Check out the weekly blogs

Online education from US Youth Soccer

US Youth Soccer Intagram!

Check out the national tournament database

Sports Authority


Capri Sun


Wilson Trophy Company

Nesquik - Great For Team Snacks!

Nike Soccer - Play Now!

Play Positive Banner

Print Page Share

Parents Blog

Susan Boyd blogs on every Monday.  A dedicated mother and wife, Susan offers a truly unique perspective into the world of a "Soccer Mom". 


All About the Money

Susan Boyd

My granddaughter thought it would be a good idea to broadcast all youth sports games so moms and dads who can’t attend the matches can still see their children play. She’s 8, and I’m betting before she’s a parent that’s exactly what will happen. Right now, we have any number of ways to watch games virtually, such as iScore and Gametracker, which create a play by play of a game that can be sent via a link to family and friends. Likewise, there is invariably a team parent who tapes the games and posts them on sites like YouTube. It shouldn’t be too long before technicians figure out how to video and broadcast youth games live. However, when they develop the means to transmit games we begin to cross that threshold into the “professionalism” of youth sports with issues of licensing, costs of delivery, private transmission services, and the possibility of charging for things that are now free. What will technology mean for youth sports?

We don’t have to look far to see the impact of monetary and legal factors on amateur sports. For example, we have a baseball team in my town that plays in one of the summer college leagues. These leagues provide an opportunity for college players to keep up their skills while playing with and against top players in the sport. This particular team is owned by a former Brewer, Robin Yount, and is run like a professional team. There is a mascot, a wide-ranging concessions stand, promotions, corporate sponsors, season ticket holders, team wear, souvenirs, and VIP seating for food and beverage. The money from sales and sponsorships goes into the pockets of the investors. None goes to the players because NCAA eligibility rules state that players can’t profit in any way from their sport. In fact the team must actively recruit host families for team members and these families are responsible for housing and feeding the players. Soccer has the same summer leagues for college players with the USL Premier Development League and the National Premier Soccer League (which pays players willing to forgo their amateur status) allowing NCAA soccer players to keep up their competitive edge during the summer. The United States Adult Soccer Association sponsors some regional and state amateur teams, which participating soccer clubs usually call their Majors team. These can be a mix of college and former pro players, but are completely unpaid. The level of investors in team franchise in these soccer leagues hasn’t reached that of Yount, but I’m positive we’re not far from seeing that happen.

Developing the ability for individual youth teams and clubs to stream their games opens a Pandora’s Box of concerns. While it seems as naively wonderful as my granddaughter’s point of view that loving parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles and friends could see every child’s game, the tough truth is someone will see the opportunity for a profit. Once that happens, companies will attempt to get government regulations, broadcast licenses, software dominance and blocking programs in their portfolio to enforce us all to pay them a fee just to watch our 6-year-old cavort on a soccer pitch. Just consider the professionalizing of high school and college games that has grown in the last two decades into multi-million dollar businesses. My graduate school was University of Oregon, home of the Ducks. I get daily emails from the bookstore touting all the new products that have been released for Duck fans. Every item is licensed by the NCAA, which gets a cut of the sale price. On the flip side, consider EA Sports NCAA Football, which will not have a 2015 edition after a class action suit by Ed O’Bannon and others against EA and the NCAA over the use of their uncompensated likenesses. The NCAA declined to renew their licensing agreement with EA when it expired in June this year in attempt to diminish the effects of the lawsuit. In the meantime, EA Sports settled for $40 million with NCAA football, basketball and baseball players, whose likenesses appeared in video games from 2003 to the present. The lawsuit against the NCAA will add millions to that number should the plaintiffs win that as well. Just Friday, the NCAA board of governors cleared the way for colleges to pay their players by allowing the top five conferences to submit possible rule changes that would include a pay option. I haven’t even touched on the threatened lawsuits over TV licensing profits. How would these affect the convoluted profit formulas for the type of broadcast my granddaughter suggests? Would there be residuals for any replay of a game? Will players all have to sign contracts before they join any youth team, school band, drama club, or any number of opportunities for streaming an event? Will a network control youth sport broadcasts requiring fees for every game we watch? Before you scoff at the ridiculousness of this situation, think about how unbelievable it seemed just a decade ago that any college player would be compensated for their college “career.” Would Rudy have refused to enter the field for that last game at Notre Dame without a media contract? Not then, but maybe now.

