Is it just me??

Here, too.

 

Until I see it in MLB - and I hope I don't - I'll assume it's not going to become a part of the fabric of the game. It's a fad.

Could not agree more.  Saw it first time, first hand last night at son's first varsity scrimmage.  Incredibly lame. Opposing coach shouting out 4 digit numbers all night.   You guessed it...they got smoked.  Shoulda spent whatever time they spent on those cheat sheet/wrist bands and learning the system on fundamentals of baseball instead.  Glad you posted this.  I got a good chuckle out of seeing this.  As Bryce Harper might say, "that's for clowns, bro!" (I adapted his actual quote, I know).

The use of the "quarterback sleeve" for numerical communication is not new, it's just a different way of giving signs. It's virtually impossible to steal signs when an opponent is using this system, and therefore it is very common throughout the game. I am surprised when I see coaches NOT using this method, as it requires the same amount of difficulty to learn as does "regular" sign giving. It's far from a fad, it's better than visual signs. 

 

 

I saw this from several teams this last week. Sons college team played 6 games, 4 of them used this system. 

 

I did not like it at all. I can imagine opposing teams fans yelling out random numbers in a similar cadence.I found it annoying.

J H - which MLB teams are using it?

This would be much better

 

There's no need for anything close to this at the big league level. Advance scouting and technology that is available to the coaching staff for MLB teams is so far beyond that of any amateur coaching staff, they are able to provide much more specified information pertaining to game plans and execution. Coaches relaying signs, whether verbally, numerically, or visually, is the most simplified version of advance scouting. When teams pour millions of dollars into resources that provide such detailed information, the form of communication necessitates a change as well. 

A few examples:

 

A catcher calling games knows exactly what each pitcher's attributes are, as well as the appropriate way to attack each hitter, based on scouting reports. A first base coach knows how long each pitcher takes to deliver to home plate, as well as each catcher's pop time, as well as the opposing pitcher's tendencies, as well as his own runner's speed and baserunning capabilities. Same for defensive positioning. Advance scouting provides such information that such visual signs are unnecessary. Major League coaching staffs are much bigger than amateur coaching staffs and Major League teams have a lot more information available to them than amateur teams. 

 

Comparing coaching tendencies in this manner is apples to oranges. If amateur coaches had access to as much information as MLB coaches do, they wouldn't have to relay signals each play. If MLB coaches lacked access to the information, they'd find the best way to relay the information so that the opposition doesn't figure out their plan. 

 

I am surprised when I see amateur coaches relaying visual signs. Numerical signs are just as easy to communicate, and provide a lot more "safety", if you will.

 

Coaches in my area choreograph every move.  For example, for every pitch the coach calls the pitch, location, pick off attempt (including which pickoff move), how many looks pitcher gives to base runner, how long to hold the ball before the pitch, slide step or leg kick, catcher back-pick.  Every pitch…Add to that bunt coverage, defensive alignments…a lot of stuff going on.  If you manage a game in that detail you need a complex system to communicate.

I'm referring to high school coaches.

It's not just you saying that it slows the game down.  But lots of people saying that doesn't make it true.  If you actually put a stop watch on the activity and compare it to the traditional method, you'll see that sleeve is faster-- doubly so if the signs are first sent from the bench and then relayed by a base coach.

 

It does add to the tedium of being a bench player, since trying to decipher the numbers doesn't bear fruit.

When my son was in high school they went to the wristbands. They missed more signs with the wristbands than without. It was tossed after three weeks. The umpires hated it too. The hitters were always stepping out of the box to figure out the correlation between the numbers and what was on their wristband. My son hated it because it made him take his eyes off the pitcher when he preferred to be reading his moves. When physical signs came from the third base coach he could look through the pitcher for the signs, get the sign and focus on the pitcher instead of looking down at his wrist. 

To be sure, I may have been a little flippant in my response above and don't mean to disrespect any hard working, quality programs (HS, college or other) that use this system.  I'm sure there are others much smarter and more focused on its merits than I.  I'm also sure that there are programs that gain an edge because of it. But, I guess I am old school and like the game the way it is and just think it is "goofy" (sophisticated word, but you get it) and distracting to hear coaches barking out all night long and doing their Peyton Manning imitations (I've not heard "Omaha...Omaha"...yet).  Moreover, if a program is going to use such a system, that suggests a certain level of sophistication, and by all means you'd better field a team that is otherwise fundamentally sound.  If not, I will laugh.

