Bit of a mess, if you ask me. Anyone following this? GAA trying to get all counties to follow the under 11,13,15,17 rule. After that it's up to each county. Under 19, 20 or 21. But this was supposed to be what the Special Congress was for...
A mess no doubt which will likely result in loads of young talented players focusing on something other that GAA.
There was nothing wrong with U12, 14, 16, minor.
Too much tinkering about in the GAA the last 6 or 7 years
Every president feels they have to leave their mark or legacy, instead of just being the head of the GAA for 3 years and representing the association as best they can
There was nothing wrong with the half years because it meant that at least the lads played with people in their school year, at least in the North. the whole way through the underage system.
Surely we want to keep playing numbers as high as possible, and to maximise that we should have people playing with their friends (who are likely to be in the same class as them)?
Quote from: Smokin Joe on November 11, 2019, 06:33:29 AM
There was nothing wrong with the half years because it meant that at least the lads played with people in their school year, at least in the North. the whole way through the underage system.
Surely we want to keep playing numbers as high as possible, and to maximise that we should have people playing with their friends (who are likely to be in the same class as them)?
What county's in the North had half years, can't think of any. Always thought L it was u12 14 16 18
Tyrone tried 2 years ago to turn it to half but was rejected by ulster Council
Quote from: redzone on November 11, 2019, 07:19:44 AM
Quote from: Smokin Joe on November 11, 2019, 06:33:29 AM
There was nothing wrong with the half years because it meant that at least the lads played with people in their school year, at least in the North. the whole way through the underage system.
Surely we want to keep playing numbers as high as possible, and to maximise that we should have people playing with their friends (who are likely to be in the same class as them)?
What county's in the North had half years, can't think of any. Always thought L it was u12 14 16 18
Tyrone tried 2 years ago to turn it to half but was rejected by ulster Council
Armagh had half years this year
Yeah Armagh had half years. Lost a few lads from the under 16s when they went to the Ulster comp because of it.
Another case of the GAA not having a standardised rule... Like the mess around replays, pens etc.
One piece about it here. https://www.irishnews.com/sport/gaafootball/2019/11/05/news/kicking-out-changing-age-grades-will-make-retaining-players-even-harder-1756459/
Think for Northern teams, the half years work well as it leaves lads playing with their own school year the whole way up.
Quote from: Armagh18 on November 11, 2019, 01:35:02 PM
Think for Northern teams, the half years work well as it leaves lads playing with their own school year the whole way up.
100%. Young fellas will stay longer if their school friends are there too.
Across the Armagh clubs the consensus seemed to be that the 1/2 years this past year have helped but the potential changes coming down the road could be catastrophic.
Within our club we benefitted in 2019 in keeping the 18.5 older players for another year before the move to senior/stop playing - which is a great thing.
But we also encountered issues as we play in other county leagues which weren't 1/2 years - this caused issues with too much game time for some players at different stages in the year.
Also competing in All Ireland Feile at U14 was an issue as well midway through season.
Looking to 2020 when football people (I coach both) are suggesting that club football could go under in some areas in Armagh I can only imagine the damage that will be done to hurling.
An trim and Donegal staying with u12/14/16.minor.
Hopefully Derry will follow
Tipperary is hanging onto the U12, u14, U16 for dear life. Still playing 21 this year as well. There is a sense that this convention might be the death knell and next year will go to odd years. I actually don't see much wrong with 12s 14s and 16s, but equally I don't think moving to odd years will result in a mass exodus either.
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 11, 2019, 07:20:30 PM
Tipperary is hanging onto the U12, u14, U16 for dear life. Still playing 21 this year as well. There is a sense that this convention might be the death knell and next year will go to odd years. I actually don't see much wrong with 12s 14s and 16s, but equally I don't think moving to odd years will result in a mass exodus either.
This is the odd thing about any clamour against changing the age grades; the ones who object to it cite dwindling playing numbers and player retention as major issues for their clubs, but want to retain things exactly as they are. I'm really not sure they're looking at the problem and the solution at the same time .
Quote from: Fear Bun Na Sceilpe on November 11, 2019, 04:39:30 PM
An trim and Donegal staying with u12/14/16.minor.
Hopefully Derry will follow
From what I hear counties don't have this choice, it is going to be a Croke Park remit, every county has to have U13, U15 & U17, they can have the other grades too but must have these 3 grades
Correct Wobbler. Its mad how scared people are of change and how blind to obvious they can be.
For whatever reason, noone seems to recognise the uselessness of an u21 championship jammed into the darkest corner of winter. Is that really a development bridge from underage to adult football. Surely a complete u19 or u20 season, properly thought out, can serve clubs better?
I guess neither perspective is scientific but the majority of club coaches i know in armagh consider the half ages to have been a step backwards.
Quote from: DuffleKing on November 12, 2019, 12:52:06 AM
I guess neither perspective is scientific but the majority of club coaches i know in armagh consider the half ages to have been a step backwards.
Really? Why are the half years a step backwards? To my mind the ability to play with your classmates the whole way up through the underage structure has to be better than two class mates, one born in December and the other in January not being able to play the same underage grade one year in two.
I keep harking back to the fact that this ability to always play with your classmates has to help participation rates.
Mayo have the evens as their main events until early August or so. From then until end of October the switch to odds occurs. The u-17 came in a few years ago but was scrapped again soon after.
I suppose having a lad turning 18 in or around Christmas is better off still playing u-18 instead of playing adult football for most of that year.
Quote from: Throw ball on November 11, 2019, 01:43:57 PM
Quote from: Armagh18 on November 11, 2019, 01:35:02 PM
Think for Northern teams, the half years work well as it leaves lads playing with their own school year the whole way up.
100%. Young fellas will stay longer if their school friends are there too.
That's it in a nutshell in the occupied 6, last worked very well IMO.
Antrim keeping 12, 14, 16 next season.
QuoteAge groups for 2020
Following central councils adoption of the "Academy Report" in June 2019, a direction was issued by An Ard Stiúrthóir on 2nd October 2019.
In that correspondence the Ard Stiúrthóir confirmed that the " Association Policy" was to change the age groups to u13.u15 and u17 for 2020, but noted that other grades i.e. 14, 16, and 18 could be allowed subject to prior approval from Central council.
Given that this is a policy and not a rule confusion exists thought-out the country
Its anticipated that a range of motions will be put to congress in Feb 2020 setting the 13,15 and 17 age groups into rule commencing Jan 2021 ( it's highly unlikely that they could be delivered any earlier as most counties will have competition schedules in place by the time congress meets in Feb 2020).
The County Chairman, Ciarán Mc Cavana, has been taking soundings from both inside and outside the county over the last few weeks.
Based on that engagement Antrim GAA will be retaining the current u14 u16 and u18 age grades for 2020 .
Quote from: thewobbler on November 11, 2019, 07:40:00 PM
Quote from: AZOffaly on November 11, 2019, 07:20:30 PM
Tipperary is hanging onto the U12, u14, U16 for dear life. Still playing 21 this year as well. There is a sense that this convention might be the death knell and next year will go to odd years. I actually don't see much wrong with 12s 14s and 16s, but equally I don't think moving to odd years will result in a mass exodus either.
