Overheated Youth Sports Rob Children Of The Joy Of The Game

BY MATT LAVINDER
SPECIAL TO THE HERALD COURIER

The recent debate over John Battle High School’s junior varsity baseball program is not unique to this area or to particular personalities, whether they be disgruntled parents or overzealous JV coaches.
The issue of whether or not Washington County eighth-graders should play on high school JV teams is a microcosm of youth sports in America. Central to this important debate are competing philosophies of youth sports in America.
AS A COLLEGE coach, I have taken great interest in the philosophy of coaching youth sports, as my career depends upon 18-year-olds who are the end products of such philosophies. Because youth sports are so important to our culture and our children, this is a debate, a conversation, we need to take seriously. Even casual observers of youth sports quickly understand both the enormous value and danger of youth sports.
On the one hand, youth sports is an invaluable environment for children to learn life lessons, the value of hard work, teamwork, discipline, and to express creativity. On the other, the same environment can too easily encourage humiliation, abuse and inappropriate degrees of pressure on young athletes.
We can’t deny the value of a home run to the self-esteem of an 8-year-old and we can’t simply dismiss the damage a screaming adult or excessive pressure can cause to the same child. There is a reason 75 percent of our young athletes quit playing any organized sport by the age of 14.
The John Battle baseball debate is a reflection of youth sports in America. At its core, the debate is between player development and winning. What is the priority for a JV baseball team – developing players or winning? Every coach, whether a T-ball or college coach, knows he must ultimately make the decision between winning and player development.
HERE’S AN example of where this decision is made. A baseball coach has a sixth-grade pitcher named Nolan who has an untouchable fastball, but his other pitches are relatively weak. He’s been working on a changeup in the backyard, but hasn’t had the courage to test it in competition. Because his team has played 80 games in three months in hopes of advancing to the Little League World Series, Nolan has pressure to win every time he pitches. Since his fastball nearly always works, he throws it in every important situation and his team continues to win.
As he faces the opponent’s home run hitter with a one-run lead in a decisive game, what pitch does Nolan’s coach call for? This is where coaches choose between player development and winning. As a coach, I know the fastball will bring us a win. But, I also know Nolan needs to have a changeup if he’s going to be successful in a few years when batters are big and strong enough to get around on fastballs.
If our priority is getting sixth-grade teams to the Little League World Series, we’re going to call for the fastball. If our priority is developing Nolan as a baseball player, we should call for the changeup because our young pitcher needs to move out of his comfort zone and develop other pitches in the heat of competition. But, calling for the changeup will probably cost us the win. Every inning, coaches at all levels must make these kinds of decisions – decisions between winning and developing players.
In the world I grew up in, we developed our “changeups” in neighborhood pickup games. I remember pitching for the Yankees against the Braves’ Dale Murphy in my backyard. There were no adults watching who cared whether we won or lost, so I was free to experiment with new pitches without fear of failure. And, when my friend Justin hit my hanging curveball over the pine trees in right field, it was OK and I’d try it again the next time around because I wanted to be the Yankees’ Ron Guidry.
BACK THEN, youth coaches and philosophies weren’t as important because our real development occurred on the playground as we pretended to be Larry Bird from the baseline, Don Mattingly in the batter’s box, and Walter Payton on the goal line. But, those days are gone. Kids don’t play in the neighborhood anymore because they play 80 games a season in front of hyper-competitive parents and coaches determined to play in ESPN’s Little League World Series.
So, in today’s world of professionalized youth sports, our coaching philosophies are important because we adults have taken responsibility for our young athletes’ development. This means adult coaches are now responsible for creating environments where young athletes are free to be creative and encouraged to try the changeup, even if it means losing the game. Most importantly, adults now have the responsibility to make it all as fun as the games in the backyard used to be.
Given the responsibility, those of us involved in youth sports have some important questions to answer. Will the priority of our JV programs be winning now or developing players? ill we schedule 80 games again this season or cut back the travel so our kids can play against the Braves in the backyard? Will we tell Nolan to win with the fastball or try out the changeup?
Our answers to these questions are important and they will come from our philosophy, whether it be a philosophy of winning now or a philosophy of player development. So, coach, what will you call – fastball or changeup?

Matt Lavinder is head men’s soccer coach, assistant athletic director and assistant professor of history at King College in Bristol, Tenn.