I'm not a fan but I'm also not sure if it's just because I'm old.  There will be a day where no umps are behind the plate and a computer will provide 100% accuracy.  I won't care for that either but it's coming Someday.

The operating systems will be taking over. You could even date one (the movie Her set in 2025). I've always thought Scarlett Johansson's looks are overrated. But what a sexy voice. She was the voice in Her.

 

Sure . . . because calling ball or strike is the only decision the home plate umpire makes and the only function he performs.  

 

The game is played under the jurisdiction of umpires.  Technology may give umpires better tools, but parents and coaches will always need a live body behind the plate to blame the losses on.

I know a top 25 D1 school who uses the wrist band. The pitching coach flashes number sequences to the catcher before every pitch. Also, a team in our district uses same method, however, coach does call out numbers. Annoying? A bit, but can't argue the results. They were state runners-up in 2012 and state champs in 2013.

Honestly, I like it and should be quicker than traditional signs.  May not always be the case because the coach hasn't thought ahead to what he wants to do. So he thinks, looks then gives numbers - that will take time.  But how many coaches will run through 10,000 signs especially when it's a non-sign time.....like the first batter of the game or when you're down 8 runs.  You're not going to bunt then so why flash signs (or call out numbers)?  That's what slows down the game.

Personally, the wristband doesn't bother me either. In the past, I have called pitches for specific batters or in specific situations only (no wristbands though). Then, I turn the reigns over to the catcher in all other situations. I'm okay with giving my catchers that responsibility. They learn the game a lot quicker that way imo.

I was a football guy and coach for many years before coaching baseball. So when I first started to use signs as a coach it took about two games for me to hate traditional baseball signs. I started using a number system like my offensive coordinated used in collage and tweaked it for baseball. It's basically a three digit system with no wrist bands. We use a lot of different things as the indicator for which of the three digits are to be used. It's very simple very quick and very easy to change if an opposing coach picked up on it. No one has yet but I wish one would because I think it would be fun to give some false information hahaha. Anyway I just think yelling for example 476 and all the base runners and hitter know what to do is much easier than rubbing all over myself and hoping the player sees the indicator.

Agree.  Three digit system for defense (1st & 3rd, bunt sits) with no wrist bands is basic and simple.  4 digit system, with wrist bands, on offense with 3b coach shouting out 4 digits between pitches - which is what I saw this weekend - is a different story, IMO.

What I don't like about it. The coach that screaming out numbers from the 3b box every single pitch of the entire game. Regardless of the game situation. Three two count no one on, bases loaded full count, etc. The coach yelling coach yelling out his numbers to the catcher while another is yelling defensive numbers the entire game. Players looking down at wrist bands as the pitcher is in the wind up. Can you coach your players and teach the game? Or do you use the system to control every aspect of the game? Hindering player development? Creating robots who know how to read a wrist band but have no clue why and learn no feel for the game?

I'm sure some coaches just use it to replace standard signals. But my experience has been most use it to create a freaking circus. But then again it could just be I'm too old school.

Bottom line is the kids are not being taught the game at an early age. I have received kids the past few years, as in coming freshmen, who literally do not know how to hold a baseball to throw it. I start on day one with "This is a baseball…" speech. I am having to take SO much time with basic principles of the game. I have in place to start putting on clinics not for the kids, but for the little league dad/ "coaches".

 

What I find to be the MOST entertaining out of this whole ordeal is inheriting these kids who have been poorly coached over the years. More so hearing these dad's (who poorly coached them to begin with) blabbing how the game isn't being managed correctly, through the fences, at our varsity games. BWAHAHAHA! Okay, okay, I digress. Simply put, TEACH THE KIDS HOW TO PROPERLY PLAY THE GAME AT AN EARLY AGE!

"...in coming freshmen, who literally do not know how to hold a baseball to throw it."

 

I wondered if anyone else has had this experience!  I am constantly amazed by this.

 

When I used to coach Little League, my first year I was several games in to the season before I realized what the kids were doing.  From then on, it became point # 1 at practice # 1 to teach the 4-seam, 2-finger grip. 

 

There are two things at the root of this.  First, many youth leagues actually teach a 3-finger grip or a whole-hand grab to very young players on the reasoning that "their hands are just smaller."  I can only imagine that someone who never played thought that up.  Because with two fingers and a thumb on the ball, you can control it no matter what your hand size.  It's the same principle as a 3-legged stool.