This is the odd thing about any clamour against changing the age grades; the ones who object to it cite dwindling playing numbers and player retention as major issues for their clubs, but want to retain things exactly as they are. I'm really not sure they're looking at the problem and the solution at the same time .
Ok - so what is the problem that switching age grades from "even" to "odd" will solve? I honestly don't see it. Usually dwindling numbers and player retention issues are caused by bad coaching/management and/or a poor fixtures programme. Also - has changing to U-17 and U-20 at county level been a success? I think it has been a total failure and that seems to be widely acknowledged. A pure nonsense.
Quote from: Smokin Joe on November 12, 2019, 06:56:12 AM
Quote from: DuffleKing on November 12, 2019, 12:52:06 AM
I guess neither perspective is scientific but the majority of club coaches i know in armagh consider the half ages to have been a step backwards.
Really? Why are the half years a step backwards? To my mind the ability to play with your classmates the whole way up through the underage structure has to be better than two class mates, one born in December and the other in January not being able to play the same underage grade one year in two.
I keep harking back to the fact that this ability to always play with your classmates has to help participation rates.
I'd agree entirely with this statement when its based purely on the Primary school age groups and Down are hopefully sticking with it even if it does change to P3 P5 and P7.
I don't think thereafter it matters as much as kids are now attending three, maybe four different secondary schools anyway.
U19 age group won't work for us as that means some lads are away to university and fitting fixtures around adult hurling is near on impossible.
Won't be a problem for big clubs but once again little or no thought given to small, rural clubs.
Does anyone have the problem statement this move is meant to fix?
The only thing I can think off is that the powers that be wanted to move away from junior cert and leaving cert ages, but even that doesn't make sense.
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 10, 2019, 09:47:24 PM
There was nothing wrong with U12, 14, 16, minor.
Too much tinkering about in the GAA the last 6 or 7 years
Every president feels they have to leave their mark or legacy, instead of just being the head of the GAA for 3 years and representing the association as best they can
Would agree, as an underage coach its a total pain in the h&le. Leave things alone.
I still dont understand what they are trying to achieve by constantly tinkering with the grades?
Does anyone know?
As a coach who has seen high volumes of kids dropping out I agree that 1/2 year age groups are the best. Irrespective of kids being spread across schools playing with kids in the same year as you makes much more sense.
But sure what do we know. We only coach the kids in small clubs.
It is much more important to look after the largest clubs and counties ::)
Whole heap of marketing people in the GAA/ Croke Park who look at change as a good thing to keep things fresh? Really they are just ballsing things up.
Surely everyone can accept that a talented u18 being asked to give his time to colleges, county minor, club minor, and club senior for the same season is a problem? That's before dual sport commitments.
That's the fundamental reason for moving to u17. It actually does make sense folks.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 12, 2019, 02:10:39 PM
Surely everyone can accept that a talented u18 being asked to give his time to colleges, county minor, club minor, and club senior for the same season is a problem? That's before dual sport commitments.
That's the fundamental reason for moving to u17. It actually does make sense folks.
County minor has already gone to u17. Colleges is done and dusted by the spring time, before club u18 gets going properly. If I look at the senior team in my own club, the first 24/25 guys, I'd say about 3 of them were playing on the senior team at u18. The last one would have been 7 years ago.
The drop off rate is bad enough from 18 to 19, without bringing it forward a year.
County can do what it likes as far as I am concerned, they are not the ones developing the players, and can afford to ignore the late developers. My club needs it to stay at u18, and going by the last time this was proposed at county board level, we are in the vast majority.
Maybe you're right Shark.
I just don't see it myself.
I don't see how playing one more year of juvenile football (instead of seconds football) would have any impact on dropout rates.
I just don't see how an 18 year old focused entirely on senior football (after the colleges season has ended) won't make the breakthrough quicker. Senior managers have had a relatively good excuse to not play 18 year old until now ie they're getting games at minor level, or they're not often at senior training due to county/college/club minor commitments.
Also please explain the science behind "my club needs to stay at u18 level".
It's at best intuition. There's no proof.
I'd expect you've had a handful or two of lads in your club's history who struggled at under 17, then went on to play senior football. We've all had them. But lads like this very rarely skip reserve football as a building block.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 12, 2019, 02:10:39 PM
Surely everyone can accept that a talented u18 being asked to give his time to colleges, county minor, club minor, and club senior for the same season is a problem? That's before dual sport commitments.
That's the fundamental reason for moving to u17. It actually does make sense folks.
Can see some sense with changing U18 to U17 but less so with u21 to U20
Quote from: thewobbler on November 12, 2019, 02:46:37 PM
Also please explain the science behind "my club needs to stay at u18 level".
It's at best intuition. There's no proof.
I'd expect you've had a handful or two of lads in your club's history who struggled at under 17, then went on to play senior football. We've all had them. But lads like this very rarely skip reserve football as a building block.
If I thought that "reserve football" or the lower league divisions were going to be run in a much more coherent manner, with more games, then that would certainly help change my opinion. But that is not going to happen, not through a lack of trying, but a lack of space in the calendar. There are not many counties that treat football and hurling equally - but I'm in one of them. So you lose 50% of weekends straight off the bat.
My club needs u-18 as those young lads will then have more football. The 19 year olds don't get near as many games as them, unless they are good enough to make the senior team. Most won't be at that stage. My club is a large urban club with plenty of numbers. It's not easy to break in to the senior team as a young lad. We've done really well at player retention in the past 10/15 years thankfully, and have lots of players on our senior team who didn't break through until their early 20's. I can't prove that we would have lost many of them had they lost a year of underage - but I feel that we would have.
I get that the odd superstar may have more games as a result. But the majority of young lads need more games - not less.
A couple of thoughts on this.
1. Having u17 at inter-County and u18 at club works well imo. The lads who make County minors are not necessarily the main men on their club team, a great thing to keep pressure off and egos in check.
2. School years up to u12.5 work well for keeping boys with their friends but I like to see it back to u14, u16 after that as it means some lads have a good birthday for school football while others have a good birthday for club football. It means different lads get to be the leaders in different environments.
I like the even age groups up to June/July, give those players a competition then switch to odd ages for rest of year. It also brings Feile to a nice conclusion. That way each age get a chance playing in their 'stronger' year and the 18 year olds can play adult if they want.
Young players don't get enough games. That's one of the biggest issues.
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 12, 2019, 10:20:02 PM
I like the even age groups up to June/July, give those players a competition then switch to odd ages for rest of year. It also brings Feile to a nice conclusion. That way each age get a chance playing in their 'stronger' year and the 18 year olds can play adult if they want.
Young players don't get enough games. That's one of the biggest issues.
Coaching under 10s last year and between go games fixtures midweek and a plethora of blitz's most weekends it actually was difficult to fit in training sessions to help develop skills.
I realise this is different to other age categories.
Is none of ye involved in Fixtures?
I think U13/15/17 makes so much sense.
Separating minor from adult opens up the whole club fixture calendar, where you can now have clubs playing minor and adult together on the same weekend as there's no clash for players. Even better for a dual county.