While we have this ongoing debate as to whether or not the NCAA should unionize their sports teams and pay them, we are ignoring other aspects of youth sports that provide an uncontested and substantial return to corporations who depend on youth sports for a significant portion of their revenue. Uniform manufacturers purposely retire designs after two or three years on the market in planned obsolescence. Players must purchase new uniform packages frequently, having nothing to do with growth spurts or wear and tear. Even socks get redesigns! Puma, adidas, Nike, Reebok, and Athletico are insuring a steady market. Manufacturers spend millions to develop and market “trends” to youth players that bring in exponential profits. In baseball, it’s the “power” neck chains. In soccer, it’s wristbands for the boys and hair bands for the girls. Don’t get me started on cleats that sprout a new look every six months. Add in the World Cup with flashy footwear rushing around the field, and you have the equation for tens of thousands of new shoe purchases. Youth sports is big business.

We saw the evolution of the term “amateur” in the Olympics over the last two decades. The 1980 “Miracle on Ice” team pulled all its players from the top college hockey squads. Now, 34 years later you’ll find only NHL players. Basketball’s “Dream Team” is culled from the NBA. Even sports that don’t have professional leagues produce athletes with huge endorsement contracts, a major taboo just a few Olympics ago. Therefore, it’s not such a stretch to see professionalism trickle down through the amateur ranks. With all the talk of paying NCAA athletes, the money that can be made off of many sports events even at the youth level, and the possibility for expanding the markets where profits can be made, I don’t think it will be too long before “amateur” will have to require an entirely different definition or not be attached to sports at all. I’d love to be able to see all my kids’, grand kids’, nieces’ and nephews’ games. My niece just won gold at the U.S. Rowing Association Club National Races in Knoxville, Tenn., for a pair boat (two-person). My brother sent me a link with her winning race. The camera didn’t focus on her and her partner until near the end of the race, but it was still a thrill to watch her compete and win. I didn’t need a professional production to share in the celebration. I’m hoping the next time I get sent a link, I won’t have to use my credit card before I can open it.

Comments (0)


Taking It on the Chin

Susan Boyd

Good Grief! The Brewers can’t put a win together and have now fallen to second place in the NL Central Division. My grandson’s high school varsity football team lost badly last Friday night. Then he played Saturday morning on his freshman team and suffered a 47-21 loss. Manchester United seems to be continuing last year’s lackluster effort in the new English Premier League season. But none of this compares to some of the worst (best?) losing records in history. The 2003 Detroit Tigers lost 118 out of 162 games. In the 1972-73 season, the Philadelphia 76ers endured 73 losses out of 82 games. From 1992 to 2009, the Pittsburgh Pirates notched 17 consecutive losing seasons. On Jan. 13, 2007, the California Institute of Technology’s basketball team beat Bard College 81-52, a resounding victory made even sweeter because it snapped a 207 game losing streak that dated back to 1996. I’ve written about winning the last two weeks, however most of us find our kids on teams that toggle between wins and losses. So we really understand the lows nearly as much as we do the highs.

Accepting that losses happen isn’t the same thing as handling them gracefully. I actually think we remember the details of the losses better than the details of a win. We have to rationalize how our team managed to come up short, so we concentrate on the bad calls, the unfair play, the unlucky bounces, and the tough competition. The “if only’s” become the foundation of any post-game conversation. Losses can also send us into a tailspin of funk where we focus so much on the outcome that we forget any semblance of enjoyment. The younger players generally bounce back from a loss, especially if an after-game snack is available. They have more of an immediate investment in any moment getting attracted by whatever shiny object appears in their frame of reference. We parents tend to dwell on losses trying to make sense of them, and certainly dejection looms large when losses come in a string. I’ve been on both ends of the spectrum having lived with a spectacular run of wins and a depressing slew of losses, so I’ve seen the reactions. We parents generally fall into one of four groups, each of which helps us address our disappointments and frustrations.

The first group is what I call the Eeyores, those parents who can’t see anything but the dark clouds on the horizon. Eeyore’s gloomy ruminations are famous in Winnie the Pooh stories.  His idea of optimism is that the worst hasn’t happened yet.  “It’s snowing still…and freezing…However we haven’t had an earthquake lately.”  Parents in this group see a loss as just a precursor to worse outcomes.  “This was an easy team, and we lost.  Think what will happen next week when we meet the league champion.”  “We were lucky to avoid major injuries, but they’re inevitable given how weak the team is.” Even the coach of Cal Tech after the losing streak ended exhibited his Eeyore. He gave into his opinion that despite the win, the future was still bleak, and in the post-game speech went with “Everyone outmatches us in size, speed and athletic ability.  Everyone.” That’s classic Eeyore – embrace the worst.

