Parent Tips for Approaching the Coach About Playing Time

Strongly agree!  Completely insane

The only thing I would say to my kid's coach is "Thank you".  The only exception would be if there were injury concerns to discuss

He forgot to mention DO NOT  under any circumstances take the meeting if you are instructed to bring your kid's uniform with you to said meeting.  Maybe he contracted for 3 articles and was running up on a deadline some Sunday after watching NFL and drinking brewskies (sp?) all day.

What is it specifically you all find so objectionable about a parent talking to a coach about playing time?

If a parent is paying a lot of money for a child to play on a travel team, on the small or intermediate diamond (and maybe at 13 to 14u level, tops), I could see super-respectfully bringing up to the coach in private. Otherwise, it is a total non-starter. That said, there have been plenty of skilled players who don't get "fair" treatment and playing time on big diamond teams for a host of reasons (good, bad, and ugly). Or as I like to say, if your kid is on the outside looking in, it can be tough and they might not get a chance.

Stats4Gnats posted:

What is it specifically you all find so objectionable about a parent talking to a coach about playing time?

Probably because at every parents meeting with every coach of every team my son has ever played on, the coach at some point says "I won't talk to parents about playing time."

Stats4Gnats posted:

What is it specifically you all find so objectionable about a parent talking to a coach about playing time?

Promise I am not trying be a smart a$$. I would recommend you read the following article. Great advice for all parents and even more so for parents who want to jump in and speak with teachers, coaches, parents, employers, etc. There are most definitely exceptions but they should be reserved for situations that no teenager should have to handle on their own.

http://www.businessinsider.com...ave-by-age-18-2016-4

For most teams my son has played on since turning 13, the coaches have preferred to have the PLAYERS approach the coach to ask something like "what can I work on to help me to improve (to get more playing time)" rather than have that awkward meeting with the parents.  At the very least this would be a better starting point than going straight to a parent - coach meeting.  Parents can learn a lot about where their son stands in the coach's eyes from that initial feedback the coach gave to their son.  Even if a meeting must still be scheduled, it can be a lot more focused and potentially productive with that initial feedback from the coach in mind.  And all of these interactions with the coach are always better when NOT done within 24 hours after a game (aka "the 24-hour rule").  Just my 2 cents worth.

coachld posted: Promise I am not trying be a smart a$$. I would recommend you read the following article. Great advice for all parents and even more so for parents who want to jump in and speak with teachers, coaches, parents, employers, etc. There are most definitely exceptions but they should be reserved for situations that no teenager should have to handle on their own.

http://www.businessinsider.com...ave-by-age-18-2016-4

And I promise I’m not trying to be a smart a$$.

I couldn’t read the article in its entirety because it wanted me to turn off my ad blocker which I won’t do. But, from what I could glean from what little I could read, I take it the article was about how the current generation doesn’t know how to communicate one on one because of being pampered. I agree that the vast vast vast majority of youths below the age of 19 communicate poorly in a face to face situation, but for that matter so do the vast majority of adults.

You noted that there are most definitely exceptions, but the impression I got from the 1^st responses to the OP were that there were no exceptions.

Sorry. I was already familiar with the article so just did google search and picked the first one. It really is a great read, if you can find it without so many ads.

I don't  doubt the article is a good one, but what does it have to do with a parent meeting with a coach to discuss his/her child?

I don't understand the "don't talk to the coach" attitude for young players.  If a 12U (maybe 13U and 14U too) or younger isn't getting playing time, or playing 2 innings a game or sitting complete games in a weekend tournament, watching this go by for months isn't a good strategy.  Sure you could pull your kid off the team and go somewhere else, but is this an adult thing to do without at least discussing it with the coach?  I don't see a problem at all with asking a coach what his plan is for my kid to get more playing time, and if that doesn't match what I think my kid needs then we'll let him know we're moving on.  It seems that a total communication blackout is unnecessary and probably rude.

