Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:31 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:14 am #21

Here is the thing.

Lacrosse is a sport we are trying to build. I have been trying on that front since the mid 80s.

Because we want growth, we have to adapt and can't always follow the norm.

Coaching. Follow the nccp, ok, but by doing that we are losing good coaches and it will kill the game. Since i started coaching and instruction no matter where i go, what organization i am around and watch the level of technical know how and its almost always extremely poor. Bad habits are either taught or never corrected. Why? because there are not many coaches around that know better. So how about get certified as a technical coach so you can teach kids properly.

How can someone who has never played the game or played at a low level teach a Midget A player to improve. They can't.

Every bench should have a head coach (organizer) and a technical coach (obvious) especially from Bantam up. Not doing this will only hurt the kids.

The coaching program has to be redesigned. They need to get rid of that stupid point system they added, that will guarantee the sport goes to hell. They also need to redesign the books so they are different for each sport and not identical. You are there for field and answering questions that relate to box. its idiotic and poorly thought out.

For me, i am giving up after 25 plus years, the hassle is too much, the abuse is too much and the lack of anything that resembles respect is too much.


Organizations. To comment on what Derek said, where would they come from. So many people stay away because of the toxic behaviour of many executives. I would bet this is the norm not the exception. Many of these executives act like they are a reality show trying to destroy anyone that questions their knowledge (which in most cases, they have little)

I bet we all know an organization where the people in charge know very little about the sport and yet never consult the experts on it. What is worse is, many times when someone who is very experienced comes in to help, they are treated like they are the anti Christ coming to take over when all they want to do is help. Executives get so protected its just stupid.

There is so much to be done with the sport but nothing will be improved until the toxic, egotistical attention starving parasites are in charge, and there is a lot of them.


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2001 3:46 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 3:22 am #22

She:kon!

I think your first point speaks to a re-org of minor lacrosse similar to how hockey is organized. Get rid of zones and go with leagues.

If a Centre can field a AAAA team, it can invite all players from 'local' non-AAAA centres to try-out. AAA centres can invite all non-AAA players and so on. Example: Whitby and West Durham and Markham. Let's say that Whitby has a AAAA team, a AAA team, AA, A, etc. WD has a AAA, AA, A, and Markham has AA, A. All players in Whitby, WD and Markham can try out for the Whitby AAAA team. If they are cut, then they can try out for the nearest AAA team, but IF their centre has AAA, the residence rule is in effect. Etc. All the way down. This allows a fair chance for all players to play at their level if they can and if not, they go to the highest level in their home centre. The incentive of course is for the local club to want to retain local talent over imports as parents will begin to demand it. Sort of the opposite of your counter-point. It also encourages local centres to develop and retain hometown talent.

For head coaching emergencies = have all registered head coaches registered to the club, not the team. This way a head coach can fill in on any team if need be. Also, retain the registration of coaches from year to year so that if their CIR is clean, they can come out of retirement and fill in if need be. Finally, each club could have a few spare head coaches on hand for such emergencies.

The point of this is not to say that every contingency can be covered, but that problems can be resolved with the right minded group.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...
I'm not sure constantly losing your best players to another centre encourages developing and retaining hometown talent, especially when it starts happening at the tyke level. How can you ever develop into an A team if it's starting right from the beginning? In your example, if you are just an A calibre centre, and you've got AAAA, AAA and AA centres all around you, how likely are you to even field a team at that point?

Let's look at the Shelburne tykes as an example. They were a D team. Orangeville had an A and C team, Arthur had a C team and Newmarket had a C team. If Shelburne loses their top 3 players to Arthur, Orangeville 2 and Newmarket, do the Shelburne tykes even end up with a rep team? You can do this same exercise with Simcoe, Midland... basically any small centre. If the answer is "who cares?", I guess that's fine but it needs to be considered.