The second group is “The Defiant Ones.” Unable to accept a loss, these parents insist the team was robbed. “We only lost because the referees were lousy.” “The long grass slowed our game down.” “The other team played dirty.” Rather than figure out what could be improved, these parents argue that the damage was externally visited upon the team. They play the “if only” game better than anyone. If only the refs had been fairer, if only the weather hadn’t delayed the game, if only there hadn’t been mud puddles in front of the goal, and on and on and on, never dealing with the realities. Defiant Ones don’t just rationalize, they out and out argue that the result was based on unfair conditions. The Brewers have been on a losing skid not capitalizing on players in scoring position, fielding badly, and exhibiting lackluster pitching. So I was a bit surprised when the manager, Ron Roenicke, blamed the home plate umpire for the Brewer’s loss to San Diego.  He argued that the umpire, “terrible behind home-plate,” forced the Brewer closer to give up a home run that tied the game in the 9th. San Diego ultimately won. Roenicke complained that the umpire called balls on two pitches which were clearly strikes, compelling his closer to “have to pitch” to the batter. I’m not convinced anyone other than the pitcher was for letting loose a fat one. Of course, had he walked the batter, it might have been less risky than what happened. The pitch was the responsibility of the closer, the catcher, and the manager, not the umpire.  Still, Roenicke’s interview after the game showed that his defiance was in full bloom. He laid the blame for the loss clearly on the shoulders of the umpire.

Down three goals with 20 seconds left, the third group, “The Cheerleaders,” are at their finest. No matter how insurmountable the odds, the cheerleaders keep urging the team onward. They handle losses by hoping for a miracle and encouraging the team to do the same. These are the parents who keep up the positive banter on the sidelines clear to the bitter end. When the kids come off the field, no matter how badly they played, the parents tell them it’s okay and they did great. Rather than let anyone point out what might be adjusted to create a better outcome next time, these parents are content to stick with the status quo, put the best face on it and keep the kids happy. In their world, bringing up improvements implies someone failed so we just need to clap and believe in fairies. Although negative criticism isn’t beneficial, not providing any criticism is equally unproductive. Cheerleaders concentrate so much on making kids feel good, that the kids can’t have honest disappointment. It’s difficult to improve if a team is constantly told that inadequate play is supportable without modification. 

An offshoot of The Cheerleaders and the opposite of The Eeyores are “The Pollyannas.” It’s not so much that they constantly tout everything as wonderful like Cheerleaders, but that they pick one positive aspect and use it to overshadow everything bad no matter how much more honest the bad is compared to the good. Their excessive optimism refuses to accept the facts of an unfortunate situation. In the book, Pollyanna is famous for playing the “Glad Game,” opting to find something to be happy about no matter how dire the situation. Pollyannas are nearly as fatalistic in their positivity as the Eeyores are in their negativity. They sugarcoat losses to the point that you can’t even recognize them as shortfalls for the team. When the team loses, the loss is pushed aside in favor of some sliver of good news. I call them the “at least” crowd. At least the uniforms looked good. At least the rain held off. At least there were bleachers. No matter how trivial the point, these parents opt for a weak silver lining. It’s a sunny outlook but it also ironically clouds the work a team needs to do to create a win. Pollyannas don’t give kids a chance to mourn a loss or talk about it because they are too busy touting some inconsequential piece of the game that went well. 

Aspects of each of these groups can be useful and even welcomed when a team experiences a devastating loss or a string of losses. Being honest about faults like Eeyore helps kids look at a game without minimizing inadequate play. Giving kids a chance to vent with defiance at how unfair some of the game actually was, allows them to distance themselves from the lousy outcome until they are ready to talk about it. Cheering them on, despite the futility of hope, shows kids that we support them no matter what. Finding the good in any disappointment allows kids to take something positive from the experience. The danger comes when we focus too much on any of these types, giving into the group behavior as a way to avoid dealing with a loss and learning from it. Some losses do roll off the backs easily. Losses can shape the character of our players by teaching them how to deal with defeats and to grow from them. 

