Why parents look at sports differently now

[ClayK]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/30/...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

It's not that parents are different -- it's not that people have changed -- it's that the stakes are higher, and the cost of college has risen so much.

So of course parents are more involved and put on more pressure, because an athletic scholarship, or any kind of financial aid, is so much more important than it was 20 or 30 years ago.

 

[alwayslearning]

The game has changed.......the people in the game have changed......the people that have the power in the game have changed.....the people that parents listen to have changed. NIKE, ADIDAS, UNDER ARMOUR and EGO's.

 

[Azanna]

Parents are different and so are the kids we raise. Thirty yrs. ago your child getting a scholarship was just as important but those parents allowed their kids to evolve and become adults, these parents do not hold their kids accountable and blame everyone around them for their child’s short comings. These same parents are now calling college professors on behalf of their baby.

 

[ClayK]

Thirty years ago, parents were better because they held kids more accountable ...

And if you go back 30 years, those people would say that 30 years ago, the parents held their kids more accountable.

This is part of the "golden age" myth that is constant in human affairs. The past was always superior to the present, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Parents are people, and people do the best they can, just as they always have. They deal with different situations and different problems, and handle them in different ways. And kids are kids, and they go through the same struggles with authority and commitment and maturity today as they did 30 years ago. It may manifest differently, but despite the age-old complaint about the younger generation leading us all to hell in a handbasket, the younger generation turns out no better or worse than the one that preceded it. (And then, by the way, complains about the next younger generation ...)

 

[Azanna]

Thirty years ago, parents were better because they held kids more accountable ...

And if you go back 30 years, those people would say that 30 years ago, the parents held their kids more accountable.

This is part of the "golden age" myth that is constant in human affairs. The past was always superior to the present, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Parents are people, and people do the best they can, just as they always have. They deal with different situations and different problems, and handle them in different ways. And kids are kids, and they go through the same struggles with authority and commitment and maturity today as they did 30 years ago. It may manifest differently, but despite the age-old complaint about the younger generation leading us all to hell in a handbasket, the younger generation turns out no better or worse than the one that preceded it. (And then, by the way, complains about the next younger generation ...)

Come on Clay you know parents were not involved in programs and getting coach’s fired like they are now, coach was like an emperor.

 

[SouthBayHoopFan]

Parents are different and so are the kids we raise. These parents do not hold their kids accountable and blame everyone around them for their child’s short comings

Come on Clay you know parents were not involved in programs and getting coach’s fired like they are now

When I was in high school 50+ years ago, there were plenty of parents whose kids could do no wrong, and several of these parents banded together to get our basketball coach fired. It's not so different now. Maybe the difference is, you weren't paying attention to the parents when you were in high school.

 

[ClayK]

Parents always had a say, though superintendents served longer terms and felt less political pressure, thus making the district less responsive.

Still, football coaches were run off, as were boys' basketball coaches. Remember, high school sports was actually a bigger deal to most communities back then ...

 

[colhenrylives]

A half-century ago, it was boys sports only. The coaches were all full-time PE guys. Locked in. Tenure. Benefits. Unions. Lawyers. Bouncing them was not easy. Now, it's mainly rental mentors. They have no rights, no cache, no support from the administration. New ballgame. Schools need twice as many coaches with the advent of girls sports. Tenured PE teachers want no part of parents today. Can we blame them?

 

[dnambisan]

A half-century ago, it was boys sports only. The coaches were all full-time PE guys. Locked in. Tenure. Benefits. Unions. Lawyers. Bouncing them was not easy. Now, it's mainly rental mentors. They have no rights, no cache, no support from the administration. New ballgame. Schools need twice as many coaches with the advent of girls sports. Tenured PE teachers want no part of parents today. Can we blame them?

Well, there was segregation too till around 50 years ago, so not sure whether that is the right comparison. Things change; and players, coaches, parents all need to move along with the times. Bobby Knight was held in awe at one time, these days he would likely be fired on the spot at the first tantrum he threw. Parents are what they are, and while (like Clay pointed out earlier in this thread) they might be getting increasingly desperate due to college fees or what have you, it is the role of the coach to be fair and set expectations all around. While one might lament that the players are getting soft and coaches cannot be hard asses any longer, I also found it amazing that coaches get away with behavior that would not be tolerated by Human Resources dept for any manager in any company that worries about getting sued - If it is not okay to behave that way with adults in a corporate setting, why is it okay for a coach to behave that way with a young teen who is already most likely going through a lot of stress. Point being, there are two sides to every story, everyone needs to adapt as what becomes socially acceptable changes, and most of the unnecessary drama can be prevented just by people talking and setting expectations up front.

 

[ClayK]

Actually, union rules pretty much eliminated P.E. teachers as coaches.

Before the unions dominated public schools, administrators could write into P.E. teachers' contracts that they had to coach X number of sports. But once the union contracts were in force, P.E. teachers could no longer be required to coach (just as English teachers, say, could no longer be required to direct plays after school).

At that point, the shift began to outside coaches, and as P.E. teachers got older, the demands of coaching became too much and they opted out.

Yes, some teachers still coach, and every administrator loves that, because the advantages of an on-campus coach are real, in terms of knowing the students, etc.

The other point about screaming, Bobby Knight-style coaches is very well taken. The old-school coaches took advantage of their age and position to literally abuse young people to get them to perform at a higher level. It worked sometimes, of course, but it came at a cost, a cost our society is rightfully no longer willing to pay.

 

[colhenrylives]

One more note about full-time, tenured, experienced teacher-coaches: They are professionals. They've been there, done that. They know the ropes. They are on campus all day and that's a huge plus. They see their student-athletes daily in an academic setting. Walk-on coaches don't have these advantages. They are essentially visitors. They are part-time. They are pretty much on their own. Any slip-ups and, boom, they can be gone in a trice. No muss, no fuss. That said, not all tenured, full-time teacher-coaches are terrific and not all walk-ons are in constant jeopardy. There are good and bad on both sides of this equation. However, with the proliferation of sports (and the addition of female athletic opportunities since the 1980s), the demand for qualified coaches, walk-ons or not, keeps increasing.

 

[colhenrylives]

By the way, a great example of the difference in status between a full-time, tenured teacher-coach and a walk-on is former Brea Olinda girls' mentor Jeff Sink. He is one of California's most successful girls' hoops coaches _ ever. Sink was a full-time teacher at Brea for years as well. He was demanding, outspoken, disciplined, untactful, organized and, in many ways, justifiably arrogant. And he won. A lot. Then he retired as a teacher (he was said to be an outstanding classroom instructor) in the spring of 2017. He wanted to continue to coach. But, soon, he ran afoul of a particular parent. Sink reportedly said something unflattering on social media (nothing grotesque or horrendous) and the parent, who had sway within the Brea district, got him removed from his coaching gig in short order. So much for a long record of excellence. His prickly personality caught up with him and he was gone, poof, just like that. No hearing. No lawyers. No nothing. It was bye-bye. Nice to know you. Sink is now retired.

 

[DFAL]

It's really too bad that coaches do not have any job security. I know some great coaches that have been let go over the years because of disgruntled parents. I know of some bad ones that were let go for just causes too. But the problem that bothers me is that a lot of coaches (good ones) can be let go for NO reason.

I would say unionize but administrators could care less about athletics (most of them).

 

[hit the sled]

Internet and Social Media has changed the game. Perhaps that is the cause of the current issues.