a handful of leagues. The point is that I don't think competitive equity and SJB deters kids from places like Redwood City, Lancaster, Goleta, etc to play football. The reality for California is that there is continuous and significant demographic shifts. That is the biggest factor, IMO, for the decline. Blue collar towns are on the decline and there are many more activities and opportunities that kids have available to them that didn't exist years ago. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PrepGridiron said:

At the end of the day Coach Negro only plays a handful of teams and can only win a championship in the Southern Section Division 1 (I know they can compete in the Open, but that's not a true playoff format) which is comprised of a handful of leagues. The point is that I don't think competitive equity and SJB deters kids from places like Redwood City, Lancaster, Goleta, etc to play football. The reality for California is that there is continuous and significant demographic shifts. That is the biggest factor, IMO, for the decline. Blue collar towns are on the decline and there are many more activities and opportunities that kids have available to them that didn't exist years ago. 

Just to add on, I've been saying East County (Pitt, Liberty, Freedom) will continue to have better football. That is because of the demographic shifts. In the Bay Area, there is a different profile then there was 20 and 30 years ago. You can see it in the participation numbers of schools in areas where the demographics have altered. Areas where Foothill is (Pleasanton where Oracle and Workday have a huge presence) have declining numbers relative to say Liberty (Brentwood where it is still a blue collar community). 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ararar said:

Says the guy who backs a team with a 300 game winning streak in its region 

Is this an attack? I thought we agreed that there are no relevant differences among IMG, SJB, MD, and DLS; they all recruit. Isn't that what we said?

So why are we now saying that there is a relevant difference between IMG and SJB?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, PrepGridiron said:

At the end of the day Coach Negro only plays a handful of teams and can only win a championship in the Southern Section Division 1 (I know they can compete in the Open, but that's not a true playoff format) which is comprised of a handful of leagues. The point is that I don't think competitive equity and SJB deters kids from places like Redwood City, Lancaster, Goleta, etc to play football. The reality for California is that there is continuous and significant demographic shifts. That is the biggest factor, IMO, for the decline. Blue collar towns are on the decline and there are many more activities and opportunities that kids have available to them that didn't exist years ago. 

I didn't know we were having a serious discussion about what is causally contributing to the decline in football participation.

I thought we were still pretending that there are no important differences between transfer policies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Belly Bob said:

I didn't know we were having a serious discussion about what is causally contributing to the decline in football participation.

I thought we were still pretending that there are no important differences between transfer policies.

If there is sarcasm in this, please excuse the response, but the assertion was that the elephant in the room regarding declining participation numbers was competitive equity (or lack thereof). My point is that SJB being a magnet for talent, IMO, has a very minimal (if any) affect on whether a kid from Eagle Rock decides to play football. 

All that said, I partly get Hawg's argument as the same is happening with our local Little League. So many travel baseball teams have built up that parents are taking their talented kids to those leagues. As an anecdotal rule, these kids are good because their parents most likely have an interest and knowledge of baseball, so along with them taking away their talented kids they are taking away competent coaches that could otherwise coach up a team full of kids with limited baseball knowledge. This creates a vacuum for these little leagues and because there aren't coaches there to to coach and talent to help sharpen skills, parents and kids are less inclined to participate and find alternative outlets. Some of these concepts are discussed in this great article from the Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/09/whats-lost-when-only-rich-kids-play-sports/541317/ 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, PrepGridiron said:

If there is sarcasm in this, please excuse the response, but the assertion was that the elephant in the room regarding declining participation numbers was competitive equity (or lack thereof).

Yes, an assertion without any evidence.

Just the personal opinion and internal angst of the poster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...