Youth sports needs its own economic stimulus package

When President Obama put together his stimulus package earlier this year, any money that went to schools came with one caveat — that it not be used for anything that is primarily used for sports. Perhaps it’s time to rethink that position.

Up2Us, a coalition of school- and community-based youth sports, released a report on Oct. 21 that noted last year sports programs were cut collectively by $2 billion nationwide. It met in Washington during that time to discuss the implications of these cuts, and how to get Washington and other lawmakers to pay attention to what havoc they might wreak. “The ‘ripple effect’ of these budget cuts will extend far beyond the playing fields, and represents a loss for children and youth physically, emotionally, and academically,” said Paul Caccamo, executive director of Up2Us, in a written statement. “Sports participation isn’t just about improving your serve or throwing a touchdown pass, but about instilling lifelong, positive character traits like strength, commitment, and dedication.”

It would seem like losing sports seems like a small price to pay if academic programs are otherwise saved. And as far as the $2 billion in cuts, the organization doesn’t note its overall starting base, nor how the cuts compare to paring of academic programs. Certainly, Up2Us, given its membership, has a vested interest in spreading the word that things are dire. And, hey, if things are so bad, why are so many communities still making grand plans for youth sports complexes?

The problem is this: while there are plenty of parents still willing to fork out whatever is necessary to make sure Tad and Muffy get a place on the travel for that elusive college scholarship, there are also plenty of children whose access to youth sports is economically limited to school or community programs. If those get cut, more at-risk children are suddenly left with nothing but time on their hands. We’re going to go back to the 19th century, when participation in sports had more to do with your upper-crust standing than your athletic talent or desire.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune in March did a good series that looked at falling sports participation rates and looked at a lack of opportunity in many schools — both for intramural and varsity sports — as a big factor. Public schools under budget strains are being forced to consider either making major cuts in sports or levying pay-to-play fees on athletes, both of which have the effect of weeding out potential athletes who are stuck in a sports-less district or whose families can’t come up with the money for sports.

I’m a big believer in youth sports. Maybe not that they’re the sole way to prevent obesity and turn delinquents into contributing members of society, but I think they do have a purpose beyond concussion distribution. Still, I would be hard-pressed to tell a school district it should cut teachers in favor of new artificial turf, or that federal stimulus money should pay to gas up the basketball team’s bus for an out-of-state tournament.

Instead, I think there’s a strong case to be made for some sort of stimulus for community sports programs and intramurals. Yes, I coach in a community sports league, so maybe I have a bias. But if the goal is to save sports and get as many children involved as possible, it’s not varsity athletics that needs our attention. Why not, for example, give grants to communities so they can reduce the price of children’s athletic programs, or so they can expand their offerings? What about a tax break for eligible youth sports expenses? (By that I mean sign-up fees and equipment for publicly run programs, not writing off the thousands you spent on your daughter’s personal softball pitching coach.)

And why not make funding available to schools, from kindergarten upward, to finance and develop intramural programs? Hey, I have a bias there, too. My two oldest children transferred from a Catholic school with organized sports to a public elementary school that didn’t have them — but had intramurals. They love them. Everybody who shows up gets to play, and it’s more about the activity then investing your time and energy in some future pro dream. Plus, the only time parents are there is after it’s over, to pick up their kids. I only wish my oldest son’s junior high had intramurals, because if you get cut from a school team, you have no other athletic options. Plus, with intramurals, you don’t have to pay to gas up the team bus.

[youtubevid id=”-4T26x6GZEw”]

Dan Hawkins, I’m right there with you, brother.

An angry football mom's sign of trouble

There is a pattern to how little misunderstandings involving youth sports turn into the raging contretemps that end up in blogs such as this.

First a child and parent are blithely going along in the course of a season. Then a team representative announces, clumsily, a sudden change in the arrangement that should have been handled earlier. Then the parent and/or child goes batshit crazy whether or not the team digs in its heels. And then smart-alecks like me write it up.

That’s the pattern playing out in Berlin Heights, Ohio. Eighth-grader Keegan O’Brien started football place at Berlin-Milan Middle School. The school comes back and says, oh by the way, Keegan shouldn’t be on the team because his poor seventh-grade marks made him ineligible. His mother, Amy Ortner, responds by demanding a refund from the school for the $70 she spent on a physical and football shoes, which she said was a lot for someone out of work such as herself. Then, in the coup de crazy, she put a marquee in her front yard that reads “Berlin Football– Shame Shame– We Dont Play Those Kind of Games.” (I presume the letters she got for the sign didn’t come with apostrophes.)

[youtubevid id=”5znh58WITU8″]

Joe South feels you, Amy.

According to the Sandusky Register, this sign has been up for about a month, and it doesn’t appear to be coming down any time soon — not with a school levy vote coming up in November.

For about a month, a marquee in Amy Ortner’s front yard has displayed messages critical of the football program. It has drawn the attention of people traveling this busy stretch of highway and an offer of money to take it down, which Ortner characterized as a bribe.

Mark Suhanic, who made the offer, said he was just trying to give Ortner what she wanted and acting not as a school board member but on behalf of a friend. [The friend is the operator of a nearby orchard who thought her sign was bad for his business.]

“I just wanted it to go away. I guess you could look at it as a bribe, paying her off, but she was very adamant that she wanted the money,” Suhanic said. “She wanted the money, and there was a guy willing to pay the money.”

She didn’t take the money.

…Ortner said Suhanic told her he was concerned her sign — which she borrowed from a friend — made the schools look bad in advance of a levy vote next month.

“I’m mad that the only reason they’re worried is because of the levy,” she said. “They’re not worried about the justice of taking a kid off of a team after he’s been part of it for two months.”

Suhanic said rules are rules, and the levy isn’t the only reason he wanted the sign taken down.

“Any bad publicity isn’t good any time. It happens we do have a levy going on,” he said, “but most people don’t understand what this has been about, and she hasn’t been forthcoming in explaining to people.”

It appears the school screwed up in two ways. The first was not following Ohio High School Athletic Association rules about informing players and parents about the ineligibility rules. According to the OHSAA guidelines:

3-1-4 Within two weeks of the beginning of each sports season, the principal, through his/her athletic
administrator, coaches and such other personnel as deemed advisable by said principal,
shall conduct a mandatory, preseason program with all student-athletes who wish to
participate in the upcoming sports seasons, their parents and booster club officers. The
meeting shall consist of (a) a review of the student-eligibility bulletin and key essential eligibility
requirements; (b) a review of the school’s Athletic Code of Conduct; and (c) a
sportsmanship, ethics and integrity component.

The second mistake was the administration’s, ham-handed handling once it realized it had made an oopsie. Maybe the school could have refunded the money. Or it could have come up with a way to let Keegan play while not sacrificing the school’s academic integrity. For example, it could have set up an arrangement that might have given Keegan a clean slate for this year, but giving strict guidelines about the minimum grade-point average he would need to keep his place on the team.

Of course, with the month-long sign tirade she has under way, Amy Ortner doesn’t sound like the most reasonable parent in the world to deal with. Yes, she did get wronged by the school. But you can’t help but think if she put this much effort toward in school in figuring out how to raise her son’s grades, he might be far better off. And whether he would be allowed to play football wouldn’t even be an issue.

But then I wouldn’t have anything to write about, would I?