An U17 is most likely not in his Leaving Cert year (in the Republic), whereas an U18 is.
At the other end, kids are starting younger and younger, and by the time they get to 12 years old, they are sick of Go Games, where every game is a draw, and by that stage they want to start competing. Starting competitions a year earlier at U13 is a good thing. My county have changed the whole way down, so Go Games is now U7/9/11 and I think it works very well.
My 2c ...
Quote from: lurganblue on November 13, 2019, 10:25:18 AM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 12, 2019, 10:20:02 PM
I like the even age groups up to June/July, give those players a competition then switch to odd ages for rest of year. It also brings Feile to a nice conclusion. That way each age get a chance playing in their 'stronger' year and the 18 year olds can play adult if they want.
Young players don't get enough games. That's one of the biggest issues.
Coaching under 10s last year and between go games fixtures midweek and a plethora of blitz's most weekends it actually was difficult to fit in training sessions to help develop skills.
I realise this is different to other age categories.
I'd agree with that. Someone pointed out in our club the U10s played more matches/blitzes than most other teams in the club seniors included.
If the same effort was put into fixtures at 14-17 maybe there wouldn't be the same drop off.
If clubs focused more on participation than winning numbers falling away would decrease.
1. County boards should run u13, 14, u15, u16 and 17 leagues championships at the same time. Stop sending kids up age grades. I know talented kids that were playing u15 in Spring, u16 and minor in the summer and then u17 in Autumn/Winter. Madness.
2. For clubs that can't play at each age grade focus on the grades where you have numbers but alway make u17 your priority, for e.g if you have 18 u16s but only 7 u17s, you still play u17s only even though your u16 team are all of age.
3. If you don't have an age grade for a kid, let him transfer one year out, e.g. you have a 13 year old but no u13 or u14 team then let him transfer out for one year to another clubs or u13 or u14 team only
4. Look at introducing u18.5 and u20.5 age grades, this helps capture the kids who were July to December and missed out because of relative age affect.
5. If your club doesn't have a an u20.5 team they can play dual status with another club i.e. play adult with your club and u20.5 only with another club.
6. Finally remove all coaches egos, it's ok to lose, stop prioritising winning over loosing. If you have a panel of 25, all 25 get a least half a game.
We as adults are too quick to impose our values on young players, majority of kids play sport to have fun, to be with friends, to belong.....winning is way down the list. When kids lose games they might show disappointment, but that disappointment is not in the losing but the in the belief that they have let down their coaches and parents.
Finally abandon all development squads from u13 to u15. Very few of these kids go on to make it and a lot just give up when cut.
Dinny you make some excellent points in this post. The one however that I would strongly disagree with is the element by which you seem to put a lot of emphasis on not instilling a winning ethos into the underage system. I personally think that by taking this element out you begin to introduce a 5 a side sunday league mentality into underage which will ultimately take the edge of some players. My experience is that this competitive nature is what drives most youth players into senior football. I suppose it comes down to what clubs want do the want to provide a sporting outlet in their community for youth or are they in the business of creating success at senior level. My club experience is that the latter is the over arching reasons for clubs having youth teams.
Quote from: This Years Model on November 13, 2019, 10:58:46 AM
Is none of ye involved in Fixtures?
I think U13/15/17 makes so much sense.
Separating minor from adult opens up the whole club fixture calendar, where you can now have clubs playing minor and adult together on the same weekend as there's no clash for players. Even better for a dual county.
An U17 is most likely not in his Leaving Cert year (in the Republic), whereas an U18 is.
At the other end, kids are starting younger and younger, and by the time they get to 12 years old, they are sick of Go Games, where every game is a draw, and by that stage they want to start competing. Starting competitions a year earlier at U13 is a good thing. My county have changed the whole way down, so Go Games is now U7/9/11 and I think it works very well.
My 2c ...
What would your recommendation be for the kids who just fall outside the under 17 group?
As it stands you would have to put them into senior (which the majority arent even close to being fit for) or ask them to train all year for a few under 20/21 games in the Winter?
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 12, 2019, 10:20:02 PM
I like the even age groups up to June/July, give those players a competition then switch to odd ages for rest of year. It also brings Feile to a nice conclusion. That way each age get a chance playing in their 'stronger' year and the 18 year olds can play adult if they want.
Young players don't get enough games. That's one of the biggest issues.
Last year burnout was the issue!!
Quote from: Taylor on November 13, 2019, 12:20:25 PM
What would your recommendation be for the kids who just fall outside the under 17 group?
As it stands you would have to put them into senior (which the majority arent even close to being fit for) or ask them to train all year for a few under 20/21 games in the Winter?
Fair enough. Ideally, they should be starting with the adults at Junior or whatever. We all did it back in the day, and it was an education! ... And we did it at 16! I accept there's a gap, but adult clubs should be bending over backwards to accommodate lads when they come out of minor/U17 ... if they've made it that far, they're footballers of some level of ability and interest. The clubs need to look after them, not waste time whining about Co Board or Croke Park.
As it happens, in Offaly the U20 club football is in early Spring, so your 18-yr-old is straight into it. It's straight knock-out, so it's short, but yes, any 18-year-old should be training and playing with the adults. He's been playing for 10+ years, let him off ....
Quote from: This Years Model on November 13, 2019, 12:55:49 PM
Quote from: Taylor on November 13, 2019, 12:20:25 PM
What would your recommendation be for the kids who just fall outside the under 17 group?
As it stands you would have to put them into senior (which the majority arent even close to being fit for) or ask them to train all year for a few under 20/21 games in the Winter?
Fair enough. Ideally, they should be starting with the adults at Junior or whatever. We all did it back in the day, and it was an education! ... And we did it at 16! I accept there's a gap, but adult clubs should be bending over backwards to accommodate lads when they come out of minor/U17 ... if they've made it that far, they're footballers of some level of ability and interest. The clubs need to look after them, not waste time whining about Co Board or Croke Park.
There is a world of difference between the physicality of adult football now and say even 10 or 15 years ago. Some players just out of U17 are nowhere near ready for it physically and it shouldn't be their only option for football.
If a club can't put out two adult teams, then they've got fundamental problems, and that's maybe another issue. The thirtysomethings should be hanging in there for the sake of the club to keep the thing rolling. And yes, any 18-year-old should be able to join the Junior panel. Why wouldn't he? If he does need to be minded in training, fine ... the club and team managers should be mature enough to handle something like that. Any 18-year-old who wants to keep playing football is only itching to play with the big boys surely?
Quote from: This Years Model on November 13, 2019, 01:17:57 PM
If a club can't put out two adult teams, then they've got fundamental problems, and that's maybe another issue. The thirtysomethings should be hanging in there for the sake of the club to keep the thing rolling. And yes, any 18-year-old should be able to join the Junior panel. Why wouldn't he? If he does need to be minded in training, fine ... the club and team managers should be mature enough to handle something like that. Any 18-year-old who wants to keep playing football is only itching to play with the big boys surely?
Fundamental problems?
Can I ask how many members are in the club you are in?
To field two teams means you need at least 40 adult players - this simply isnt viable in many many areas.
So what we are saying is that if a club cannot field two teams every 17 year old+ is expected to play away with the senior team regardless of their physical development.
