High School coach

Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Jun 6, 2016
2,714
113
Chicago
Seriously, high school coaches are just high school coaches. Some are great and really want to develop their players. Others just want to reward the kids they've known a long time. They might know a lot; they might know next to nothing. One thing I have learned in DD's high school "journey" is that you can't predict what a coach will do, and the only thing you can to is work to be one of the set seve -- now eight -- that get the PT next year.

I have very limited experience observing travel ball coaches, but... all this applies to them, too.

I have seen some stuff that has just horrified me from a "knowing the game" standpoint. Stuff that was so bad I've had to tell my players privately "Look, I'm not criticizing anything else about this coaching, but he is 100% wrong about this rule. You need to know that."
 
Last edited:
Dec 11, 2010
4,713
113
Parents don’t criticize basketball coaches for “playing to win”.

Softball is often viewed as an activity not a sport.
 
Apr 20, 2015
961
93
Parents don’t criticize basketball coaches for “playing to win”.

Softball is often viewed as an activity not a sport.
Parents rarely criticize any male sport for playing to win. Its always female sports that they want to the "equal" I won't even say fair because I don't think equal playing time is fair for a lot of reasons. As to the poster who said why a roster of 16 if only 9 play I agree with the other 7 kids deserve opportunities but those opportunities might not be anywhere near equal. I don't agree with throwing only 1 pitcher for the health of the pitcher not for the the equality aspect. My kiddo is athletically blessed in many sports and I've always told her that your job as a starter is to play so well that your team kicks a** and everyone behind you gets opportunities.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 
Jun 8, 2016
16,118
113
I was talking to my father the other day about sports parents. He told me my Mom used to sit in the stands (my father was either coaching or parked in the OF) and would hear all kinds of garbage about how their kid wasn't playing, etc...this was 30+ years ago so it isn't a recent thing.
 
Last edited:
Dec 11, 2010
4,713
113
@ang2bmd That’s very true. I really like what you told your dd about her job- that is a perfect attitude to establish!

I’m so glad to be done with high school sports. I tried so hard to make it better, volunteering time, energy, expertise and even my own equipment.

I saw what other schools did to be successful and in one competing schools case it was so clear how they went about building a competitive program that I met with the athletic directors numerous times and even created a PowerPoint presentation that I presented to the school board detailing what the other schools did and how we could implement a similar plan. They politely ignored me and kept doing what they wanted. More mediocrity ensued.

In our school districts, (co-op sports teams), the problem is mostly leadership and messaging at/from the top. Main problem: A meat head athletic director that has never witnessed excellence, (athletic or otherwise), has no idea what it is and certainly can not recognize it. In his case, he is providing leadership for both schools and they are spending wheelbarrows of money and getting no results- because excellence is about people, not equipment and fifteen thousand dollar camera systems.
 

Cannonball

Ex "Expert"
Feb 25, 2009
4,854
113
@ang2bmd That’s very true. I really like what you told your dd about her job- that is a perfect attitude to establish!

I’m so glad to be done with high school sports. I tried so hard to make it better, volunteering time, energy, expertise and even my own equipment.

I saw what other schools did to be successful and in one competing schools case it was so clear how they went about building a competitive program that I met with the athletic directors numerous times and even created a PowerPoint presentation that I presented to the school board detailing what the other schools did and how we could implement a similar plan. They politely ignored me and kept doing what they wanted. More mediocrity ensued.

In our school districts, (co-op sports teams), the problem is mostly leadership and messaging at/from the top. Main problem: A meat head athletic director that has never witnessed excellence, (athletic or otherwise), has no idea what it is and certainly can not recognize it. In his case, he is providing leadership for both schools and they are spending wheelbarrows of money and getting no results- because excellence is about people, not equipment and fifteen thousand dollar camera systems.
While this is representative of your standard exceptional post, there is a lot of great info here. First, I'd love to have a parent like you. You put forth the effort BUT also got a sense of what the inner workings were of a poor program. It isn't always the coach. I know a school system that I was asked to take over a program at when I retired. In the conversation with the AD, he said that all he wanted was "no parent problems." That is a long way from I want to win. You are sooooooo correct in mentioning losing atmospheres at schools. When I came to the school I coach at now, and I am still coaching after retirement, they had decades of losing. The superintendent wanted change and he cleaned house. He set up the new guidelines of win or hit the road. I would guess that there were 7 or 8 coaching changes the year I started. It was a purge and the school took off. When that happened, the town exploded with new growth.

While some in administration recognize the need for winning programs, they simply do not know how to win.
 
Jun 8, 2016
16,118
113
Typically a HS winning or losing is due to the strength of the feeder programs. Cannot squeeze water out of a rock. Here in Norman, OK, home of one of the best college FP programs in the country, the HS softball teams stink. Not coincidentally the rec program stinks and there are very few kids (compared to surrounding towns) who live in Norman and play competitive TB. By HS, for all but the 6 sigma athletes, you are not going to turn a dud into a stud, no matter how good of a coach you are.
 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2019
1,375
113
Typically a HS winning or losing is due to the strength of the feeder programs. Cannot squeeze water out of a rock. Here in Norman, OK, home of one of the best college FP programs in the country, the HS softball teams stink. Not coincidentally the rec program stinks and there are very few kids (compared to surrounding towns) who live in Norman and play competitive TB. By HS, for all but the 6 sigma athletes, you are not going to turn a dud into a stud, no matter how good of a coach you are.
You can’t win the Kentucky Derby with a donkey
 
Feb 20, 2020
377
63
Parents rarely criticize any male sport for playing to win. Its always female sports that they want to the "equal" I won't even say fair because I don't think equal playing time is fair for a lot of reasons. As to the poster who said why a roster of 16 if only 9 play I agree with the other 7 kids deserve opportunities but those opportunities might not be anywhere near equal. I don't agree with throwing only 1 pitcher for the health of the pitcher not for the the equality aspect. My kiddo is athletically blessed in many sports and I've always told her that your job as a starter is to play so well that your team kicks a** and everyone behind you gets opportunities.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I don’t think anyone has suggested they shouldn't play to win, only that winning shouldn‘t be the top or only priority. The point of youth sports is to build character and help kids mature. To help them sees reward for effort, to feel the thrill of success and the pain of failure. To learn to work with others toward a common goal, learning to trust their peers, to forgive them mistakes and be forgiven for them to. To learn that the world doesn’t actually end with a loss. Those “thank you softball” videos rarely mention the titles; they mention the lessons learned from the game.

Winning is the easiest part of a coach's job because, as patter says above me, one of the things most out of a coach's control. If you inherit a stud pitcher like slugger's DD, you're going to win a lot of games. If you coach in an area where softball is the sport athletic girls play from 8 up, you'll win a lot of games. Our little mountain area has a strong softball presence. No cheer to speak of, no gym for gymnastics or volleyball, no pool for swimming -- we get some soccer and some lacrosse and softball. We've usually had a respectable softball team because the HS coach inherits players who are repectable. Every now and then she gets a stud pitcher and we get a little more respectable. When she's got an average staff, she's a little less respectable. It's a matter of the talent that comes in. And that's fine. But it's not great coaching.

Great coaches develop players. The mark of a great coach isn't winning, but whether their players get better under their tutelage. A coach who plays the same starting lineup an entire season -- or who plays a group of incoming freshmen for four years -- is not developing a team. They're simply riding the coattails of what they've inherited. You want to see a great coach? See how many first- and second-year seniors they have starting and contributing. See how they've helped girls get better in the time they've been in the program. Anybody can win with exceptional pitching. You want to see great? Show me a coach who can remain competitive without it.

With that said, the complaints here haven’t been about equal time or coaches playing to win. They’ve been about how coaches play to win and the decisions and politics that go into coaching decisions. If we take the OP at their word — and what’s the point if we don’t — then DD was playing at least as well if not better than other girls who were getting more PT. In most positions of this sport outside of the circle and the shield, most differences are marginal. So if a player hits better and plays OF as well, then why isn't she getting more PT? That was OP's question -- reason for venting. Not that a coach was playing to win, but about how those decisions of how to win were being made. In a sport where actual game-influencing coaching decisions are pretty rare beyond the starting lineup, it's a legitimate reason.
 
Aug 25, 2019
1,066
113
I don’t think anyone has suggested they shouldn't play to win, only that winning shouldn‘t be the top or only priority. The point of youth sports is to build character and help kids mature. To help them sees reward for effort, to feel the thrill of success and the pain of failure. To learn to work with others toward a common goal, learning to trust their peers, to forgive them mistakes and be forgiven for them to. To learn that the world doesn’t actually end with a loss. Those “thank you softball” videos rarely mention the titles; they mention the lessons learned from the game.

Winning is the easiest part of a coach's job because, as patter says above me, one of the things most out of a coach's control. If you inherit a stud pitcher like slugger's DD, you're going to win a lot of games. If you coach in an area where softball is the sport athletic girls play from 8 up, you'll win a lot of games. Our little mountain area has a strong softball presence. No cheer to speak of, no gym for gymnastics or volleyball, no pool for swimming -- we get some soccer and some lacrosse and softball. We've usually had a respectable softball team because the HS coach inherits players who are repectable. Every now and then she gets a stud pitcher and we get a little more respectable. When she's got an average staff, she's a little less respectable. It's a matter of the talent that comes in. And that's fine. But it's not great coaching.

Great coaches develop players. The mark of a great coach isn't winning, but whether their players get better under their tutelage. A coach who plays the same starting lineup an entire season -- or who plays a group of incoming freshmen for four years -- is not developing a team. They're simply riding the coattails of what they've inherited. You want to see a great coach? See how many first- and second-year seniors they have starting and contributing. See how they've helped girls get better in the time they've been in the program. Anybody can win with exceptional pitching. You want to see great? Show me a coach who can remain competitive without it.

With that said, the complaints here haven’t been about equal time or coaches playing to win. They’ve been about how coaches play to win and the decisions and politics that go into coaching decisions. If we take the OP at their word — and what’s the point if we don’t — then DD was playing at least as well if not better than other girls who were getting more PT. In most positions of this sport outside of the circle and the shield, most differences are marginal. So if a player hits better and plays OF as well, then why isn't she getting more PT? That was OP's question -- reason for venting. Not that a coach was playing to win, but about how those decisions of how to win were being made. In a sport where actual game-influencing coaching decisions are pretty rare beyond the starting lineup, it's a legitimate reason.
Big difference between a coach and a manager. Everyone likes to call themselves a coach, but how many actually "coach" DD has been on 4 TB teams, two had managers, two had coaches, big, big difference.
 

Latest posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
42,830
Messages
679,468
Members
21,443
Latest member
sstop28
Top