 

The other root of the problem is that kids are constantly told "there is no one right way," or indulged in doing what they find most comfortable.  When it comes to grip, there is indeed only one right way (unless you're pitching).  If you tell a kid to go with what's comfortable, he'll do what he's always done, because anything new feels uncomfortable at first.  (Some kids will even mess up their throws intentionally to try to get the coach to let them go back to the way they have always done it.)  The cure is to force the kids to throw correctly so that it becomes what is comfortable and automatic.  The younger the better; it's easier to start off right than to go years building bad habits and then try to change them.

 

Note that a key part of that second thing is that the kid is being encouraged to disregard and disrespect the coach and his instruction.  Now, if we could solve THAT problem, the world would be a better place.  But instead, as you note, we have parents setting the example of disrespecting the coach.

 

The one advantage to high school ball is, you can cut those kids.  I say, let's do that --and let them and their problem parents do their grousing from their sofas at home!

I know we're getting off topic but the first thing I learned when I started coaching HS baseball was never assume anything. It became very clear very early that things I was sure kids should know many did not. And many of the things that didn't matter they were experts at. The most important thing is for a young player to get a solid baseball foundation to build on. Instead many are doing everything else but that before the HS years.

We use them and have for 4 years.  Why don't they go to MLB, maybe because there are 35,000 yelling fans.  Oh and to the guy that said he saw someone use them at get smoked, that is incredibaly lame.  We use them and we are considered a powerhouse in our area.  Oh and by the way we have not missed a sign since we put them on and the signs don't get picked.  I have even played a coach that had 3 players write eveything down and he told me after the game he still had no idea what we were doing.  Also in regards to the fans yelling out random numbers, LOL, it happens all of the time.  My players are not dumb enough to get that confused.  There is nothing wrong with change.  The problem with purists is that change scares them and they think it takes away from the game.  What does it take away?  Why is it so evil?  I should also say I am one of the few coaches in the area that allows my catcher to call his own game. 

I understand what you're saying ... and JP's coach at 11-13 used verbal number schemes. I understand it -- I just don't like it. Not because I'm a purist, but really, for a couple reasons:

- Yelling number schemes on every play inserts the coach into the middle of the game constantly. Even fans can't ignore the constant voice. I prefer the quieter, more contemplative coach who says little but gets his point across.

- It potentially sets boys up for failure later, when they play for a program that EXPECTS them to remember ALL the signs.

 

I actually think that if your school is a powerhouse, it would be one with or without using these new approaches.

That's awesome; I'm very happy for you.  Glad to hear how well it is working for you and your team.  Best of luck.

 Kid's can be like sponges, if this means enough to you that you want to teach it and implement it into your system I believe it can work without too many problems. When I would introduce a new pick-off play to my kids, they would gather around with wide open eyes and in a couple of practices they could at it to their arsenal. So if you have a group of focused kids and dedicated parents the sky is the limit on what you chose to teach and how good you want to be at it.  I think some conversations are hard to discuss on here, because of all of the lower level of ball that is played across the country. I usually called the game, but I would turn it over to the catcher as soon as I could. I would give him the green light on throwing to bases, until they proved to me they couldn't handle it. But it's like anything else, you tend to be good at what you practice on.

LOL, that is funny...."If this means enough to you that you want to teach it."  Seriously that makes me laugh.  If by teach you mean to take 10 seconds to show them how to read the card then I guess your right.  I did it because my assistant coaches coach the bases but I run the offense.  HS coaches used to be able to stand outside of the dugout and a few years ago were told we could no longer do that.  Well I wasn't going to step in and out of the dugout, nor was I going to relay signs to a base coach to relay signs to a hitter so I switched to the wristband.  I am not in love with the wristband, it doesn't "mean enough to me"  I switched it because it was easier and we don't ever miss signs.  BTW before I hear a sob story from someone about me making them learn them we only missed a couple signs every year.  However, with the wristband we have missed 0 signs in 4 years.

Yelling number schemes on every play inserts the coach into the middle of the game constantly. Even fans can't ignore the constant voice. I prefer the quieter, more contemplative coach who says little but gets his point across.

So yelling number schemes on every play inserts the coach in the middle of the game but giving signs does not?  What am I missing here.  Just because someone says numbers doesn't mean that the are not quiet and contemplative.  In other words if I put my fingers up as opposed to yell them out I guess you would think that was ok.

