The appeal of a "non-parent" coach

[_MIA_]

As i told another softball parent asking my advice, i said show me a parent coached team that the coaches kids play the outfield and i might consider the team for my DD.

Once in a while the coaches' kids might actually be the best IF so this strategy is not exactly fool-proof..

The truth of the matter is that many parents, whether they are coaching or not, do not view their kids objectively. My advice is as a parent do not rely on coaches for anything. Do not expect them to develop your kid and do not expect them to be fair. If you are working with your kid and she is developing properly and not getting the proper PT, and you as a parent are being objective/unbiased about the situation, then go find another team that will utilize her properly..there are plenty out there.

 

[CanOfCorn]

I agree with @marriard as it is 100% coaching. In the 20+ seasons of travel my kids did collectively I coached twice, both out of necessity, and I underplayed them because I didn’t want to be “that dad.”

I think generally parent coaches can be fine but they fall into the overestimate their child’s skills and play them too much/give them too much leeway or the opposite, play them too little and have a short rope. It is hard to have a middle ground. Even then in the latter case you hope they are doing it for the right reasons.

At 10U one DD had a dad and his 19-yo daughter who didn’t play anymore but had for years. While you can nitpick anything they were fantastic for the age group so positive non-parent coaches. They had some favorites but generally the girls had earned it and even then it was not blind. We had a 20-30yo former college player for an 18U team who was terrible. It was if she was trying to be friends with girls on the team and played the “most popular” kids. They could go who 0-for-weekend, mail in defense, skip practice, show up late and still start and play the next week every inning. Coaches play favorites it just if they are doing it objectively (because the player deserves it.)

The big issue is not just technical ability in coaching but soft skills like objectiveness, communication, organization, relatability and still hold a sense of authority. It seems people think non-parent equal this automatically which isn’t always the case, and those soft skills are hard to quantify at a tryout.

CoC


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Westwind]

This is really a case by case deal.

I can literally create columns of "Parent Coaches That Rock" and "Non-Parent Coaches That Suck".

Local non-parent coach just blew up his third team in ten years. His teams always explode in spectacular fashion. He will wait a few years and he will be coaching again.

 

[BradyC87]

i have had to deal with a group of dads controlling the whole town org and it was a mess for girls with talent who just quit. their daughters were pitchers, and the whole infield. if you were lucky your kid might get 1 inning pitching and a little outfield. lots of talented girls quit softball. i took my DD to a non parent coached division A team very young college players coaching 12U they sucked at coaching but things appeared merit based and my DD developed into a much better player. I then moved her after 2 years to another non parent coached org with very experienced coaches and she is having a blast but it does cost more. As i told another softball parent asking my advice, i said show me a parent coached team that the coaches kids play the outfield and i might consider the team for my DD.

Find me a below-average player whose parents are willing to commit to volunteering to coach a team.

 

[grcsftbll]

Once in a while the coaches' kids might actually be the best IF so this strategy is not exactly fool-proof..

I don't think it's even a rare thing. By definition, coaches are invested. They've probably been practicing with their own kid 3x a week for years, just because they enjoy it. Even a kid who's not naturally talented will do pretty well with all the extra practice they're probably putting in. My DH only head coached for two years, and my DD would've enjoyed playing more outfield. She got to play very little, because he needed her at SS. Coach's kid playing SS, gasp! She also used to pitch! Double-gasp! But she was good, and earned it.

The same has been true for other dad coaches she's played for. The trend I've noticed, if there is one, is that some of these dads tend to be harder on their own kids. Their kids have been hard workers and good ball players.

DD played for a non-parent coach in first year 10U. He was very knowledgeable. She learned a lot from him. But he had just come through 18U and did not have a very good rapport with 9 year olds. I think for 14U and older he was probably great.

 

[uncdrew]

One thing I've noticed with non-parent coaches. They don't always want to go the extra mile quite as much as a parent coach. Some certainly do, and every case is different, but here's a few examples:

1. It's raining. Non-parent coach may just cancel practice. Parent coach with little girl really wanting to not miss practice can be more motivated to call around and get an indoor spot booked and go through the hassles of setting that all up and communicating it.

2. Fun things for the girls, especially at 10U. Field trips to high school or college games, fun outings, etc. I find the parent coach does these things better.


For the young ages, it's about making sure the girls have fun, learn to love the game, and get better at softball. A parent or non-parent coach can do this.

Quite honestly, the one type of coach I'm most wary of is the "Just out of college ex-player". I see this touted as a good thing but it raises red flags for me.

 

[Top_Notch]

Seems the coach's kid is either usually the best on the team or the worst on the team. My DD has played 7 years travel ball (prior I coached) and has yet to play for a non parent coach. Maybe next year. There's definitely an allure to a non parent coach.

 

[_MIA_]

I don't think it's even a rare thing.

Yes..I was being understated on purpose (I was a coach's kid through LL and played SS and pitched )

 

[uncdrew]

I don't think it's even a rare thing. By definition, coaches are invested. They've probably been practicing with their own kid 3x a week for years, just because they enjoy it. Even a kid who's not naturally talented will do pretty well with all the extra practice they're probably putting in. My DH only head coached for two years, and my DD would've enjoyed playing more outfield. She got to play very little, because he needed her at SS. Coach's kid playing SS, gasp! She also used to pitch! Double-gasp! But she was good, and earned it.

The same has been true for other dad coaches she's played for. The trend I've noticed, if there is one, is that some of these dads tend to be harder on their own kids. Their kids have been hard workers and good ball players.

DD played for a non-parent coach in first was in first year 10U. He was very knowledgeable. She learned a lot from him. But he had just come through 18U and did not have a very good rapport with 9 year olds. I think for 14U and older he was probably great.

My experience as well.

I went from being the AC last year to being a parent this year. My DD pitches more than she did last year, and plays zero outfield this year. So if any parents thought I was doing Daddy Ball last year, no idea what they're thinking this year. Perhaps they've come to realize I wasn't playing Daddy Ball.

 

[Strike2]

After 13 years in this game, I've reached the conclusion that the perfect youth softball coach who teaches great technique, creates a great environment, plays no favorites, retains & develops players, is the perfect game manager, wins often, and comes at a reasonable cost is something of a unicorn. For the vast majority, there will be trade-offs, compromises, and stuff you'll just need to learn to ignore.

Regardless of a coach's family relationship to a player or even their personality, I'd look for track record, particularly regarding player retention and team turnover. Does the coach teach good technique? What does the team look like on the field during games or practice? How do the players get along?

There may be some politics, and the coach may favor their kid and/or others, but that doesn't mean they're a bad coach or even broadly unfair. Regardless of whether you personally like everything the coach does, is YOUR kid developing while getting reasonable playing time, and is she having fun? Is the team effective on the field and do most players return the following year? IMO, those are the measuring sticks.