Smitty28 posted: I don't understand the "don't talk to the coach" attitude for young players.  If a 12U (maybe 13U and 14U too) or younger isn't getting playing time, or playing 2 innings a game or sitting complete games in a weekend tournament, watching this go by for months isn't a good strategy.  Sure you could pull your kid off the team and go somewhere else, but is this an adult thing to do without at least discussing it with the coach?  I don't see a problem at all with asking a coach what his plan is for my kid to get more playing time, and if that doesn't match what I think my kid needs then we'll let him know we're moving on.  It seems that a total communication blackout is unnecessary and probably rude.

 There’s a lot of parents out there who have handled this situation badly, but there’s also a lot of coaches who’ve done the same and that’s unfortunate. It’s not unfortunate that it happens. It’s unfortunate that for the most part it could be avoided if there were better communication on everyone’s part.

Smitty28 posted:

I don't understand the "don't talk to the coach" attitude for young players.  If a 12U (maybe 13U and 14U too) or younger isn't getting playing time, or playing 2 innings a game or sitting complete games in a weekend tournament, watching this go by for months isn't a good strategy.  Sure you could pull your kid off the team and go somewhere else, but is this an adult thing to do without at least discussing it with the coach?  I don't see a problem at all with asking a coach what his plan is for my kid to get more playing time, and if that doesn't match what I think my kid needs then we'll let him know we're moving on.  It seems that a total communication blackout is unnecessary and probably rude.

Fair enough, but the article was on the website of the National Federation of State High School Associations, so I believe it was about approaching high school coaches.

Iowamom23 posted:

Stats4Gnats posted:

What is it specifically you all find so objectionable about a parent talking to a coach about playing time?

Probably because at every parents meeting with every coach of every team my son has ever played on, the coach at some point says "I won't talk to parents about playing time."

EXACTLY!

Agree with everyone else.....and again, it was an NFHS letter sent to HS athletic directors....so I'm basing my comments on that.

1) Every sport my kids played in HS, daughter played 4 years of VB, 2 of BB.....son played 4 of baseball and soccer....had a pre-season parent meeting.  I'm thinking it's required in Ohio...maybe everywhere.   EVERY single one the coach said "if you have questions, have your child ask me first...then if it's not resolved we can meet.....but I will not discuss playing time".

2......see #1

Paying to have your son play travel is another story....though again, a preseason parent meeting is still a great idea...and we always did that on the teams I ran/coached

Stats4Gnats posted:

I don't  doubt the article is a good one, but what does it have to do with a parent meeting with a coach to discuss his/her child?

5. An 18-year-old must be able to handle interpersonal problems

The crutch: We step in to solve misunderstandings and soothe hurt feelings for them; thus, kids don't know how to cope with and resolve conflicts without our intervention.

6. An 18-year-old must be able to cope with ups and downs

Courses and workloads, college- level work, competition, tough teachers, bosses, and others.

The crutch: We step in when things get hard, finish the task, extend the deadline, and talk to the adults; thus, kids don't know that in the normal course of life things won't always go their way, and that they'll be okay regardless.

That was written by a coach who sent the article to his parents directly after the "I don't have conversations about playing time" speech at the team meeting. 

Buckeye 2015 posted: Agree with everyone else.....and again, it was an NFHS letter sent to HS athletic directors....so I'm basing my comments on that.

 “HS athletic directors” can and often do include oversight of 7^th and 8^th graders which can and may be 11 years old.

1) Every sport my kids played in HS, daughter played 4 years of VB, 2 of BB.....son played 4 of baseball and soccer....had a pre-season parent meeting.  I'm thinking it's required in Ohio...maybe everywhere.   EVERY single one the coach said "if you have questions, have your child ask me first...then if it's not resolved we can meet.....but I will not discuss playing time".

I had two children go through various HS sports, and I’ve sat in on many a pre-season parent meeting and never once heard a coach state unequivocally that s/he would never discuss playing time. I’ve heard them often say they would never discuss another player’s PT which is understandable.