With some people thinking this way it is no wonder many clubs voices are being ignored
Quote from: This Years Model on November 13, 2019, 01:17:57 PM
If a club can't put out two adult teams, then they've got fundamental problems, and that's maybe another issue. The thirtysomethings should be hanging in there for the sake of the club to keep the thing rolling. And yes, any 18-year-old should be able to join the Junior panel. Why wouldn't he? If he does need to be minded in training, fine ... the club and team managers should be mature enough to handle something like that. Any 18-year-old who wants to keep playing football is only itching to play with the big boys surely?
That's ideally what you want, a reserve/junior team made up of a mix of young lads coming up, thirty something senior players giving it you their last couple of years and then your eternal reserve players. Old fellas look after the young lads and brings them into the scene nicely. It just doesn't happen anymore though, young lads don't see reserve football as a way in to senior and older lads are holding on at senior longer and retiring out of football completely. It takes a big panel of players to keep 2 teams going throughout a full year.
Quote from: SkillfulBill on November 13, 2019, 11:46:00 AM
Dinny you make some excellent points in this post. The one however that I would strongly disagree with is the element by which you seem to put a lot of emphasis on not instilling a winning ethos into the underage system. I personally think that by taking this element out you begin to introduce a 5 a side sunday league mentality into underage which will ultimately take the edge of some players. My experience is that this competitive nature is what drives most youth players into senior football. I suppose it comes down to what clubs want do the want to provide a sporting outlet in their community for youth or are they in the business of creating success at senior level. My club experience is that the latter is the over arching reasons for clubs having youth teams.
Not ever player is going to play senior but a healthy club is going to be me more than your senior team. Your volunteers all come from this base, not every kid is cut out for it but maybe that's the kid down the line that will be a great coach, great administrator a great volunteer. You should always be prepared to lose matches but you shouldn't be prepared to win matches at the cost of losing players.
I don't believe competitive underage sport drives winning cultures, there is far too much emphasis on the result and not enough on the performance, if you focus on the performance and work on intrinsic motivating factors, you will find your level and become competitive as a result. It takes time and patience and teams need to be prepared to lose, what's better a for a club an u14 Feile Title or a County Minor Title?
This was an ill-conceived and badly implemented concept. It is detrimental to club football and small clubs as per will be hit hardest.
It is pure pigheadedness to persist with this flawed concept when it is clear to anyone with a bit of sense that it will decrease participation levels at an earlier age than the previous age bands.
Quote from: Keyser soze on November 13, 2019, 04:33:18 PM
This was an ill-conceived and badly implemented concept. It is detrimental to club football and small clubs as per will be hit hardest.
It is pure pigheadedness to persist with this flawed concept when it is clear to anyone with a bit of sense that it will decrease participation levels at an earlier age than the previous age bands.
How?
Leinster gaa with a notice out saying counties must run U13, U15, U17 competitions in 2020
U12, U14, U16, U18 may also be ran as well
There you go. The authorities have spoken
Dinny I'd roll along with the suggestion that the main reason why players stop playing the game in the early teens, is that they just aren't that fond of competitive sport.
But that's a catch 22 situation. There's a hundred other pastimes that aren't sports. Gaelic Games is sport. The attraction for so many other teenagers (to any sport) is that they can quickly measure how good they are, and learn how they can improve.
The concept of ensuring the development of sporting skills in people who will never have the competitive spirit to use them, just seems an odd thing to me. This isn't maths or English or indeed any form of transferable life skill.
Of course we might unfurl a few secretaries and treasurers down the line through your methods, but surely that situation is every bit as likely by those candidates wanting to attach themselves to a successful group of peers by any possible means, rather than burdening them and sinking out the door with them.
——
As for late teenagers and the regularly butchered, bastardised and imaginary reasons for their dropout, with this thread again showing that all too many people would look at anywhere but the truth when trying to explain it.
There are two overriding reasons why 18 year olds stop playing Gaelic Games:
1. They are not physiologically wired up to evaluate training 3 times a week as capable of delivering a reward. In short, they can find better ways to enjoy their lives. This doesn't make them lazy, weak or cowardly. It just means that 10-15 hours a week of training and matches doesn't do it for them. Giving them another year of minor football won't affect this.
2. They aren't physiologically wired up to disregard the dangers to their own health. Leave aside the fact that you will inevitably take a thump from time to time, and that you are expected to go head first into a 40:60 challenge even if it means taking a hit. If there's one thing that unites 90% of adult GAA players, it's that they regard not being able to walk properly for a couple of days after a championship match, as a badge of honour, as a sign that they gave everything. This is how you have to be wired up to progress into adult football. If that's not you, then another year of minor football isn't going to be a magic pill. If anything it exposes you to the fact that football gets a little bit more physical at every raise in age level.
I've been involved in B football for 25 years. You can tell by the 3rd or 4th match a 17 year old plays whether he will still be playing at 21 years old.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 13, 2019, 07:13:17 PM
Dinny I'd roll along with the suggestion that the main reason why players stop playing the game in the early teens, is that they just aren't that fond of competitive sport.
But that's a catch 22 situation. There's a hundred other pastimes that aren't sports. Gaelic Games is sport. The attraction for so many other teenagers (to any sport) is that they can quickly measure how good they are, and learn how they can improve.
The concept of ensuring the development of sporting skills in people who will never have the competitive spirit to use them, just seems an odd thing to me. This isn't maths or English or indeed any form of transferable life skill.
Of course we might unfurl a few secretaries and treasurers down the line through your methods, but surely that situation is every bit as likely by those candidates wanting to attach themselves to a successful group of peers by any possible means, rather than burdening them and sinking out the door with them.
——
As for late teenagers and the regularly butchered, bastardised and imaginary reasons for their dropout, with this thread again showing that all too many people would look at anywhere but the truth when trying to explain it.
There are two overriding reasons why 18 year olds stop playing Gaelic Games:
1. They are not physiologically wired up to evaluate training 3 times a week as capable of delivering a reward. In short, they can find better ways to enjoy their lives. This doesn't make them lazy, weak or cowardly. It just means that 10-15 hours a week of training and matches doesn't do it for them. Giving them another year of minor football won't affect this.
2. They aren't physiologically wired up to disregard the dangers to their own health. Leave aside the fact that you will inevitably take a thump from time to time, and that you are expected to go head first into a 40:60 challenge even if it means taking a hit. If there's one thing that unites 90% of adult GAA players, it's that they regard not being able to walk properly for a couple of days after a championship match, as a badge of honour, as a sign that they gave everything. This is how you have to be wired up to progress into adult football. If that's not you, then another year of minor football isn't going to be a magic pill. If anything it exposes you to the fact that football gets a little bit more physical at every raise in age level.
I've been involved in B football for 25 years. You can tell by the 3rd or 4th match a 17 year old plays whether he will still be playing at 21 years old.
Girls, booze and working
3 biggest threats to the gaa team sport for 18 year olds
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 13, 2019, 11:23:35 AM
If clubs focused more on participation than winning numbers falling away would decrease.