Last Friday night two Texas high schools, Greenville and North Garland, competed against one another, neither of which had won a game last season. Greenville actually has a 40-game losing streak, one of the longest in Texas history, meaning that many seniors could graduate from the school without ever enjoying a win. No parent would ever wish that experience on their child in the name of forming character. We don’t need to be completely beat down to appreciate a win from a loss. I’m sure those kids will welcome some Cheerleaders and Pollyannas on their sidelines and around the dinner table. Losses should be a learning experience (as well as wins), yet we can help mitigate the sting a bit without muddying the waters too much. By the way, Greenville finally broke its 40-game losing streak with a 24-21 win over North Garland. So deal with that, Eeyore.

Comments (0)


Players First Movement

Sam Snow

My very good friend and colleague Logan Fleck had a saying about quality coaching, “It’s easier to say no than go. It’s harder to teach go than no.” A part of coaching/teaching ‘go’ is to know when as the coach to let them go. High quality soccer performance by players moves through many mistakes in order to grow to a consistently good performance. Coaches of youth players, and the parents of those players, must let the youth player work through trial and error. This is an important part of the learning process. The coach should guide the players through that process, but not micromanage them. Over-coaching precedes timid play. This is what coach Fleck was alluding to in that it’s hard for some coaches to let the players go. So if you want your team to be good, I mean really good, then you must let them make some mistakes as they learn the game. Most of those mistakes will happen in training sessions as you teach them go rather than no. But some mistakes will happen in a match and once in a while it will cost you a goal and perhaps a loss. The price is a part of growth within the dynamic game of soccer. Coaches who teach no instead of go will win some matches at the youth level, but once the game is at a higher standard the team that coached no will become a ‘no go’. Let me share with you some of coach Fleck’s thoughts on the matter.

“This message is a reminder of the face-to-face or phone conversation that I’ve had with colleagues of my frustration at watching a high level educated coach use the directive approach (telling the players what to do numerous times during the game). Instead of quite bluntly allowing the players the opportunity to figure it out on their own. This did not occur once but many times and I observed young players (13-14 year olds) being moved around as to where they should be and what to do the majority of the time. We can all argue about coaching moments, but when they become a running commentary as to where a player should be – we (coaches) have crossed the line. To me this is not only hindering player development but, in my mind, is abuse. We (coaches) interject what we want the players to do and they just follow the yelled out instructions. Bull! I was privileged to have been coached by some of the best coaches in the country. Who with great patience and understanding knew that the game is and will always be a player’s game. Those coaches taught me the most important thing about soccer, which was to possess the confidence to make my decisions on the field and to take responsibility for the game. Let me pause to thank them all again.

No, over-coaching is not a new problem – but this particular event occurred at a very high level and I hate to think that our Founding Fathers of soccer in this country would feel good about this being the end result of contributing a lifetime of effort to the education of coaches in the country. I would like there to be proclaimed a ‘Shut Up For Soccer Day’! The day would entail all coaches (and parents if they so choose) but most decidedly us coaches to not yell anything at the players or referees for one game – on the same day nationwide. The coaches will enjoy, observe, analyze and/or suffer in silence while the game is going on. This I know is like asking the entire country to quit smoking simultaneously, however I do believe we can and will make our point and more importantly show the respect for the players that our coaches showed us back when we played the game (and enjoyed it as well).

This topic is one that touches all of us and I simply want us to do our part to continue to keep soccer a player’s game. Many of you knew my father, Dr. Tom Fleck, and were present during his acceptance speech upon receiving the Lifetime Achievement Award from the NSCAA. He focused his speech on two points. He stated clearly and categorically that the award should have been given to all of you who make the game what it is today. His final point was in regard to the children who play soccer, LET THEM PLAY!

This problem of over-coaching youth soccer players has reached epidemic proportion that is as detrimental as smoking and obesity are to their health. I feel this issue of over-coaching young players can kill our game.”

It seems to be appropriate that during Youth Soccer Month we should undertake the Players First Movement.

Comments (0)


Dramatic Effect

Susan Boyd

Does art imitate life or does life imitate art? Experts argue that literary and visual presentations impact our social experience to the point of changing how we interact. As to what imitates what when it relates to sports, we can see both angles. Over the past few weeks, I’ve seen how much life and art intersect. A few examples demonstrate how closely fiction and reality align. “When the Game Stands Tall” details the aftermath for a high school football team whose 151 winning streak collapses in a loss. What might be expected to be a reality check on dramatic exaggeration in fictional movies, the documentary “Trophy Kids” ends up reinforcing the details. It follows five kids in four sports, all of whom are driven by overzealous parents. “Varsity Blues,” a fictional film about high school football in a small Texas town, shows the underbelly of youth sports as displayed by an abusive coach, an overbearing father, and a “winning at any cost” philosophy. With a lighter touch, the Will Ferrell soccer movie, “Kicking and Screaming,” shows how the psychological scars we earn in youth sports can follow us into adulthood. Whether fictional or real, the characters and their behaviors are equally disturbing. Within the context of youth sports, the broad range of outcomes positive and negative can be found in artistic presentations.