2......see #1

Paying to have your son play travel is another story....though again, a preseason parent meeting is still a great idea...and we always did that on the teams I ran/coached

The article was written by someone with outstanding bona fides. And if you read the article closely, it’s pretty easy to see that while it was written with school athletics in mind, the “tips” could be applied to anything from Little League to college sports.

Buckeye 2015 posted:

Agree with everyone else.....and again, it was an NFHS letter sent to HS athletic directors....so I'm basing my comments on that.

1) Every sport my kids played in HS, daughter played 4 years of VB, 2 of BB.....son played 4 of baseball and soccer....had a pre-season parent meeting.  I'm thinking it's required in Ohio...maybe everywhere.   EVERY single one the coach said "if you have questions, have your child ask me first...then if it's not resolved we can meet.....but I will not discuss playing time".

2......see #1

Paying to have your son play travel is another story....though again, a preseason parent meeting is still a great idea...and we always did that on the teams I ran/coached

Same at our school.  During the parent meeting, the lines of communication are made very clear.  Player to Coach first, Parent w/Player to Coach second, Parent w/Player to AD w/ Coach3rd, the entire group with Principal 4th.  According to the AD the principal thiing only happened once.

Just don't..... My daughter had  to miss a tourn this past weekend and she wanted me to talk to her coach about it. I told her no she needed to handle it (she is in JrHigh).  She did and it went well. Her playing time was cut some the following week and I was good with that and so was she.

Buckeye 2015 posted:

 

Paying to have your son play travel is another story....though again, a preseason parent meeting is still a great idea...and we always did that on the teams I ran/coached

I think when you're paying for a team, it is a little different than a HS team because you're paying for exposure (another word for playing time). But all those teams my son has done have involved tryouts and placing kids on teams where their skills matched the level of the games. And truthfully, for travel ball, I couldn't talk to the coach because I don't have a clue which of the many guys running around the facility IS the coach. And I'm fine with that.

coachld posted:  5. An 18-year-old must be able to handle interpersonal problems

The crutch: We step in to solve misunderstandings and soothe hurt feelings for them; thus, kids don't know how to cope with and resolve conflicts without our intervention.

1. An 18-year-old must be able to cope with ups and downs

Courses and workloads, college- level work, competition, tough teachers, bosses, and others.

The crutch: We step in when things get hard, finish the task, extend the deadline, and talk to the adults; thus, kids don't know that in the normal course of life things won't always go their way, and that they'll be okay regardless.

I don’t disagree that there are things all 18YOs would be well served to learn about how to deal with, but again, the same thing can be said for people of all ages.  It’s a process that takes place at different paces for different people.

 Ideally, a player(no matter what the age) will have the understanding to talk to the coach/manager himself and have the wherewithal to do it appropriately. But that ASSUMES every coach/manager will have the wherewithal and patience to do his job appropriately as well. That’s not at all an indictment of coaches, but let’s not leap to the conclusion that all coaches will act appropriately any more than we’d expect every player or parent to do the same.

 All I’m saying is, every situation’s different, so blanket statements shouldn’t be made. Every team I’ve ever heard of has some kind of line of communication set up, with some being more strict than others. But there’s always a way to communicate, which is what we’re talking about.

It seems to me that if my son doesn't have a relationship in which he can talk to the coach about playing time, he doesn't have a relationship in which he will learn, which begs the question — why is the guy his coach?

I always told the parents, at the preseason meeting, to ask their son first why they don't get as much playing time, and if the son doesn't know, then he should talk to me. If, after that, the parent still doesn't know, I'd be more than happy to discuss with them. Never once had to have that discussion--my players knew where they stood.

-42

joes87 posted:

Buckeye 2015 posted:

Agree with everyone else.....and again, it was an NFHS letter sent to HS athletic directors....so I'm basing my comments on that.

1) Every sport my kids played in HS, daughter played 4 years of VB, 2 of BB.....son played 4 of baseball and soccer....had a pre-season parent meeting.  I'm thinking it's required in Ohio...maybe everywhere.   EVERY single one the coach said "if you have questions, have your child ask me first...then if it's not resolved we can meet.....but I will not discuss playing time".