1. County boards should run u13, 14, u15, u16 and 17 leagues championships at the same time. Stop sending kids up age grades. I know talented kids that were playing u15 in Spring, u16 and minor in the summer and then u17 in Autumn/Winter. Madness.
2. For clubs that can't play at each age grade focus on the grades where you have numbers but alway make u17 your priority, for e.g if you have 18 u16s but only 7 u17s, you still play u17s only even though your u16 team are all of age.
3. If you don't have an age grade for a kid, let him transfer one year out, e.g. you have a 13 year old but no u13 or u14 team then let him transfer out for one year to another clubs or u13 or u14 team only
4. Look at introducing u18.5 and u20.5 age grades, this helps capture the kids who were July to December and missed out because of relative age affect.
5. If your club doesn't have a an u20.5 team they can play dual status with another club i.e. play adult with your club and u20.5 only with another club.
6. Finally remove all coaches egos, it's ok to lose, stop prioritising winning over loosing. If you have a panel of 25, all 25 get a least half a game.
We as adults are too quick to impose our values on young players, majority of kids play sport to have fun, to be with friends, to belong.....winning is way down the list. When kids lose games they might show disappointment, but that disappointment is not in the losing but the in the belief that they have let down their coaches and parents.
Finally abandon all development squads from u13 to u15. Very few of these kids go on to make it and a lot just give up when cut.
Well said. In the 6 counties I feel half year makes sense so i would go 13.5, 14.5 etc. to let fellas play with their pals. Not sure what way school works in 26.
Quote from: Throw ball on November 13, 2019, 08:37:33 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 13, 2019, 11:23:35 AM
If clubs focused more on participation than winning numbers falling away would decrease.
1. County boards should run u13, 14, u15, u16 and 17 leagues championships at the same time. Stop sending kids up age grades. I know talented kids that were playing u15 in Spring, u16 and minor in the summer and then u17 in Autumn/Winter. Madness.
2. For clubs that can't play at each age grade focus on the grades where you have numbers but alway make u17 your priority, for e.g if you have 18 u16s but only 7 u17s, you still play u17s only even though your u16 team are all of age.
3. If you don't have an age grade for a kid, let him transfer one year out, e.g. you have a 13 year old but no u13 or u14 team then let him transfer out for one year to another clubs or u13 or u14 team only
4. Look at introducing u18.5 and u20.5 age grades, this helps capture the kids who were July to December and missed out because of relative age affect.
5. If your club doesn't have a an u20.5 team they can play dual status with another club i.e. play adult with your club and u20.5 only with another club.
6. Finally remove all coaches egos, it's ok to lose, stop prioritising winning over loosing. If you have a panel of 25, all 25 get a least half a game.
We as adults are too quick to impose our values on young players, majority of kids play sport to have fun, to be with friends, to belong.....winning is way down the list. When kids lose games they might show disappointment, but that disappointment is not in the losing but the in the belief that they have let down their coaches and parents.
Finally abandon all development squads from u13 to u15. Very few of these kids go on to make it and a lot just give up when cut.
Well said. In the 6 counties I feel half year makes sense so i would go 13.5, 14.5 etc. to let fellas play with their pals. Not sure what way school works in 26.
Yeah, gaa at underage should be all the year so that lads can play with their classmates all the way up e.g. everyone born in 2010 should all be on one team.
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 13, 2019, 02:14:30 PM
Quote from: SkillfulBill on November 13, 2019, 11:46:00 AM
Dinny you make some excellent points in this post. The one however that I would strongly disagree with is the element by which you seem to put a lot of emphasis on not instilling a winning ethos into the underage system. I personally think that by taking this element out you begin to introduce a 5 a side sunday league mentality into underage which will ultimately take the edge of some players. My experience is that this competitive nature is what drives most youth players into senior football. I suppose it comes down to what clubs want do the want to provide a sporting outlet in their community for youth or are they in the business of creating success at senior level. My club experience is that the latter is the over arching reasons for clubs having youth teams.
Not ever player is going to play senior but a healthy club is going to be me more than your senior team. Your volunteers all come from this base, not every kid is cut out for it but maybe that's the kid down the line that will be a great coach, great administrator a great volunteer. You should always be prepared to lose matches but you shouldn't be prepared to win matches at the cost of losing players.
I don't believe competitive underage sport drives winning cultures, there is far too much emphasis on the result and not enough on the performance, if you focus on the performance and work on intrinsic motivating factors, you will find your level and become competitive as a result. It takes time and patience and teams need to be prepared to lose, what's better a for a club an u14 Feile Title or a County Minor Title?
Dinny again you make some decent points here and I admire your very holistic approach to player development but again I think you fail to address the reason that clubs put so much effort into youth development it is not to provide youth activities. Regardless of the rights or wrongs of it the primary reason is to channel footballers capable of playing senior football. Any club to be sustainable at senior level requires 2-3 players to bridge the gap to adult football. each year It is not to provide 10 pub league players each year with little or no competitive edge.
Quote from: marty34 on November 13, 2019, 09:28:43 PM
Quote from: Throw ball on November 13, 2019, 08:37:33 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 13, 2019, 11:23:35 AM
If clubs focused more on participation than winning numbers falling away would decrease.
1. County boards should run u13, 14, u15, u16 and 17 leagues championships at the same time. Stop sending kids up age grades. I know talented kids that were playing u15 in Spring, u16 and minor in the summer and then u17 in Autumn/Winter. Madness.
2. For clubs that can't play at each age grade focus on the grades where you have numbers but alway make u17 your priority, for e.g if you have 18 u16s but only 7 u17s, you still play u17s only even though your u16 team are all of age.
3. If you don't have an age grade for a kid, let him transfer one year out, e.g. you have a 13 year old but no u13 or u14 team then let him transfer out for one year to another clubs or u13 or u14 team only
4. Look at introducing u18.5 and u20.5 age grades, this helps capture the kids who were July to December and missed out because of relative age affect.
5. If your club doesn't have a an u20.5 team they can play dual status with another club i.e. play adult with your club and u20.5 only with another club.
6. Finally remove all coaches egos, it's ok to lose, stop prioritising winning over loosing. If you have a panel of 25, all 25 get a least half a game.
We as adults are too quick to impose our values on young players, majority of kids play sport to have fun, to be with friends, to belong.....winning is way down the list. When kids lose games they might show disappointment, but that disappointment is not in the losing but the in the belief that they have let down their coaches and parents.
Finally abandon all development squads from u13 to u15. Very few of these kids go on to make it and a lot just give up when cut.
Well said. In the 6 counties I feel half year makes sense so i would go 13.5, 14.5 etc. to let fellas play with their pals. Not sure what way school works in 26.
Yeah, gaa at underage should be all the year so that lads can play with their classmates all the way up e.g. everyone born in 2010 should all be on one team.
This is not how school years work - they start with July birthdays. Every other sport is graded by calendar year grades of course.
What a lot of you seem to fail to realise is that young players all develop physically, mentally and emotionally at different rates.
Just because a boy or girl doesn't feel that competitive or winning edge at 13 doesn't mean they won't feel it later at 17/18 or 20/21. You complain that you don't have the numbers etc etc but if you don't change your coaching values, your club values and how as a collective you do things, how do expect things to change?
