Prom night Part III

The Prom Part III

Just when I thought I had heard all the feedback that I was going to get on this subject, I got a call this morning that I had to write about. Now understand I am getting this third hand, but even if only part of this is true, it speaks volumes as to why I feel so passionate about what we do at Frozen Shorts, and how much it needs to be successful for our future generation of children.

I was told this morning that a parent had actually blamed a loss for his team on the Prom. That’s right; kids going to the Prom had cost their team a win. Now think for a minute: A parent, a successful and a fully functioning member of society, who was so into this team that he was blaming a loss on children who did not play. It seems to me he just wanted to make sure he had the coaches back and that every parent, and sadly his son, knew that. He was the guy who had the keen insight to be able to make these calls for the team. He also maybe is trying to insure that his kid has a starting spot on the team for next year, and may or may not realize it.

Whether it is bad calls by the umpire that he captures on video, and shows all that will listen, or some outside distraction affecting his sons ability to perform in a crucial moment, that he pontificates to the other parents  because this could happen to their kid, he has the definitive say on what’s going on during the game. The illogic he used in this case was because the children who weren’t there could have played, the coach was “forced” to play one of his better players in a major blowout! Seriously, how much kool aid do you have to drink to come up with that one? Did this guy even play High School or college sports?

 I have spoken with many ex pro athletes and not one agrees this current path is the right ones for their kids, or any kids. One did talk to me about completion for little ones around the age of 8-10 but when I explained the science, Psychology, and data as to why equal play would actually help the competition, she readily agreed.

Let’s break this down logically. I know, I’m using logic, experience, and cause and effect principles, to come up with solutions to an illogical thought process. ALL kids should be encouraged to go to the Prom if they want to. Most of these kids do not play unless the game is a blowout anyway. Even with them not there were other kids, not just the starters, were still left to play. I don’t think you think what you think you think is correct on this sir.

Now here comes the part that my brain is trying to analyze and figure out. Did the kids, as a group, decide, since they knew they weren’t going to play anyway based on this seasons past experience, say collectively, let’s go to the Prom and show everyone our feelings. Did they think that they would be “punished” for missing the game by being “benched?” Going to the Prom en masse was a form of teenage rebellion or defiance? Or did they just want to go to the Prom?

Did the coach reschedule this game knowing about the Prom, and thus insuring that he did not have to worry for three games, about playing kids that were on the bench? Did he tell the other coach, after the game, that he was in a “pickle” because these kids went to the Prom and he was “forced” to use one of his best players more that he wanted to?  Was he saying and modeling one behavior to the kids and then a completely opposite thought process and behavior for adults so as to ensure that anything bad that happened wasn’t his fault?

But mostly, what about the kids? Are they now being modeled a behavior by adults that allows them to rationalize poor behavior? Are they seeing themselves as pawns as they wait their “turn” to play next year? “You must sit now so you can play later.” Is everyone so accepting of this because there are so few spots and so many kids playing that fear of falling behind, or not keeping up with the Jones dictates a slow and steady decline of real inter team completion and fun?

We are then sending a group of children into adulthood from youth and high school sports that see entitlement and manipulation as acceptable parts of a persona.