2......see #1

Paying to have your son play travel is another story....though again, a preseason parent meeting is still a great idea...and we always did that on the teams I ran/coached

Same at our school.  During the parent meeting, the lines of communication are made very clear.  Player to Coach first, Parent w/Player to Coach second, Parent w/Player to AD w/ Coach3rd, the entire group with Principal 4th.  According to the AD the principal thiing only happened once.

 

 

This is exactly correct.  This is very typical of the general guidelines put in place across the majority of HS's and for very good reason.  In fact, many schools/AD's take it a step further and have the policy the they will discuss any issues parents have EXCEPT playing time.  The multitude of reasons have been discussed here in depth in the past.

It is bizarre that NFHS has this article posted when this goes against HS policy almost everywhere.

The author has an area of expertise and the dynamics of the school/parent/administration/student athlete relationship is not what that area is.  The fact that he doesn't even mention the idea that the player should first talk to the coach is a good indication as to how far off base from reality he is in regards to this particular topic.  

You nailed it, Cabbage. By the way, it's not just sports -- if there is a problem in the classroom, I also want my high school aged son and daughter talking with the teacher themselves.

2019Dad posted:

You nailed it, Cabbage. By the way, it's not just sports -- if there is a problem in the classroom, I also want my high school aged son and daughter talking with the teacher themselves.

Agree, 2019, but the author makes it a direct comparison, implying that just as you would talk to the teacher about struggling in class, you should talk to the coach.  Well, while I agree with the premise that coaches are teachers, there are still distinct differences.  There is no competition for playing time in the classroom.  If you successfully do the work and pass the tests, you pass.  Sports are voluntary.  School/classwork is not.  Etc., etc.

Still, your point is sound.  The HS student should make every effort to determine the proper path to succeeding in the classroom and identifying resources for help.  They certainly should be learning how to go about finding their own way by this point.  I would, however, be quicker to step in/monitor classwork than I would any voluntary sport or activity.  

cabbagedad posted: This is exactly correct.  This is very typical of the general guidelines put in place across the majority of HS's and for very good reason.  In fact, many schools/AD's take it a step further and have the policy the they will discuss any issues parents have EXCEPT playing time.  The multitude of reasons have been discussed here in depth in the past.

It is bizarre that NFHS has this article posted when this goes against HS policy almost everywhere.

The author has an area of expertise and the dynamics of the school/parent/administration/student athlete relationship is not what that area is.  The fact that he doesn't even mention the idea that the player should first talk to the coach is a good indication as to how far off base from reality he is in regards to this particular topic.  

Please point out exactly what in that article you think is bad or wrong. Notice the title of the article isn’t only about playing time, it’s about tips for parents from the AD for approaching the coach about playing time.

Although I’d love to see a policy that says PT will not be discussed, I don’t doubt an AD or would refuse to do it unless a strict procedure had been followed. But somehow I suspect that’s another one of those blanket statements precisely for the multitude of reasons that might exist.

The article isn’t an attack on coaches trying to denigrate them and reduce their power! It’s an article suggesting to ADs some ideas s/he can pass on to parents to help them communicate with the coach in a productive manner. As I asked above, precisely what is it in that article you find so offensive?

Playing time should be spelled out up front, that being said if you are paying hundreds to thousands of dollars for a travel team and your son gets 10% of the playing time you should approach the coach. 

IMO the high school coach is off limits.

just going to leave this right here as my answer to the whole topic. 

Stats4Gnats posted:

cabbagedad posted: This is exactly correct.  This is very typical of the general guidelines put in place across the majority of HS's and for very good reason.  In fact, many schools/AD's take it a step further and have the policy the they will discuss any issues parents have EXCEPT playing time.  The multitude of reasons have been discussed here in depth in the past.

It is bizarre that NFHS has this article posted when this goes against HS policy almost everywhere.