- It potentially sets boys up for failure later, when they play for a program that EXPECTS them to remember ALL the signs.

 Well I currently have 4 players in college and pro ball and I after this post I sent a text to all of them with this exact question and they all said no it did not hurt them.

I actually think that if your school is a powerhouse, it would be one with or without using these new approaches.

I agree.  I just thought it was foolish that someone made reference to a team they saw using them and getting smoked.

  I didn't see the funny that you did. I was the guy agreeing with you that it can be done well. Maybe it's more difficult than what your saying after all.

No, it's pretty cut and dry… "DOWN! SET…" (at this point the whole offense stands straight up and looks over to the sideline. After about 10-15 seconds wasted because the coach obviously didn't know what call to play beforehand, the coach proceeds to call a play that produces the exact same progress as if the QB would have simply called in the huddle. The offense then goes through the reset process and the QB starts his cadence all over again.) OH WAIT! We weren't talking about boring and pathetic play calling in football were we? 

 

My beef isn't with the catcher wristbands.  That is pretty straight forward and seems to move the high school and college games I've been at.  My beef is with the batters taking a "walkabout" after every pitch to adjust themselves, check the 3rd base coach signals, re-check the 3rd base coach signals, take a couple shadow swings, take a deep breath then get in the batters box again, take some half swings.....and wait for the pitch.   They do this after every pitch.  I would like to see the batter's box electrified during an at bat.  If you leave the batters box during your at bat.....you get a shock!   JMO.   

Just a Texan with internet and a football helmet on, but "DOWN, SET" locks the defense into it's players, the upstairs OC looks at the match ups, relays a play and a check play to the coach, who signals to the QB, who calls it to the team.

And that's in middle school down here.

--oooops, saw coach3 is in texas also.  and probably my sons head coach.  ----

Fenway, I wonder if you got that upset when Nomar was playing? Just asking.

Absolutely drove me bat-sh*t crazy!  Nomar had the added "fix the velco and straps on the gloves" routine after every pitch (even if he didn't swing).  He had issues.  I think the game needs to flow at the rhythm of the pitcher, just as tennis flows to the speed of the server. Umpires are giving too much leniency to hitter.   If the pitcher is ready the game should move forward.  JMO

 

 

After the Giants won the WS in 2012 and Pablo Sandoval blew up (the good way, not the way he did last year)  I was PU a few LL Majors games. On a couple teams, every dang kid who came up would draw some runes in the dirt with his bat, do a hop-skip into the box, then re-adjust the gloves and squish the helmet onto the noggin, then do it all over again on every subsequent pitch.   It was pretty hilarious until it got old.

+1 on Fenway's electro-shock batter's box. Modified dog collar technology is maybe a good working model starting point.  Let's get this patented immediately.

 

Go44dad is kidding a bit with the football stuff, but not really!  That's my issue with the numbers system... It's not the system used, it's the overuse of coaching direction in the course of game play. There's (supposed to be) a flow to this game, and over coaching interrupts this... whether it's at the plate, on the mound, or in the field.  I understand why coaches are doing it... they're trying to win ballgames and ultimately this trumps the time and patience players need... ie letting players fail and learn the game more deeply in their own skin.  Its like that Jeter cutoff relay down the first base line that I've been sick of seeing for years; there's no sign or number sequence for that... that's just reading the game flow in real time based on knowing the game from experience.  When players are looking at a coach every pitch, they're not really in the flow of the game.  It sort of reminds me of the over coached kid who looks at dad in the stands before and after every big event.  Fine for mindless football players who are somewhat necessarily cogs in the machine, but not baseball.  JMO 

Overall I agree with you on going on the pitchers pace but there are some pitchers that allow everyone to age a few years between pitches.  But the hitters need to chill with all the theatrics.

 

The reality of the situation is that the wrist bands don't slow the game down anymore than a coach going through a long series of signs slow the game down.  The purpose of wrist bands is to become "pick proof" with your signs and speed the game up.  If it's not speeding the game up then it's because you have coaches who don't know how to use it correctly.  The reason football uses them is to help speed up the offense and get more plays per game than using a huddle.  So if they use them to speed up games then baseball can to if they know how to use them.

 

Practice time you will spend a lot less time on this than using signs but unless the player is a mouth breather they will pick up signs if they move on to a program that does them.  At the end of the day it's not rocket science either way.