The GAA is suppose to be about community and not only as a pathway to adult sport. Wobbler says he knows after a few Adult B games whether a 17 year old will be playing at 21, a 17 year old who is studying for exams, dealing with hormones, still not physically, emotionally or mentally mature. Have you ever asked yourself why? You need a much broader mind than that.
Well said. In the 6 counties I feel half year makes sense so i would go 13.5, 14.5 etc. to let fellas play with their pals. Not sure what way school works in 26.
[/quote]
the half year grades only make sense until the end of primary school in the north anyway.
Once you go to secondary school it gets all mixed up - you could be the only one in your class from your club if you're from a rural area.
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 14, 2019, 09:52:02 AM
What a lot of you seem to fail to realise is that young players all develop physically, mentally and emotionally at different rates.
Just because a boy or girl doesn't feel that competitive or winning edge at 13 doesn't mean they won't feel it later at 17/18 or 20/21. You complain that you don't have the numbers etc etc but if you don't change your coaching values, your club values and how as a collective you do things, how do expect things to change?
The GAA is suppose to be about community and not only as a pathway to adult sport. Wobbler says he knows after a few Adult B games whether a 17 year old will be playing at 21, a 17 year old who is studying for exams, dealing with hormones, still not physically, emotionally or mentally mature. Have you ever asked yourself why? You need a much broader mind than that.
There has been some mad dog sh*t talked in this thread, [some of it by you Dinny which is a surprise as you are usually fairly sensible], but that by Wobbler takes first prize by a country mile.
Quote from: Too many steps on November 14, 2019, 10:52:39 AM
Well said. In the 6 counties I feel half year makes sense so i would go 13.5, 14.5 etc. to let fellas play with their pals. Not sure what way school works in 26.
the half year grades only make sense until the end of primary school in the north anyway.
Once you go to secondary school it gets all mixed up - you could be the only one in your class from your club if you're from a rural area.
[/quote]
But you could be playing against people from your year in school?
Surely it makes sense for kids to be playing with/against kids from their school year
I'm an underage coach in Armagh and it definitely impacts kids when the half year ends and they are no longer in the same age group as friends that they have played with since they were Under 6.
I do not see any advantage to going U14, U16, U18 over the half years, whereas there is a clear disadvantage in some kids being disillusioned as they no longer get to play with their mates. Why risk that?
Quote from: Keyser soze on November 14, 2019, 10:58:58 AM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 14, 2019, 09:52:02 AM
What a lot of you seem to fail to realise is that young players all develop physically, mentally and emotionally at different rates.
Just because a boy or girl doesn't feel that competitive or winning edge at 13 doesn't mean they won't feel it later at 17/18 or 20/21. You complain that you don't have the numbers etc etc but if you don't change your coaching values, your club values and how as a collective you do things, how do expect things to change?
The GAA is suppose to be about community and not only as a pathway to adult sport. Wobbler says he knows after a few Adult B games whether a 17 year old will be playing at 21, a 17 year old who is studying for exams, dealing with hormones, still not physically, emotionally or mentally mature. Have you ever asked yourself why? You need a much broader mind than that.
There has been some mad dog sh*t talked in this thread, [some of it by you Dinny which is a surprise as you are usually fairly sensible], but that by Wobbler takes first prize by a country mile.
No of us are sensible, we wouldn't be here if we were.... ;D
Quote from: Smokin Joe on November 14, 2019, 11:27:13 AM
I'm an underage coach in Armagh and it definitely impacts kids when the half year ends and they are no longer in the same age group as friends that they have played with since they were Under 6.
I do not see any advantage to going U14, U16, U18 over the half years, whereas there is a clear disadvantage in some kids being disillusioned as they no longer get to play with their mates. Why risk that?
Completely agree.
There is no sense in risking alienating any kids at all.
While it is nice for kids to win the most important thing is keeping them involved with the club and the community
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 14, 2019, 09:52:02 AM
What a lot of you seem to fail to realise is that young players all develop physically, mentally and emotionally at different rates.
Just because a boy or girl doesn't feel that competitive or winning edge at 13 doesn't mean they won't feel it later at 17/18 or 20/21. You complain that you don't have the numbers etc etc but if you don't change your coaching values, your club values and how as a collective you do things, how do expect things to change?
The GAA is suppose to be about community and not only as a pathway to adult sport. Wobbler says he knows after a few Adult B games whether a 17 year old will be playing at 21, a 17 year old who is studying for exams, dealing with hormones, still not physically, emotionally or mentally mature. Have you ever asked yourself why? You need a much broader mind than that.
Dinny what you're suggesting here is that I'm fuelling this dropout, and my "narrow mind" is maybe even actively pursuing it.
If so, it's absolute nonsense. These are not actions. They are observations gained from spending 25 years involved at the entry point to adult football.
Someone else suggests that drink and women are the reason for dropouts. He's wrong. It's not drink and women that's the issue. Nor is it age grades. Some people just don't like competitive sport enough to work hard at it. As mentioned before, this does not make them weak, strange, disappointing, cowardly, or unfulfilled. It's perfectly norma behaviour and is reflected among teenagers in every competitive sport across the world. It's not a GAA issue. It's just people being people.
I played with dozens of senior players who partied hard. But they'd still find a way to make training, and on match days left no quarter given. Because competitive sport was a priority in their life.
When people can accept this simple reality, they can focus on ensuring that players who have that drive are given every opportunity to progress through the ranks, regardless of ability. Clubs will prosper.
Quote from: lurganblue on November 13, 2019, 10:25:18 AM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 12, 2019, 10:20:02 PM
I like the even age groups up to June/July, give those players a competition then switch to odd ages for rest of year. It also brings Feile to a nice conclusion. That way each age get a chance playing in their 'stronger' year and the 18 year olds can play adult if they want.
Young players don't get enough games. That's one of the biggest issues.
Coaching under 10s last year and between go games fixtures midweek and a plethora of blitz's most weekends it actually was difficult to fit in training sessions to help develop skills.
I realise this is different to other age categories.
Thank god we are not the only coaches that felt this. Unreal amount of running around after our clubs U10s this year. Instead of weekly go games next year it may be better to host blitzes every 4 weeks and get a batch of clubs together and being more selective on which tournaments we attend.
Quote from: Taylor on November 14, 2019, 10:59:25 AM
Quote from: Too many steps on November 14, 2019, 10:52:39 AM
Well said. In the 6 counties I feel half year makes sense so i would go 13.5, 14.5 etc. to let fellas play with their pals. Not sure what way school works in 26.
the half year grades only make sense until the end of primary school in the north anyway.
Once you go to secondary school it gets all mixed up - you could be the only one in your class from your club if you're from a rural area.
But you could be playing against people from your year in school?
Surely it makes sense for kids to be playing with/against kids from their school year
[/quote]
It depends on how they've been conditioned up to that point.
I'm all on for academic years up to P7 as then yes you'll by and large have kids in the same school friendship groups even if you've more than one primary school feeding into the club.
In most rural clubs playing up years is a given but they get used to playing, training and mixing with kids not in their class but they're neighbours all the same to the change to calendar years isn't really an issue.