In terms of coaching, it's great that a centre has all these spare coaches on reserve, with no conflicting schedules. But If my team is in say Nepean, I better hope any of our other teams there don't play at the same time or close to it at a different rink. Or their team didn't leave because they lost in the 10am semi-final and I play in the 6pm final.

In order to coach box lacrosse in Ontario, you need to take 2 courses. The community which is good for any age the year you take it and Paperweight-Peewee after the first, and the competitive, which is good in Bantam +. It's not like you need to go back every year and take the course. If you've got a kid in paperweight, you take the community, then in what, 6 years you take the competitive if you want to continue coaching in Bantam+? This is a pretty easy problem to currently resolve... get all members of the coaching staff to take the course. Then you are covered.

If we want to talk fixable things, how about the trainer issue? Each team needs a trainer. You take a 6 hour course and it's good for 3 years... but do people who don't require it all the time (police, fire, emt, doctor, ect...) even remember half they stuff they were taught? Does this make any sense? How many players have left the game because trainer mom/dad doesn't know what they are doing and the player suffered long term injuries?

How about getting this sport into the schools. Not just a one day play around, but leaving behind equipment they can use? Lacrosse has an incredible history behind it that few even know about. I know this is slowly starting to be more of a thing, but a full push could do wonders.

The interlocking house league should have been an option a long time ago. Instead of having 2 teams play each other every week because that's all the centre has in an age group, why was it such an issue to be able to play house league teams from a nearby centre? I believe this has been changed, but it should have already been done.

Hockey is moving to cross ice and we're noticeably silent on it. Is there a plan? I know some centres have started doing the swaxlax thing and others are talking about reducing contact at the lower age groups. US football has started to come to their sense regarding not letting kids hit each until middle school, have we even discussed this in lacrosse? Do we need 6 and 7 year olds hitting each other?

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 11:53 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:03 am #23

She:kon!

A model cannot include every contingency that applies to it, that is why it is a model. In the AAAA-A scenario,{or even the current ratings scenario) there is no presumption that any player must play out of town. The ability to play on a higher calibre team is an option without a lot of administrative overhead. And not all kids/families would want to play out of town, but it would give an association a good reason to incentivize their programming.

The more likely a scenario, the more likely contingencies ought to be planned for. So in a tournament situation, the host tournament would have spare coaches yes? Or the team that is down a coach could have a registered coach as an assistant. Not requiring certain credentials to be head coach doesn't mean coaches can't get those credential anyways, it's an option that makes it easier for some teams to get door-openers who don't wish to go through the time and expense of having to obtain a credential they might never plan on using. I don't think it was a big deal to get my creds, but I had no other option. And house league coaches need no credentials.

Trainers - good point. Although for some reason I believe that medical and emergency personnel have much more first aid training, possibly an annual thing for some.

In schools - in our region it is part of the PE curriculum of a lot of schools, including high school varsity teams.

Interlocking house league - agreed although the caution is that I have already seen interlocking house league being used as an excuse by people who don't care about house league or growing the game at the grassroots. They are killing lacrosse because they don't have a clue.

Cross-floor, rule modifications - good God man, are you trying to start a war? LOL! These are all good ideas. Jr. PPW used to be cross-floor here, and there is likely no reason it couldn't be used cross-floor in the Sr. PPW.

As for rule modifications - I convened the Pee Wee division last year and experimented with the rules because we had major novices mixed in: all the players, parents and referees before games were reminded that: only body checking between players of similar size, no slashing on the body at all and all cross-checking had to be place-and-push. The first few weeks, one dad pulled his kid out because the game wasn't rough enough or something. Otherwise the parents, kids and referees all made the game that much more fun with the emphasis on stick skills, positional play, running, etc. We had very few problematic incidents. These sorts of rule modifications can be done, alone with any of the modifications contained in the LTAD scenarios.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 11:53 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:08 pm #24

Here is the thing.

Lacrosse is a sport we are trying to build. I have been trying on that front since the mid 80s.

