[Johnp2]

Tonight I get our new rulebook. I look at is states, "There will be six players on offense and six players on defense for each play."

Thus we have gone from 8vs8 to 6vs6.

I am VERY disappointed in this, and frankly will be moving my son to another league (perhaps tackle) after this season. I'm not so much concerned with 6vs6, but instead the radical change without consulting with the coaches. I would have hoped at a minimum, an email would have been sent out to the coaches, asking for their opinions.

I'm also taking a hard stance that I have no more than 10 players. While I don't have my roster, I know that 13 parents have requested me, so this means that I will have to "cut" three players. I'm not going to field a team where the kids only get to play 1/2 the season. In the past I've had as many as 16 players, and can see this happening this season--which I will simply decline to coach if that is the final outcome. Either way, they are losing a solid coach---it's just a matter of this season or not.

At this point I have to completely revamp my playbook. As mentioned, I am not worried about this, as I see it as fewer defenders on the field (although my DC will have his work cut out for him).

Good times....

[coach sadkins]

Yeah, a E-mail or something whould have been good. We went from 7vs7 to 8vs8 this season and the director discussed it with the coaches a month before the season began. Anytime you move down in the numbers it is negative for the kids. Has there been a decline in kids signing up? I know one of the reasons we added the extra kid is to increase in sign ups.

[rushbuster70]

John,

Personally I dont see a problem with it at all.Especially since the league runs it & not the coaches.Obviously its an inconvenience but it comes down to the league and them doing what they want to do.Again they own it.I think 6 on 6 is better than 8 on 8 because its a whole different type of football & it takes way different coaching.

[Coach Rob]

John - Makes me wonder if it was something along the lines that coach sadkins mentioned, less kids signing up so they wouldn't have enough teams or something. Bummer about having to come up with a new playbook though.

coach sadkins said:

Anytime you move down in the numbers it is negative for the kids.

Depends on how you look at it, I think the less kids the better. I look at 5 vs. 5 as a chance to get kids more ball touches, more chances for longer runs and an overall more exciting game because the field is less crowded. I struggle to get all the kids two touches every game with 10 kids, can't imagine 8 vs. 8 unless the games run longer or something.

[Orange]

One of the things that really irked me about the local YMCA flag football league was that the rules changed every year. That and the level of competition was the reason that I switched to I-9, a much more professionally run league in my opinion.

I have 10 kids for 5 on 5. 10 is great for practices and scrimmages but come game time I really would like to field 8 or 9. I'd say at least half of my games I have someone absent and we do end up with less than 10.

[Johnp2]

Rush, I understand the league has complete authority to do what it wants--no problem there. I guess my concern is that this league has always been 8v8. Yes they own it, but they don't run it--not ours at least. The coaches run the league. The league handles registration and contracts. The coaches are really the backbone of the league. We are the ones who deal with the parents, players, officials, scheduling, etc. We are the face of the league. When it comes to actual football, the league just gives us rules and we handle everything else. I personally don't mind this, but do think consulting with us would have at least looked like they cared what we thought. Otherwise they will lose good coaches, and we all know that it is hard to find good coaches.

Although I don't have my roster yet, I was told a "max of 12". I KNOW I will get the max, so this means that the kids will play only 1/2 the season. This just seems wrong to me. Of course, I am going to respond when I get my roster and let them know to remove two players. We'll see how that goes.

I think the real reason behind this is because of last year. In 8v8, offense wins. In other words, if you don't have a creative playbook--you won't move the ball. Last season we had a slew of first time coaches. The result was quite a few 0-0 ties (I know of at least three). I don't remember what we averaged, but it was at least 21 ppg. I'm sure however that a lot of the new coaches complained about the number of kids on the field. Funny thing is I bet half of them won't even coach this season.

Anway, with all of this off my chest.... ;-)

I do agree with Coach Rob this will open the field. We played a 7v7 game a few seasons ago and I was amazed at how it opened up the field. I revamped our running plays yesterday. We have 14 running plays. I'll work on the passing plays this weekend. We were a throwing team last season, and imagine with 6v6 we'll throw the vast majority of the time this season.

Anyways, we'll see how it goes. As long as I don't players spending 1/2 the season on the bench, I'm cool.

On the bright side, I guess my problem with finding a way to go deep just got a lot easier. ;-)

[rushbuster70]

Umm I've been coaching in the same league for 3 years and I wouldn't consider myself running it.I deal with all that stuff to.But it comes down to the people who run the league & what they want to do.12 kids is perfect for 6 on 6.I have 12 kids and we play 5 on 5.Its just a matter of how you sub your kids in.All coaches run into it.Its a matter of how you deal with it.Best of luck to you though.Good luck with season & I hope you guys do well.Keep us updated obviously and see how you like the 6 on 6.

[Coach Rob]

Johnp2, on 17 October 2009 - 10:49 AM, said:

Although I don't have my roster yet, I was told a "max of 12". I KNOW I will get the max, so this means that the kids will play only 1/2 the season. This just seems wrong to me.

I'm geting the impression that you've had less than 16 players on your 8 vs. 8 teams? Couldn't figure out the "play only 1/2 the season" deal, but if you've been used to only 12-13 players then your kids have been getting a great deal.

The challenge from a league standpoint is getting enough revenue to keep the league running. Less kids on a team equals more ball touches and more playing time, but also less overall revenue for the league. My experience has been that 5 vs. 5 whether it's football or basketball, a team usually consists of at least 10 players. Soccer was the exception, which usually had 9 players on the field and maybe 12-13 total on the team.

[Johnp2]

Coach Rob, on 17 October 2009 - 04:21 PM, said:

I'm geting the impression that you've had less than 16 players on your 8 vs. 8 teams? Couldn't figure out the "play only 1/2 the season" deal, but if you've been used to only 12-13 players then your kids have been getting a great deal.

Rob, it has varied. I've had anywhere between 11 and 14 kids. There have been seasons where I was given 15+, and I said "no way" to the league. Without seeming egotistical, I am in high demand with parents wanting their kids on my team (either through word of mouth or returning players). I really hate even saying that, but it is a fact. I hate the idea that I am going to have to turn some kids away, especially when their parents called/emailed me and said, "Joey only wants to play if he can be on your team." Even if I accept the max of 12, I'm certain I will have to turn some away, and that pains me. The "1/2 season" season revolves around the fact that if I am given 12 players and only six are on the field at once, because I guarantee equal playing time, well....

Coach Rob, on 17 October 2009 - 04:21 PM, said:

The challenge from a league standpoint is getting enough revenue to keep the league running. Less kids on a team equals more ball touches and more playing time, but also less overall revenue for the league.

My feeling is this happened because of last season. In 8v8, you must have a creative offense to score. Last season we had a plethora of first time coaches, and there were at least three 0-0 ties that I know of. While we averaged 21+ PPG, many teams struggled to move the ball, and I feel quite a few of the newer coaches complained about this fact. Ironically, I doubt many of them will even be back this season.

I guess I am not seeing how fewer kids per team equals less revenue. You have x number of players and y number of coaches. Coaches are not paid, so don't see how allowing more kids to be on the field at one time affects the bottom line. Regardless, I am over it now. Perhaps my players have been getting a great deal. I just want to see this continue and not be affected by a single person who thinks it's better protocol to play 6v6 simply because other coaches cannot figure out how to beat an eight player defense.

[Johnp2]

As a follow up--I was given 16 players on my roster (all requested me) even though the max is 12. :-) I immediately told the league I cannot take that many, and we came to an agreement that I would only take 11. They were cool with this, and I stepped up and let them know I will contact the five families and explain the reasoning behind them being moved (playing time).

I based my decisions on how many seasons the player has been on our team, and it was not based on skill-level (I moved some good athletes, and kept some staple players with me who are sub-par athletes, but have been in my system for a few years now).

First practice is next week, and we will pick up where we left off...as Champions.

