So the league that our organization is apart of has always had the “X-man” rule for kids that are over a specific weight. Meaning these kids are only allowed to play on the line of scrimmage in the tackle box. The league did away with X-men rule for this upcoming season meaning now any kid regardless of size can run the ball, play LB, return kicks, etc. With the microscope that youth football is under, and when most leagues are adding rules to protect the kids, I was surprised to see our league taking a rule away that was put into place for safety. I have only ever coached in a league with weight restrictions and I’m curious to know if anybody else had coached in a league without any rules based on weight and if so how does it effect the game and the overall safety of the kids?
I have only ever coached in a league with weight restrictions and I’m curious to know if anybody else had coached in a league without any rules based on weight and if so how does it effect the game and the overall safety of the kids?
It doesn't. There's no proof that unlimited weight youth football is any more dangerous than limited weight.
--Dave
"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."
The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."
#BattleReady newhope
Our League has weight restrictions for Skill Positions. The only issue I ever had was the Weight allowance year after year. They finally acquiesced to 160 pounds in 8th grade. I thought that was still too light. My son was always the lightest kid on the team he weighed 105 pounds soaking wet in pads! We cheered when the Air Bag light finally went off in 8th Grade.
The biggest fear for all is that some Coach putting a 220 pounder at Fullback and "Riding the wave"! However I suggest that 220 pound kid in 8th Grade IS NOT going to be a world beater at Running Back. Your impotence remains putting the best available Kid at the spot they are needed most! Safety has more to do with teaching best technique for the size of the child.
What does that mean? I teach the little guys to "Gator Roll" and Bigger kids to Bite The Ball!
The disparity in weight and size NEVER ENDS. That's one of the things I never understood with restricted leagues. Eventually it comes down to "Mano E Mano" regardless. That needs to start in Junior High. Get them over the "OMG Look how big that guy is" early. Teach them to "Chop the Tree" low to high!
That 105 pound 8th Grader was 195 his Senior Year!. Never Underestimate them! Coach Em Up! 🙂
Not MPP... ONE TASK! Teach them! 🙂
Our local leagues have the patch (x-man) rule until 7th grade. Their reasons for removing the rule in 7th and 8th are as stupid as their reasons for having the rule in the first place, but whatever. I'd rather not have the rule for a stupid reason than have the rule for a stupid reason.
In our last 7th grade Spring season, we played a team with a 200lb, fast, athletic, big butt FB. We had a very hard time tackling him, but no one got hurt and the space-time continuum went about its merry way. We lost that game 2 TDs to 1, and since our offense averaged over 30ppg that season, I can confidently say that he was not the difference in the game.
To answer your 2 questions, removing the x-man rule does not affect the safety of the game one bit. If it did, someone should come up with a rule that doesn't allow kids over a certain weight to block or tackle either.
The second question, I would give your smaller players tools to tackle bigger players. I am a big fan of DP's "Kick Out the Stilts" aka KOTS. Reach out to him. I was working on a video, but ran out of steam on it. I taught it early last season. It looked effective and the kids loved it, but I never visited it again. I still believe in it, though.
Game plan? I got your game plan. We gonna run the bawl some. We gonna throw the bawl some. We gonna play some defense. We gonna run some special teams, but we better not run kick return but one time and we sure as heck better not punt.
Our local leagues have the patch (x-man) rule until 7th grade. Their reasons for removing the rule in 7th and 8th are as stupid as their reasons for having the rule in the first place, but whatever. I'd rather not have the rule for a stupid reason than have the rule for a stupid reason.
The first Rule we are voting on for 2020....drop all patch rules.
What is beautiful, lives forever.
The disparity in weight and size NEVER ENDS. That's one of the things I never understood with restricted leagues.
I don't understand what you mean.
I have only ever coached in a league with weight restrictions and I’m curious to know if anybody else had coached in a league without any rules based on weight and if so how does it effect the game and the overall safety of the kids?
It doesn't. There's no proof that unlimited weight youth football is any more dangerous than limited weight.
Absence of proof is not proof of absence, but my intuition is that there indeed would be no difference if they were tested scientifically. This is one of those cases where supposed concern over safety is a smokescreen for competitive considerations. And even the competitive considerations are exaggerated over the actual evidence, from my limited experience with teams from unlimited and weight-limited circuits, or with different weight limits, playing each other. What makes more difference when such teams play each other is a difference in age limits by even a few months.
The real PITA is leagues or classes with weigh-ins for every game rather than just at registration or one point pre-season. The uncertainty of who's going to be eligible in any given week is a killer, especially if they have to agonize over whether to send them up a class, which depending on the rules may lock them in for the season. Plus just the hassle of having to break your warmups on game day to go to the scale. I had this on the team I coached with in 2007, then was glad to get away from it for years, now back in it starting 2017.