The author has an area of expertise and the dynamics of the school/parent/administration/student athlete relationship is not what that area is.  The fact that he doesn't even mention the idea that the player should first talk to the coach is a good indication as to how far off base from reality he is in regards to this particular topic.  

Please point out exactly what in that article you think is bad or wrong. Notice the title of the article isn’t only about playing time, it’s about tips for parents from the AD for approaching the coach about playing time.

Although I’d love to see a policy that says PT will not be discussed, I don’t doubt an AD or would refuse to do it unless a strict procedure had been followed. But somehow I suspect that’s another one of those blanket statements precisely for the multitude of reasons that might exist.

The article isn’t an attack on coaches trying to denigrate them and reduce their power! It’s an article suggesting to ADs some ideas s/he can pass on to parents to help them communicate with the coach in a productive manner. As I asked above, precisely what is it in that article you find so offensive?

Here's the article...

cabbagedad posted: First, as I said, the piece doesn't even include the important prerequisite of the player first trying to talk to the coach and figure out where he stands and why on his own.  Stats, do you not think this is important enough to mention in such an article?

 As a matter of fact I think it’s extremely important, but I also know every kid, every parent, and every coach is different. Should it happen? I think it definitely should. If a player doesn’t approach the coach 1^st should it preclude a parent from talking to the coach? Absolutely not. Would it have been nice to mention in the article? Sure. But then again, I don’t know if the author sees it as something all that important.

In the opening paragraph, the article clearly implies that a parent talking to a coach about son's PT can improve their chances for more PT.  I associate with well over 100 fellow HS coaches (and more than a handful of AD's), most of whom are well qualified, and I can tell you this just isn't true.

You’re correct! That 1^st paragraph does exactly what you said. It clearly implies that a parent talking to a coach about son's PT CANimprove their chances for more PT. It doesn’t imply that it WILL. What you’re saying is, there is absolutely nothing that any parent can say to any coach anywhere that could possibly improve the kids chances for more PT. It might be rare, but to me a blanket statement that it can’t is really stretching it.

The article gives tips that the AD should share with parents when talking to the coach about their son's PT.  Well, if an AD is employing a HC, he/she should at least have the confidence that the HC is better qualified to make PT decisions for the team than a parent of a specific player on the team who is currently not playing.  So, that AD should, as a policy, support the coach and immediately diffuse the issue by telling the parent that PT decisions are in the hands of the HC.  They are with the players collectively every day and that is their job.  Stats, do you not agree with that position?  Even if the coach is not what you would consider a strong coach, wouldn't you agree that supporting the  decisions of the coaching staff (regarding PT) would be better than opening it up to allowing a parent to be influential in playing time decisions?  Any time the AD and/or administration opens the door to those types of complaints, kaos ensues.  I've seen it happen dozens of times and the results are without exception.  That said, I think AD's should be checking in on each HC/program often enough to assure that their continued confidence is warranted.

I agree an AD should definitely have confidence that a HC is qualified to make those decisions and as a policy support the coach. But that’s not the same thing as a policy that says the coach is unconditionally right in every decision, and not only never to be questioned, but never allowed to have any input that might alter his decision.

You seem to be assuming that what will happen in every case, is a parent demands his child gets more PT without any reason other than the parents’ unwarranted demands.

On to the tips... 

The first tip is that parents should first attend practices and see if there are noticeable reasons why their child is not playing as much as they would like.  Well, first off, how many working parents can realistically do this?  If they can get there regularly, how many could conduct such an exercise objectively?  In my experience, a select few can, but those few are not the ones going directly to the coach or AD asking about their kid's PT.    And also, if you are the parent that is disgruntled over your kid's PT and you are suddenly showing up at practices, how's that gonna go over?  With the coaching staff?  With your kid?  With the other players?  Is this going to be a positive thing for the team?  For the program? ... The school?  No.  No.  No.

