Underage Grades

[Dinny Breen]

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?

[Keyser soze]

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. 

[thewobbler]

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?

[manfromdelmonte]

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

[thewobbler]

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.

[manfromdelmonte]

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

[Throw ball]

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.

[marty34]

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.

[SkillfulBill]

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.

[DuffleKing]

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.

[Dinny Breen]

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.

[Too many steps]

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.

[Keyser soze]

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. 

[Taylor]

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

[Smokin Joe]

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?