[10UCoach]

We play 8 on 8 with a max roster of 12. Makes it tough sometimes. Our league has two divisions - one where kids get lots of touches and equal playing time. One, the one we are in, which is more competitive and no guarantee on playing time - let alone ball touches. Parents can choose whichever league they want - knowing that if Johnnie is not up to par, he will be developed - but may get limited playing time. It is very similar to baseball Rec and Select - and it works well. I've been cutting kids for 2 years now. Not easy - but necessary.

I run mini-camps through the summer - this year I had over 20 boys working hard and wanting to play on our team - I could only take 12 - I wish I could take all 20. Wanna know what is sad? The 8 that were left - I offered to recruit 3 or 4 more - teach them my system, work them at my practices, IF one of the dad's would be the 'head coach' because I couldn't be at 2 games at once. I had several dads get mad because I cut their kid - but did I have any step up to help coach a team? Nope - not one. I don't get it...

[Johnp2]

That is interesting with the two divisions. We are not considered a "select" league (that is mainly for tackle here), but most coaches in our league treat it as such. Over the past few seasons, it has morphed into a "win at all costs" league, which disappoints me a little--but it is what it is. Our league has no rules on playing time--the only rule is you cannot hand-off to the same player twice in a row---yet some still did this quite a bit last season (the officials can barely detect it).

Although the coaches have a gentlemen's agreement to develop players by spreading the ball around, most give it to their top two players on every play. I bend over backward to ensure equal touches. It can be tough, but I love seeing all the kids given the opportunity to make an impact, and enjoy that their parents know I gave each one a fair shake. Last season, we earned our first championship, and it was oh so sweet--as every player shared equal accountability in obtaining the title. Nothing can ever replace that, in my opinion. However, as you mentioned, if there is a select division where parents know it is all about winning, then the gloves are off and they should not complain about their kids playing time.

Regarding dads stepping up---good luck with that. Although I've been fortunate enough to always have complete buy-in from every parent of the kids I've coached, I do realize there are parents out there who think they know what is best (it usually revolves around their child being the star). My attitude is they should step up themselves and volunteer their time to create their own team---just like I did many years ago---instead of complaining.

Thanks

[Tubby Raymond]

rushbuster70, on 16 October 2009 - 11:41 AM, said:

John,

Personally I dont see a problem with it at all.Especially since the league runs it & not the coaches.Obviously its an inconvenience but it comes down to the league and them doing what they want to do.Again they own it.I think 6 on 6 is better than 8 on 8 because its a whole different type of football & it takes way different coaching.

Couldn't disagree more.

Volunteer leagues are made up of well............. volunteers so ownership of "the league" is mutual to my way of thinking. If you believe that then you also believe that any new rule change that effects everyone, the coaches especially, the league should be consulting with them on those decisons. If not, then the level of respect the coaches are being shown is poor and thier subsequent level of investment is compromised.

I had the same thing happen to me but worse. For my 8 and under team, we got rules for 5 on 5 at a coaches meeting on a Tuesday. The following Saturday (9 days and two practices later) I showed up for our first game and noticed that the game that was already being played had 7 on 7. When I asked the ref at the end of the game why is was so, he told me that the rules had changed, on Tuesday. My team practices on Monday and had been practicing plays and defense for, you got it, 5 on 5. No notice no email, no nothing. When I saw the director at the field he said, "sorry" about not giving me notice. Fortunately, the other coach took pity on my and agreed to play 5 on 5. It created a conflict with the ref;s theat the lague officals were responsible for. When I asked why the decison had been made the director told me that "some coaches" had complained about the size of the rosters (12 or more) and didn't want the kids to get fatigued or have problems with playing time. If either were a problem, they aren't very well organized coaches.

Anybody think that's an OK way to run a league?

[Johnp2]

Tubby--I am RIGHT there with you. Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Not all leagues are the same. Some rely more on their coaches to "run" the league (which is fine), as long as that is protocol.

As you said, without the volunteer coaches----there would be no league---at least not one I would want to sign my kid up for...