It doesn’t matter how many parents can do it! Heck, how many parents can get to the games? How many can be objective if they do go to practices? Probably not a very high percentage, but where does it say in the article that a parent should go “directly” to the coach, implying no investigation of any kind?

I honestly don’t understand what the big deal is about parents going to practices. Until my son got his driver’s license, I attended every HS practice. I and a few others sat there and watch what was going on, read books, chit-chatted, as well as other things parents might do in the 4 hours or so of a practice. We were told at the parent coach meetings that talking to players as well as other things weren’t allowed, and as far as I know, no one broke any of those rules. In fact, I remember quite a few times being asked to jump on a mower to mow, or a Gator to drag the field, or to do some other kind of field maintenance.

I’m terribly sorry that your experience isn’t what mine has been, but just like I don’t believe for a second no parent would cause some kind of problem at a practice, I don’t believe it’s a given that there will be problems simply because parents go to practices.

The second tip is to be polite.  Hmmm...  brilliant.  Thanks for the tip - would have never thought of that one.

Are you saying that’s not a good tip? Remember, these are human beings, not all of them have the same grasp of communication skills you possess.

The third tip is to ask specific questions like  “You have mentioned the importance of conditioning, do you have specific advice on how my child can improve in this area?"  Well, that's fine on it's own.   But in the context of a discussion about your son's lack of PT, it just comes across as a thinly veiled excuse as a reason for dialog.  And, why couldn't your son have asked that question?  This goes back to the very important notion that others have stated... A HS kid should be standing on his own two feet and learning how to resolve issues (barring more serious issues than baseball PT).

You keep assuming every kid is at the same point in his maturity and development and can easily communicate with an authority figure. I can tell you that I don’t, but I’ve had over 70 years to develop that particular skill. Yes, a HS kid sure should be able to stand on his own two feet and learning to resolve issues. But does that mean every HS kid has that ability? To me, it’s a part of the learning process.

 The next tip is to leave out other kids in the discussion.  I actually agree with this one for obvious reasons.  So, think about that for a minute...  when it comes right down to it, your kid isn't playing because the coaches have determined that other kids give the team a better chance to compete and win.  So, if you can't talk about how he compares to the other kids, what is there to talk about?  (This is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but certainly has some element of truth.)

You’re taking another leap in your assumption. Are you saying no coach ever wanders from the path and allows his prejudices or biases, or what he’s “heard” about a player to affect his decisions?

The last tip is to say thank you.  Uhhh, OK, thanks ??

Here again, perhaps in your world everyone possesses the social grace to say please and thank you, but in my world that isn’t universally true.

Lastly, the overriding message of the article is for the parent to approach the coach in the spirit of politeness and "work together".  Here is the reality...  those that know enough to have their kids try to work thru it with the coach first end up with the results that 4T2 describes... the player knows where he stands - no need for further discussion with the coach by parents.  And the player doesn't need to be particularly gifted or comfortable with communication to get that information from the coach.  The coach doesn't expect them to be.  Those parents that choose to go directly to the AD or coach on their own are almost always the ones who feel there is politics or their kid is somehow otherwise being "cheated" and any initial attempt at diplomacy, unity or teamwork disappears quickly in those conversations.  

I’m terribly sorry that you feel every coach communicates perfectly, every kid understands everything the way it’s intended, and every parent is some kind of jerk who feel his kid is being cheated, and any attempt to question the coach destroys every team. Does that happen? Sure it does, but to believe it happens in every case is just ludicrous.

Yesterday I sat down with our HC, handed him a copy of the article, and asked him if he knew of any school that had a policy that no parent could ever discuss PT with a coach. He mentioned one of the local schools and I was surprised. Then he told me it was the FB coach who put the policy into effect, and it got him and the AD fired.

Then the HC said he’d love to have a policy like that because he’s sick and tired of A**H*** parents whining about their kids’ PT. I asked how many times in the 4 years he’s been the HC, he had a parent who had followed the tips in the article be a PITA to him or the team. He said none. In his estimation, it was almost always someone who hadn’t attended the team meeting or read the literature presented there. IOW, it was just pure ignorance. Then I asked how many times he had a problem with the same parent. Again he said none.