These changes won't have an impact one way or another in that regard, but now we've a group of U17's out of U16 who the only game time they'll get is at U17 and if you're the weaker code in a county with limited teams there might not be a whole pile of fixtures to sustain development or you're playing the same team 3 or 4 times in the year.
This in fairness has always been the case but at least they'd be more challenged playing at U18 than U17 as 17 year olds.
I wouldn't just be so hasty at writing any kid or young adult off. I've seen too many young superstars fall by the wayside to be replaced with lads who'd have shown very little in the juvenile ranks but flourished in adult games.
But the point Wobbler does make about being prepared to make the sacrifices, put the effort in to make a senior grade or even reserves is pretty evident to me as well.
There's no fix for it in some kids as they just don't see the reward or maybe a lack of encouragement/role models at home or a mixture of both.
If you grow up in a house where going out training or games two, three times a week either by a parent, older siblings, or even a group of close friends that you're part of means that its part and parcel of your life and no big deal.
If you're not exposed to that even through the juvenile ranks then it's easier to drop away when things do get more demanding on you.
Quote from: Taylor on November 14, 2019, 10:59:25 AM
Quote from: Too many steps on November 14, 2019, 10:52:39 AM
Well said. In the 6 counties I feel half year makes sense so i would go 13.5, 14.5 etc. to let fellas play with their pals. Not sure what way school works in 26.
the half year grades only make sense until the end of primary school in the north anyway.
Once you go to secondary school it gets all mixed up - you could be the only one in your class from your club if you're from a rural area.
But you could be playing against people from your year in school?
Surely it makes sense for kids to be playing with/against kids from their school year
[/quote] [/quote]
If you are always playing for / against kids in your year those with July and August birthdays always have an advantage over those born in May and June in both schools and club football.
Having schools football and club football with different cut off points gives everyone a chance somewhere.
Heard from a man involved at underage with a Roscommon club that they're changing to u 13, 15, 17 and 20.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 14, 2019, 01:27:14 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 14, 2019, 09:52:02 AM
What a lot of you seem to fail to realise is that young players all develop physically, mentally and emotionally at different rates.
Just because a boy or girl doesn't feel that competitive or winning edge at 13 doesn't mean they won't feel it later at 17/18 or 20/21. You complain that you don't have the numbers etc etc but if you don't change your coaching values, your club values and how as a collective you do things, how do expect things to change?
The GAA is suppose to be about community and not only as a pathway to adult sport. Wobbler says he knows after a few Adult B games whether a 17 year old will be playing at 21, a 17 year old who is studying for exams, dealing with hormones, still not physically, emotionally or mentally mature. Have you ever asked yourself why? You need a much broader mind than that.
Dinny what you're suggesting here is that I'm fuelling this dropout, and my "narrow mind" is maybe even actively pursuing it.
If so, it's absolute nonsense. These are not actions. They are observations gained from spending 25 years involved at the entry point to adult football.
Someone else suggests that drink and women are the reason for dropouts. He's wrong. It's not drink and women that's the issue. Nor is it age grades. Some people just don't like competitive sport enough to work hard at it. As mentioned before, this does not make them weak, strange, disappointing, cowardly, or unfulfilled. It's perfectly norma behaviour and is reflected among teenagers in every competitive sport across the world. It's not a GAA issue. It's just people being people.
I played with dozens of senior players who partied hard. But they'd still find a way to make training, and on match days left no quarter given. Because competitive sport was a priority in their life.
When people can accept this simple reality, they can focus on ensuring that players who have that drive are given every opportunity to progress through the ranks, regardless of ability. Clubs will prosper.
This article might give you something to think about, you can change your thinking after 25 years , I wonder where Nemo would be now if they only picked the competitive boys at 13,14,15.....
https://www.irishnews.com/sport/gaafootball/2018/02/22/news/we-don-t-care-if-we-lose-ye-will-all-get-a-game-joe-kavanagh-on-nemo-s-famous-underage-policy-1261352/ (https://www.irishnews.com/sport/gaafootball/2018/02/22/news/we-don-t-care-if-we-lose-ye-will-all-get-a-game-joe-kavanagh-on-nemo-s-famous-underage-policy-1261352/)
Quote from: LooseCannon on November 15, 2019, 07:27:31 AM
Heard from a man involved at underage with a Roscommon club that they're changing to u 13, 15, 17 and 20.
We had a U20 Championship last year and this year.
Didnr hear anything official about switching to 13/15 byt I suspect we have to do what HQ wishes these days.
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 15, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Dinny this thread is about the change age grades. Some people have managed to convince themselves that it will increase dropout rates. My personal opinion is that it won't affect them. The evidence I've seen before my eyes is that the majority of 17 year olds require little coercion in either direction - those that get their kicks from competitive sport will stick at it, those that do not, will not.
Your idealistic attitude to sport is in many ways admirable, but your last few posts are going off on their own tangent.
But while we are here, for the life of me I don't fathom how blunting the competitive edge in youngsters will make them suited to adult sport.
A huge club like Nemo is always going to have 15+ oversized, overgrown players at every grade capable of dominating matches by themselves. They have to take care that their smaller and lighter players aren't sacrificed, as eventually those oversized youngsters will usually become normal sized young adults. But this isn't relevant for 99% of clubs in Ireland. Having 20 willing under-13 footballers, without having to dig into the 12s and 11s, is once in a generation stuff for a large number of clubs. If you have only 10 of these, do you really want them to treat Gaelic Games as a social? I can't see what can be gained from this approach.
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 15, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Very hard to keep 16/17 year olds involved if there isn't some sort of ambition of winning games and competitions
Might as well be at home on the couch otherwise
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 15, 2019, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 15, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Very hard to keep 16/17 year olds involved if there isn't some sort of ambition of winning games and competitions
Might as well be at home on the couch otherwise
Theres a difference between being competitive and winning. If skills have been developed properly from an early age then lads should be equipped to compete at u13/15/17/19. Doesnt mean they need to be winning everything but winning has to be possible. If they dont develop these skills they will take hammerings in these grades and soon fade away. We need to equip these lads to be able to compete.
Quote from: SpeculativeEffort on November 15, 2019, 08:46:30 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 15, 2019, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 15, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Very hard to keep 16/17 year olds involved if there isn't some sort of ambition of winning games and competitions
Might as well be at home on the couch otherwise
Theres a difference between being competitive and winning. If skills have been developed properly from an early age then lads should be equipped to compete at u13/15/17/19. Doesnt mean they need to be winning everything but winning has to be possible. If they dont develop these skills they will take hammerings in these grades and soon fade away. We need to equip these lads to be able to compete.
Sorry Dinny your Non compete methods aren't getting much support on here. The whole grading ethos is there to ensure teams can be competitive at their level. The Gaa is built on competition and winning. When you remove the possibility of winning lads lose interest.
What happens below under 13 if these proposals are accepted? For instance our club has teams at U6, U8, U10 and U12. do we change that as well to U11, U9, U7
Quote from: lurganblue on November 16, 2019, 08:36:08 AM
What happens below under 13 if these proposals are accepted? For instance our club has teams at U6, U8, U10 and U12. do we change that as well to U11, U9, U7
It's up to the counties to decide themselves below U13.