Greetings
Our league dropped the weight limit thing about 10 years ago. Used to be for 3rd - 4th grade was 95 lbs for backs and receivers.
I think we had the biggest back in the league last season at 107 lbs (HB - good blocker & receiver, mediocre runner; mostly he was lead blocker for our FB on belly weak). Our FB (a stud) came at 101.
There was an active debate this season over who was the best back in the league which included our FB, and 3 other kids, none of whom were close to 100 lbs. I believe every coach in our league would like a big back, but come draft time, they're looking for play-makers not chain movers and in the my time here (5 seasons) I can't think of any kids on any team I'd call a big back.
Most times if a big kid is getting the ball, its a lineman getting an 'atta-boy' carry late in the game.
My guess is the fastest, most agile kids will generally come in around an average weight for the age... tho I can think of lots exceptions once puberty kicks in... the usual caveats about sweeping generalities apply.
Umm.... why does that 6 ft tall 9 yr old have a goatee...?
There is in fact scientific proof...we actually did away with our weight limits I guess about 7 or 8 years back, when I found a study done by the...wait for it....Mayo clinic...I was trying to get the weight restrictions removed, because we were losing big athletic kids to other sports.
What the study found...there were actually more injuries in weight restricted leagues than in unrestricted leagues...and the other interesting thing...it wasn't the little kids who were getting injured...it was the big ones.
I just did a quick google search and couldn't find the study, but I will dig it out and send a link.
None of them suck, they just haven't found what the kid is good at yet.
We play in AYF unlimited and have for 15 years. No problems. My son was smallest on the team playing LB and liked the big backs more because they were easier to catch.
We teach tackling at the thighs and knees anyway for the smaller players, so it is no big deal.
Our league has weight restrictions on ball carriers up to the 8U level. This is also the last year coaches are allowed to be on the field. Once we hit 9U, anybody can play anywhere. I agree that this doesn't seem to have much of an impact on injuries. Bad coaching and poor execution of technique and fundamentals seems to be the biggest indicator of injuries that I see.
There are rare instances where we actually see BIG and FAST kids running the ball. When we do we teach the smaller kids to take their ankles out. That coupled with heavy pursuit/gang tackling usually takes care of it.
This is a rather old discussion but it seems relevant to a situation I face. I coach an inner city 10-11 year old team where I help with ball skills, but I have observed the league overall for at least 20 years. In that time the number of players coming out has dwindled, the size and athleticism of our players have become noticeably inadequate, such that on a typical Saturday series against an organization from the suburbs, our 3 younger teams can lose by total of more than 120 points to zero. Moreover, there can be upwards of 20 injury timeouts during a game, and though not all are serious physical injuries, the players often refuse to return to play. Still, serious injury seems inevitable. Even where there may not be a physical toll, psychological damage cannot be ruled out. From my viewpoint the situation is critical, but other coaches don't seem to be bothered by the situation, apart from the fact that we are losing. The league is based on age grades with an X-man rule. Has anyone encountered such a situation? Is there a possible remedy short of telling kids to go play flag or soccer?
"Toughness" (or, "effort/aggression/intensity/physicality") can be coached, taught, retained and developed. Most coaches don't believe that, because most coaches don't know how to teach it. It sounds like your group doesn't try to, perhaps because they never considered it as a teachable fundamental. Regardless, I've seen much of what you talk about with an org that I coached with back in the '90s. They didn't win, had lack of retention, excessive "injuries," etc. We turned that around when we addressed the toughness of our teams. Never looked back after that. You ask if there's a "remedy." Absolutely. Trouble is, most don't know what it is or how to teach it.
--Dave
"The Greater the Teacher, the More Powerful the Player."
The Mission Statement: "I want to show any young man that he is far tougher than he thinks, that he can accomplish more than what he dreamed and that his work ethic will take him wherever he wants to go."
#BattleReady newhope
Thanks for your input Dave. If anything, I feel that there is not enough emphasis on ball skills, which is why I decided to get involved.
Current league rules require that there can only be contact at practices when a physio is present, and the physio is there only once a week. But the simple fact is that our teams are outnumbered, undersized, less athletic and less skilled overall, which is a complete reversal from the situation even 10 years ago. Some of the coaches say it is just a cyclical effect, but I think it is more related to the overall demographic shift of city vs. suburb. Probably the solution would entail a change of grade system. But I am not sure if a new grade system based on weight could remedy this, as I have been told by one coach that moving players up a grade is not an option. Meanwhile, I think that the kids who do come out suffer.
A question, if I may. In case I have the opportunity to teach toughness, how would I go about it?
Latest Post: Former CoachDP player? Our newest member: CoachKDog Recent Posts Unread Posts