So it turns out that his limited 4 years of being the HC is far different than yours, which is all I’m saying. Blanket statements are dangerous things to make because things are different everywhere.

Stats, what is it that you see in the article that you feel has so much merit or value?  What circumstances do you see where it makes sense for a parent to talk to a coach without having their kid do so first?

To me, any effort to improve communication is worthwhile, and that’s how I see the article. To me it’s an attempt to have people approach what could be a very emotional and volatile situation in a controlled manner. Some might say civilized manner.

 Here in Ca, the state association is very active in trying to promote good communication in sports. The 1^st link is one that outlines a presentation that I’ve attended many times over the years. Unfortunately, not every sports parent can or will participate, and that’s where the problems begin.

 http://www.cifstate.org/coache...in/pvh/presentations

 This 2^nd link is one that shows everyone what’s expected of them. Again, I’ve been through them many times over the years, but again, it’s not something every sports parents even knows about, let alone is familiar with. If you take the time to look, you’ll notice that communication is a very important part of the whole thing.

 http://www.cifstate.org/coaches-admin/pvh/tools

 I’m really sorry there are so many problems in sports because it’s a damn shame, but problems are there none-the-less. But simply refusing to discuss them or in some cases even admit they exist, sure seems to me like burying one’s head in the sand. I guess it’s my burden to believe that no one is above question, even coaches.

Well, Stats, particularly in light of recent threads, I will try extra hard to keep things civil but I have to point out once again that there are some significant differences from what I said and what you seem to have heard....

 You said...

I agree an AD should definitely have confidence that a HC is qualified to make those decisions and as a policy support the coach. But that is not the same thing as a policy that says the coach is unconditionally right in every decision, and not only never to be questioned, but never allowed to have any input that might alter his decision.

I most certainly did not say or suggest anything close to the coach being unconditionally right in every decision, never to be questioned.  I just said it's a very bad practice to allow parents an open pipeline to talk to a coach or AD about their kid's playing time before the kid talks to the coach first.  Not even remotely close to the same thing.

You said...

 I honestly don't understand what the big deal is about parents going to practices. ..

I'm terribly sorry that your experience isn't what mine has been, but just like I don't believe for a second no parent would cause some kind of problem at a practice, I don't believe it's a given that there will be problems simply because parents go to practices.

I never said it was a big deal for parents to go to practice.  I have no problem with it from my perspective (except that most players won't want their parents there).  The author suggested that " parents should first attend practices and see if there are noticeable reasons why their child is not playing as much as they would like."  Well, this implies that the parent is not currently attending.  My point was that if a parent suddenly showed up, only after there was issue with son's PT, this would likely raise flags and cause discomfort.  

You said...

You keep assuming every kid is at the same point in his maturity and development and can easily communicate with an authority figure.

No, again, not even close.  I was clear in stating that the kid didn't have to be polished or comfortable talking to a coach and, furthermore, that the coach wouldn't expect him to be.

You said

You're taking another leap in your assumption. Are you saying no coach ever wanders from the path and allows his prejudices or biases, or what he's heard about a player to affect his decisions?

I didn't say that at all.  I said, regardless of how strong a coach is or is not, he is still the right one to make playing time decisions, particularly as compared to a parent of a player who is not getting playing time.  Not sure how this can be any more obvious.

You said...

I'm terribly sorry that you feel every coach communicates perfectly, every kid understands everything the way it's intended, and every parent is some kind of jerk who feel his kid is being cheated, and any attempt to question the coach destroys every team.

Once again, I did not say or imply anything remotely close to this. VERY, VERY far from any truth to this statement.

As you most likely know, we too are part of CIF.  Our school has a written policy, as do several other schools in our area, that playing time is a subject that is off limits for parents to talk to coaches, AD or administration about.  Other issues, not a problem.  If you can't see the premise behind this policy by now, I don't know what else to tell you.  It has nothing to do with a coach knowing best, etc., etc.