“When the Game Stands Tall” carries the disclaimer, “Inspired by True Events,” meaning that some license was taken. I researched its story after I saw it because I was fascinated that so many dramatic elements could actually exist in one remarkable history. I discovered that most of the narrative was factual. Minor discrepancies for dramatic purposes included a significant game, which was actually played three years before the end of the streak, a devastating second loss that never happened, and two composite players: One, a cocky kid who felt he was God’s gift to the team and, naturally, learns the lesson of humility in the course of the film, and the second, a hotshot running back who was fighting to break the state touchdown record. It’s the second player who I suspected wasn’t real, not because of the subplot of him possibly breaking the record, but because of his relationship with his father. The man was the stereotypical “stage dad” micro-managing his kid’s career, even punching him in the stomach after he failed to make a touchdown when tackled on the two yard line. The battle between father and son got really heated in the front seat of their car when the son accused dad of wanting the touchdown title for his own egotistical reasons, another “trophy to put on the shelf to show how great you are.” In a rage at being challenged, the dad attacks his son, grabs his throat and demands, “Tell me you’ll break the record; promise me you’ll break the record.” The confrontation was difficult to watch because the pain was raw even if imaginary. This fictional element ended up ringing far too true as evidenced by the documentary “Trophy Kids.” A football dad mistreats his son physically, and even more psychologically. The pain in the kid’s eyes during this abuse was haunting. In an attempt to motivate his son, he belittles him. Like déjà vu, the son dares to challenge his father in their car. He explodes. When the son finally exits the car, his mother tries to reason with the father. “He doesn’t respect you. He’s afraid of you. You’re making him scared and insecure.” The father responds, “I’m teaching him to be a man” as the film cuts to the boy sitting on the curb sobbing.

Jon Voight in “Varsity Blues” plays Bud Kilmer, the stereotypical domineering coach that all players fear, but parents love because he gets the job done and brings glory to the football-obsessed town. Kilmer has been coaching for decades and has brought back state and district championships. In the highlighted season, the star quarterback injects his injured knee with anesthetic so he can continue to play, and naturally he blows it out. The coach, who ordered the shot, feigns no knowledge of the injury, a behavior indicating that his focus is on the win not on the players. The backup quarterback, “Mox” Moxon, is reluctantly called upon to step up to play. His football-crazy father, who spent his time under Coach Kilmer warming the bench, wants his son to go on to play Division I football. Instead, Mox wants to attend Brown on an academic scholarship. The climax comes when another player suffers a knee injury during the championship game. Kilmer again orders that the knee be injected so the kid can get back on the field. Mox refuses to reenter the field if that occurs, and the team agrees. Kilmer, realizing he is losing control of the situation, attacks Mox, then attempts to use the attack as a motivator. As coach runs on to the field for the second half, he realizes he is alone.  Considering how much power a coach wields and how intimidated players can be, it begs the question would a team really stand up for what is right.  

Then I read the case of Brian Seamons, a member of a Utah high school football team. Brian was hazed in a particularly brutal manner after exiting the team showers. He contacted school authorities and the police who passed the complaint on to the coach, Doug Snow. Snow suggested Brian meet with the team captains who were two of his assailants to see if they could find some way to resolve this. The captains told Brian he had betrayed the team by reporting the assault and should not be allowed to play until he apologized to the team. The coach agreed and, when Brian refused to apologize, sent him home so he couldn’t play in that night’s game. Brian returned to the coach the next week and stated that he did not owe the team an apology. Snow said he found Brian’s attitude unacceptable and removed him from the team. So Brian sued on the basis of violation of his First Amendment right to free speech. The local court denied his suit and said the school couldn’t be held responsible, but an appeals court overturned that decision. Eventually the coach was fired.