We've put a motion into Armagh convention this year suggesting that we operate U7.5, U9.5 and U11.5, which we thought was the best way to transition to U13.
Would U12, U14, U16 and U19 work?
Quote from: SkillfulBill on November 15, 2019, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: SpeculativeEffort on November 15, 2019, 08:46:30 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 15, 2019, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 15, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Very hard to keep 16/17 year olds involved if there isn't some sort of ambition of winning games and competitions
Might as well be at home on the couch otherwise
Theres a difference between being competitive and winning. If skills have been developed properly from an early age then lads should be equipped to compete at u13/15/17/19. Doesnt mean they need to be winning everything but winning has to be possible. If they dont develop these skills they will take hammerings in these grades and soon fade away. We need to equip these lads to be able to compete.
Sorry Dinny your Non compete methods aren't getting much support on here. The whole grading ethos is there to ensure teams can be competitive at their level. The Gaa is built on competition and winning. When you remove the possibility of winning lads lose interest.
I may be wrong here but I think you are misinterpreting the whole thing here. All matches are competitive. People want to win but research shows that over competitive win at all costs coaching discourages kids from participating. The GAA is in a position where they need to keep people involved to help clubs survive. The best way to achieve this the evidence suggests is to ensure participating is more important than winning up to a certain age. Kids and adults play sport for the fun. Only a few can win trophies. If winning at all costs was the most important thing then why do people bother about 5 a side , playing snooker, pool or darts. Heading out for a round of golf etc. Why do people bother playing for the club that never wins anything? Sport is about participation, friendship and recreation. At its core the GAA epitomises this.
Quote from: Throw ball on November 17, 2019, 01:00:25 AM
Quote from: SkillfulBill on November 15, 2019, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: SpeculativeEffort on November 15, 2019, 08:46:30 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 15, 2019, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 15, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Very hard to keep 16/17 year olds involved if there isn't some sort of ambition of winning games and competitions
Might as well be at home on the couch otherwise
Theres a difference between being competitive and winning. If skills have been developed properly from an early age then lads should be equipped to compete at u13/15/17/19. Doesnt mean they need to be winning everything but winning has to be possible. If they dont develop these skills they will take hammerings in these grades and soon fade away. We need to equip these lads to be able to compete.
Sorry Dinny your Non compete methods aren't getting much support on here. The whole grading ethos is there to ensure teams can be competitive at their level. The Gaa is built on competition and winning. When you remove the possibility of winning lads lose interest.
I may be wrong here but I think you are misinterpreting the whole thing here. All matches are competitive. People want to win but research shows that over competitive win at all costs coaching discourages kids from participating. The GAA is in a position where they need to keep people involved to help clubs survive. The best way to achieve this the evidence suggests is to ensure participating is more important than winning up to a certain age. Kids and adults play sport for the fun. Only a few can win trophies. If winning at all costs was the most important thing then why do people bother about 5 a side , playing snooker, pool or darts. Heading out for a round of golf etc. Why do people bother playing for the club that never wins anything? Sport is about participation, friendship and recreation. At its core the GAA epitomises this.
Try telling this to underage coaches and parents along the line...lol.
Quote from: Throw ball on November 17, 2019, 01:00:25 AM
Quote from: SkillfulBill on November 15, 2019, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: SpeculativeEffort on November 15, 2019, 08:46:30 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 15, 2019, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 15, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Very hard to keep 16/17 year olds involved if there isn't some sort of ambition of winning games and competitions
Might as well be at home on the couch otherwise
Theres a difference between being competitive and winning. If skills have been developed properly from an early age then lads should be equipped to compete at u13/15/17/19. Doesnt mean they need to be winning everything but winning has to be possible. If they dont develop these skills they will take hammerings in these grades and soon fade away. We need to equip these lads to be able to compete.
Sorry Dinny your Non compete methods aren't getting much support on here. The whole grading ethos is there to ensure teams can be competitive at their level. The Gaa is built on competition and winning. When you remove the possibility of winning lads lose interest.
I may be wrong here but I think you are misinterpreting the whole thing here. All matches are competitive. People want to win but research shows that over competitive win at all costs coaching discourages kids from participating. The GAA is in a position where they need to keep people involved to help clubs survive. The best way to achieve this the evidence suggests is to ensure participating is more important than winning up to a certain age. Kids and adults play sport for the fun. Only a few can win trophies. If winning at all costs was the most important thing then why do people bother about 5 a side , playing snooker, pool or darts. Heading out for a round of golf etc. Why do people bother playing for the club that never wins anything? Sport is about participation, friendship and recreation. At its core the GAA epitomises this.
Every club has its day eventually, at some level
Otherwise the club is just a social sporting club
Quote from: Throw ball on November 17, 2019, 01:00:25 AM
Quote from: SkillfulBill on November 15, 2019, 09:07:01 PM
Quote from: SpeculativeEffort on November 15, 2019, 08:46:30 PM
Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 15, 2019, 08:28:21 PM
Quote from: Dinny Breen on November 15, 2019, 03:13:50 PM
Quote from: thewobbler on November 15, 2019, 12:54:39 PM
Dinny you've replied to my comments on why 17 year olds drop out of sport, by citing an article about an under-14 policy in a club falling down with players.
This is not the same thing.
There may be come correlation here, but unless Nemo are also keeping their stronger juvenile players on board as well, and playing junior football while their old teammates "jump ahead" of them, then it's the same situation anyhow.
You were talking about teenagers when I quoted you not specifically 17 years old. I think your attitude is wrong and symptomatic of why clubs are struggling with numbers. Unless a kid is competitive at x, y, z age he won't play adult sport to me is simply mind boggling. Since when did playing sport solely become about winning? No wonder clubs are dying on their feet.
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html (https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/sport/493869/open-letter-a-young-player-s-view.html)
Very hard to keep 16/17 year olds involved if there isn't some sort of ambition of winning games and competitions
Might as well be at home on the couch otherwise
Theres a difference between being competitive and winning. If skills have been developed properly from an early age then lads should be equipped to compete at u13/15/17/19. Doesnt mean they need to be winning everything but winning has to be possible. If they dont develop these skills they will take hammerings in these grades and soon fade away. We need to equip these lads to be able to compete.
Sorry Dinny your Non compete methods aren't getting much support on here. The whole grading ethos is there to ensure teams can be competitive at their level. The Gaa is built on competition and winning. When you remove the possibility of winning lads lose interest.
I may be wrong here but I think you are misinterpreting the whole thing here. All matches are competitive. People want to win but research shows that over competitive win at all costs coaching discourages kids from participating. The GAA is in a position where they need to keep people involved to help clubs survive. The best way to achieve this the evidence suggests is to ensure participating is more important than winning up to a certain age. Kids and adults play sport for the fun. Only a few can win trophies. If winning at all costs was the most important thing then why do people bother about 5 a side , playing snooker, pool or darts. Heading out for a round of golf etc. Why do people bother playing for the club that never wins anything? Sport is about participation, friendship and recreation. At its core the GAA epitomises this.
Personally I try to win in all of these, to varying degrees of success.