 Even though our school has the policy, I have insisted to our AD that I am more than happy to speak to any parent directly and have done so on many occasions. 

I would still like to hear from you an example of a scenario where a parent should talk to the coach about his/her kid's playing time and what he/she should say.

cabbagedad posted: …I most certainly did not say or suggest anything close to the coach being unconditionally right in every decision, never to be questioned.  I just said it's a very bad practice to allow parents an open pipeline to talk to a coach or AD about their kid's playing time before the kid talks to the coach first.  Not even remotely close to the same thing.

No cabbagedad, that’s not what you said, because if you had, I would have totally agreed. You may have been thinking that, but you never said it.

…I never said it was a big deal for parents to go to practice.  I have no problem with it from my perspective (except that most players won't want their parents there).  The author suggested that " parents should first attend practices and see if there are noticeable reasons why their child is not playing as much as they would like."  Well, this implies that the parent is not currently attending.  My point was that if a parent suddenly showed up, only after there was issue with son's PT, this would likely raise flags and cause discomfort.  

True, you didn’t specifically say that. Here’s what you said: And also, if you are the parent that is disgruntled over your kid's PT and you are suddenly showing up at practices, how's that gonna go over?  With the coaching staff?  With your kid?  With the other players?  Is this going to be a positive thing for the team?  For the program? ... The school?  No.  No.  No.

What you did there was lump every parent who attends practices with the disgruntled parent suddenly showing up. Why should the coaching staff or any of the players be bothered? You’re implying that the parent is somehow gonna be disruptive, when it’s entirely possible they do what I did and just sit there watching.

…

No, again, not even close.  I was clear in stating that the kid didn't have to be polished or comfortable talking to a coach and, furthermore, that the coach wouldn't expect him to be.

Sorry, but it wasn’t clear to me.

But even if that’s what you meant, you make another blanket statement that every coach everSorry, but it wasn’t clear to me. But even if that’s what you meant, you make another blanket statement that every coach everywhere wouldn’t expect him to be.

I didn't say that at all.  I said, regardless of how strong a coach is or is not, he is still the right one to make playing time decisions, particularly as compared to a parent of a player who is not getting playing time.  Not sure how this can be any more obvious.

I have never disagreed that the coach is the right person to make PT decisions. What I disagree with is that the coach never has to communicate with parents as to how those decisions are made. Sometimes the parent truly doesn’t understand and wants to. To me this is just good communication practices.

…Once again, I did not say or imply anything remotely close to this. VERY, VERY far from any truth to this statement.

When you lump everyone into the same basket, to me that’s precisely what you’re implying. Here’s something you said: Those parents that choose to go directly to the AD or coach on their own are almost always the ones who feel there is politics or their kid is somehow otherwise being "cheated" and any initial attempt at diplomacy, unity or teamwork disappears quickly in those conversations.  

“Almost always” doesn’t equate to “always”. I’d agree that those who do that because they feel politics is somehow involved or their kid is somehow being “cheated” will make diplomacy difficult. But why shut out everyone?

As you most likely know, we too are part of CIF.  Our school has a written policy, as do several other schools in our area, that playing time is a subject that is off limits for parents to talk to coaches, AD or administration about.  Other issues, not a problem.  If you can't see the premise behind this policy by now, I don't know what else to tell you.  It has nothing to do with a coach knowing best, etc., etc.

 Even though our school has the policy, I have insisted to our AD that I am more than happy to speak to any parent directly and have done so on many occasions. 

I would still like to hear from you an example of a scenario where a parent should talk to the coach about his/her kid's playing time and what he/she should say.

No, I didn’t know your school is in Ca., but I truly would like to see that policy. Mebbe I can learn something. Would you be kind enough to post it?

The easiest example I can think of is when a regular starter is removed from the lineup because he was late or missed some function, when the reason it happened had to do with academic obligations or some personal family obligation.