On a lighter note, but with serious undertones, “Kicking and Screaming” details the difficulties with not only being the parent of a player, but being the coach of your own child. Will Ferrell plays Phil Weston, the son of Buck Weston, the winningest youth soccer coach in the district. Phil spent his playing days riding the bench on his father’s team and receiving plenty of belittling comments. Two decades later, he has to watch his own son face the same humiliation at the hands of Buck. The Gladiators are the best team, but to protect him, Phil has his son, Sam, transferred to the worst team, the Tigers, where he happily plays until the fateful day when the coach doesn’t show. In order to avoid a forfeit, Phil agrees to step in, beginning a transformation to the very type of coach his father is — arrogant, bullying, obnoxious and competitive — much to the dismay of Sam and his teammates. Adding to the mix are two Italian boys, newly immigrated to the U.S., who join the team as star players. Soon the chant becomes, “Give the ball to the Italians.” Phil’s obsession with winning takes the joy out of the game for the kids. The he brazenly challenges his father to a match in order to avenge all his childhood pain. In the midst of the game, as he screams at the kids because of their poor play, he sees their dejection and agony. Realizing that he has the wrong priorities, he lets the boys know that win or lose, he’ll be proud of them. He encourages them to have fun. Because this is the land of happy endings, the Tigers naturally win with Sam scoring the winning goal. Although the ending is saccharine and expected, there’s a warm hopefulness that comes from the moment which I encourage more parents and coaches to realize — the idea that having fun can lead to winning, though it may not and that’s okay too.

I wonder if there are parents and coaches who will see these films and have a mirror thrust in their faces. Will they recognize themselves in the fictional characters, or more to the point, in the real life characters? Will they turn away and deny they’re as bad as or possibly even worse than what’s depicted? When I thought that the running back’s battle with his father couldn’t be real maybe that was wishful thinking on my part because I’ve sat next to parents at soccer who reproach their child’s teammates and hold their kid to extremely high standards. I’ve witnessed post-game yelling sessions where a dad is in his child’s face accusing the player of not caring enough or being weak or slacking off. There is never any praise — these sessions are all about laying blame. If I saw them in a movie (just like I did this week) my reaction would be, “how melodramatic” and “clearly exaggerated to make a point.” Then I remember what I’ve seen. Life imitating art. Could an aggressive parent be jolted into changing his or her behaviors by seeing these parent/child interactions on the screen? I’d hope so, but I’m pretty sure the scenes would be rationalized and minimized. We parents want to believe that we can motivate our children to greatness by being tough on them. The reality is that many of those children end up quitting the game.

I have been helping on a set of video instructions for the F license offered by USSF. The license is meant for volunteer parent coaches of 5 to 10-year-old players. One video is on Coaching Philosophy and includes a brief explanation about why kids quit sports and why they stay with sports. Kids quit because of criticism and outcome-driven play. When only wins are seen as success, we set kids up for failure because even a team with 151 consecutive wins eventually loses. Most teams lose a quarter to over a half of their games, so equating wins with success and losses with failure leaves kids ping ponging between narrow singular outcomes. Add the burden of criticism even if they win, and no one would want to keep playing. Kids stay committed to a sport and motivated to step onto the playing field when they are having fun. They need to see they are improving, that they get to be with friends, wear cool stuff, and develop a sports identity. Winning doesn’t enter the picture. Certainly winning is fun, breaking a record is awesome, and being a champion boosts the ego, but only a small sliver of players and teams get to attain those conquests. Most teams live in the world of average, and yet those players keep coming back and enjoying themselves because they get out of the sport more than the thrill of a win. The parent that demands perfection often ends up with a flawed child — maybe not athletically, but in other ways. In the “Game,” they talk about making the perfect effort meaning each player commits to a set of goals and does his best to achieve them. But it’s not the achievement that’s significant; it’s the effort.

I hope we can learn from art to lead better lives. While we may rationalize that dramatic license has been taken, we also have to see the grain of truth on which the scene is built. Likewise, we can’t minimize what happens in our lives because those events aren’t as dramatic or serious as what we see in fictional media. The arts can be an enticing inspiration for our behaviors because make believe can present an appealing perfect outcome. Our kids don’t always have the context in which to measure that appeal, but we can guide them. Likewise, when something in the arts hits home, we need to use those vignettes as teachable moments. After you see a movie or TV show about sports, ask your child what rang true and what rang false about the program. If the presentation purports to be true, research and find out how close to reality it actually comes. Talk about why the writer and director changed things up. Help kids to develop the analytical skills to be able to decipher what’s right and what’s wrong. Seeing what happens both in life and in art can provide lessons that will support our children throughout youth sports and give us parents food for thought.

Comments (0)