Because we want growth, we have to adapt and can't always follow the norm.

Coaching. Follow the nccp, ok, but by doing that we are losing good coaches and it will kill the game. Since i started coaching and instruction no matter where i go, what organization i am around and watch the level of technical know how and its almost always extremely poor. Bad habits are either taught or never corrected. Why? because there are not many coaches around that know better. So how about get certified as a technical coach so you can teach kids properly.

How can someone who has never played the game or played at a low level teach a Midget A player to improve. They can't.

Every bench should have a head coach (organizer) and a technical coach (obvious) especially from Bantam up. Not doing this will only hurt the kids.

The coaching program has to be redesigned. They need to get rid of that stupid point system they added, that will guarantee the sport goes to hell. They also need to redesign the books so they are different for each sport and not identical. You are there for field and answering questions that relate to box. its idiotic and poorly thought out.

For me, i am giving up after 25 plus years, the hassle is too much, the abuse is too much and the lack of anything that resembles respect is too much.


Organizations. To comment on what Derek said, where would they come from. So many people stay away because of the toxic behaviour of many executives. I would bet this is the norm not the exception. Many of these executives act like they are a reality show trying to destroy anyone that questions their knowledge (which in most cases, they have little)

I bet we all know an organization where the people in charge know very little about the sport and yet never consult the experts on it. What is worse is, many times when someone who is very experienced comes in to help, they are treated like they are the anti Christ coming to take over when all they want to do is help. Executives get so protected its just stupid.

There is so much to be done with the sport but nothing will be improved until the toxic, egotistical attention starving parasites are in charge, and there is a lot of them.

She:kon!

"How can someone who has never played the game or played at a low level teach a Midget A player to improve. They can't." Jim Bishop did. I watched a pee wee house league dad coach for the first time last year and learned something from him - everyone has the potential to transform the game in a positive way.

"There is so much to be done with the sport but nothing will be improved until the toxic, egotistical attention starving parasites are in charge, and there is a lot of them." (This speaks of independence to me.) I saw this exact problem when I started noticing that existing policies designed to protect the people, association/club and assets were not being followed, often on the basis of some form of exceptionalism. When that happens, the exceptions to the rules becomes the rule.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:31 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:13 pm #25

I actually coached with Jim and helped him with some of the technical aspects of the game once his group hit midget age.

He wasn't alone in teaching that group and while they were a great group they did have bad habits.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:31 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:16 pm #26

he was an anomaly also.

I also should have said generally, and not used an absolute. But to get to the next level of play there are little things that most people really wouldn't know unless they were at that level. At least that is my opinion.

but do you agree each bench should have the Head coach that keeps it all together and a technical coach that corrects the form?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 11:53 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:48 pm #27

She:kon,

Bish wasn't an anomaly, he simply followed along with what Lloyd Percival was saying, who also indirectly transformed Soviet hockey through others who followed along.

Aye there's the rub.

I don't know enough about your HC/TC setup to offer any sort of developmental opinion.

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:31 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:01 pm #28

I meant anomaly for what he did in Lacrosse. I don't recall many people like him and i don't think anyone had his sort of record.

P
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 11:53 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 1:32 pm #29

She:kon!

Lacrosse has a history of innovation from people who never played the game, or who were on the fringe. My point about Bish is that he latched on to sport science of his day and revolutionized the game. I am sure there were other Bish factors involved too, but anyone can do it. But... aye, there's the rub: if there is too much an emphasis on prior experience or some special absolute knowledge, that outlier revolutionary or innovator will never find their way to the game. And with the toxic atmosphere that seems to exist, there is twice the reason to not bother. Who needs it right?

Skennen

...Tsitshoh...
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2018 7:31 pm

Wed Mar 14, 2018 2:57 pm #30

I was talking about technical aspects on a personal level, not systems or structure.
Quote
Like
Share