ADVERTISEMENT

Foley's Friday Mailbag for 5/19/17

I'm highly skeptical of Foley et al romanticizing the international system (for lack of better term), for lots of reasons that I'm too lazy to type right now.

I'll just summarize by saying that those systems produce results in very few countries, due to truly elite athletes who would likely succeed in any system, and often with a lot of very ugly that we tend to gloss over. If you can't get the results without the ugly, then is the system all that great? (Plus the notion of "teaching technique over competitions" is a fairy tale.)

Reminds me of the Churchill quote about democracy -- it's the worst form of government except for all the others.
 
You have all these club coaches who basically talk out both sides of their mouth. They will tell you kids should play multiple sports, makes them a better athlete...OTOH, the coach expects your child to work those other sports around their sport year round. That is the problem with the current sports culture.

It is very difficult for a kid to play multiple sports above the rec level because most want a year round commitment. An example, I coached a low level travel soccer team with optional practices in winter/spring and league play based upon interest. I had one kid who would miss soccer games in the Fall because of lacrosse tournaments and would miss practices in the Fall because of basketball practice.

That is what burns kids out, too many competing priorities which also means too many demands on their time and bodies. When you have multiple games on the weekends and three practices a week for all your sports, you are setting yourself up for burnout and injury.
because everyone wants to win now!
 
Interesting to me is how Americans can completely misappropriate the European system. So while the European system focuses on specialization at an early age, it doesn't focus on competition. THAT is what is burning out Americans in the current system. The second, and probably the most important failure of the American system is the involvement of parents in the coaching system. You just don't see that in the European system. They are, in general, college educated coaches. Combine our love for competition with adults who's passion for their own children to win far exceed their children's and you have America's sports training culture.

We can't get over the fact that parents will have to be more involved because our sports population is far greater than that of any European system. We can definitely get over the competition-driven focus we have. It's nauseating as a coach. Parents believe "mat-time" is the most important way to develop. Damn straight it is. There's a mat right there, get to practice. Rant over. LOL
Makes me feel pretty good that my kid is about to receive his high school's "Tri-athlete Award" for multiple varsity letters in three sports. Guaranteed he would have burnt out on a single sport.
 
Nice, so now you are using programs like Gardner-Webb to compare with PSU to reach in your attempts. I expect better from you, especially coming off the HOF Downey troll. Although maybe a letdown after a something like that is inevitable.

Gardner-Webb, Minnesota, PSU, Wartburg - wth the difference, right? It's all NCAA wrestling...
You expect better from him? I don't.
 
Sorry, this is crazy. She's 6 years away from college and may not even be in middle school. I'd never tell anyone how to parent their own kids, but this is baffling.
My kid is a really good student/athlete. She has visited over 15 Universities at the age of 12. She will visit 3 more this summer. She only wants to attend PSU. It is her dream and I would pay any amount of money to have her attend the School she wants to attend.

Just so you know, we travel a lot and do not contact coaches. I just like to show the kid around college life.
 


If you care to lose 5 secs of your life wondering how the mind of foley works read this thread.
 


If you care to lose 5 secs of your life wondering how the mind of foley works read this thread.
Same guy who demands transparency from the NCAA when he acknowledges the system worked ... no biggie when his UWW bosses put out a cryptic press release about suspending 2 nations.

Who needs consistency when you can have nuance?
 
Sorry, this is crazy. She's 6 years away from college and may not even be in middle school. I'd never tell anyone how to parent their own kids, but this is baffling.


I can realize how that reads to you.

I enjoy going to local college sports, so I take my kid with me. We have 7 schools with-in 30 minutes of my house. There are also plays, and musicals at schools that are fun to go to.

Now add that to the colleges she has played at that host tourneys, I don't think it that many. We just go a little early,walk around campus, watch/play the event, go home. Sorry I think it is good fun.
 
I'm highly skeptical of Foley et al romanticizing the international system (for lack of better term), for lots of reasons that I'm too lazy to type right now.

I'll just summarize by saying that those systems produce results in very few countries, due to truly elite athletes who would likely succeed in any system, and often with a lot of very ugly that we tend to gloss over. If you can't get the results without the ugly, then is the system all that great? (Plus the notion of "teaching technique over competitions" is a fairy tale.)

Reminds me of the Churchill quote about democracy -- it's the worst form of government except for all the others.


Ech... Don't lump me in with Foley. I'm not romanticizing. I'm talking scientific data. While true that no system is perfect, the American system just needs more balance. It produces at an elite level for sure, but I'm also talking about actual, international sports. Tennis, Soccer, et al. Obviously we rule the Olympics, and we probably always will, but we also have the largest sports-involved population in the world. BY A LOT. Per capita, we don't do as well as most other countries. God. I do sound like Foley. Yuck. Please forgive me.

Also, I'd like to hear your opinion about how "teaching technique over competition is a fairy tale?"
 
Makes me feel pretty good that my kid is about to receive his high school's "Tri-athlete Award" for multiple varsity letters in three sports. Guaranteed he would have burnt out on a single sport.

Congrats to him! I played three sports in college (Div. 3) my sophomore year and it was too much, to be honest. Hard to keep up the academics with non-stop sports. I went from being a good student to a Dean's List student the next two years. I knew one other guy who played 3 sports in a year. But he did it only one year, also. He became a doctor; I, a lawyer. But respect to your son, especially in this day and age.
 
Ech... Don't lump me in with Foley. I'm not romanticizing. I'm talking scientific data. While true that no system is perfect, the American system just needs more balance. It produces at an elite level for sure, but I'm also talking about actual, international sports. Tennis, Soccer, et al. Obviously we rule the Olympics, and we probably always will, but we also have the largest sports-involved population in the world. BY A LOT. Per capita, we don't do as well as most other countries. God. I do sound like Foley. Yuck. Please forgive me.

Also, I'd like to hear your opinion about how "teaching technique over competition is a fairy tale?"
No intent to lump you in with Foley ... that's why i didn't quote you.

I can't speak about other sports but will caution about the per capita argument. Most other countries are a statistical small sample error, and/or specialize in a very small number of sports. I'd guess that clustering countries into groups would have a normalizing effect.

About "teaching technique over competition" being a fairy tale: First let's ignore the fact that Let's assume there's some truth to it -- that there is specialized training that is focused solely on technique. Who is getting it, and where? Certainly not all athletes everywhere -- nobody has enough coaches to provide that level of training in all the goat-roping cliffside hinterland hamlets of the world. Perhaps at the academies that might be true.

But who gets into the academies? Excluding political favoritism and bribes (though those are hard to exclude in much of the world): those who are judged to have superstar potential. And how do they get identified as such?

That's a competition. I can't say if it's a volume of tournaments, but there absolutely is competition to get noticed for those spots. It begins early. And it's far more intense than anything we face. In much of the world, families and society put enormous pressure on children to achieve at high levels, with sometimes severe consequences for failing. Parents get turned down for jobs. Families get shunned by society. Sometimes junior gets the fist and the belt.

Now, back to the technique training part. Much of the rest of the world fights dirty -- punching, slapping, eye poking, clawing, scratching, biting, and the like. Is that the technique they're being taught? If so, that's time not spent on teaching wrestling technique. And aren't those tactics a means of raw competitiveness?

And then there are the other symptoms of extreme competitiveness gone awry: the official packing heat on the mat at Russian cadet nationals ... the Azerbaijani coaches getting busted with suitcases full of drugs and doping equipment at their Juniors hotel in France ... etc.

So, yeah, there might be some specialized training going on at the extreme upper levels, but only a Foley could pretend it's without intense competition.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT