tornado99

The soccer influence has brought up some interesting points whether masculinity or economics which brings up a great point about playing the two sports, and that’s size. In looking at the recent World Cup rosters the average size of the players virtually mirrors the average population barring the obesity epidemic in developed countries. Football mostly consists of specialized body types or attributes. Those that thrive are on one or both ends of the extremes. It helps certainty have both size and speed, but often those are opposite qualities. I know it’s not always the case, but roughly half of the positions are the biggest kids and the other are the fastest kids. In soccer, you have a lot more room for average to above average. While speed is never a disadvantage, size can be. Just being honest, you don’t see many big, fat kids who are in shape playing soccer. You’re more likely to find more of the skill position sized players finding a spot on the pitch. Admittedly, I’m a football guy, but I certainly see the appeal if you or your kid is athletic enough or of average size to be a role player. A very average receiver/running back has the opportunity to be an excellent soccer player through practice and skill development. They might be a poor lineman as well simply due to size and frame. (I know it helps for a big man to be agile and in shape. I can still take the biggest kid who may not be athletic and he still occupies a position because he’s harder to move out of the way at the youth level simply from eating and genetics.)

I know there are lies and statistics. I think the quote below does apply here. However, it seems I’ve read articles on a national scope that high school football participation has increased or recovered since the pandemic. I’m sure it’s driven by particular areas, such as Texas or population growth in the South or West. I’d ask JDHoss or SWVAOG among others what it really is like outside our corner of the country.

I know some areas have true population issues more than others. I’m not intending to throw grenades. I think for others the fundamental question is whether to develop your best or develop the most? I simply fall into the latter camp due to seeing more kids playing and learning from football while not losing late bloomers, but I understand the other argument. Sorry to take it off trail, but Richlands looked about 30 to me.

I think this is what I mean by my comment. If I’m not mistaken, they have had one good team with the best players concentrated on that team. I might be wrong, but prior to this season, Richlands had multiple teams. I know population is a factor combined with specialization with the numbers declining. My rough comparison is the shift from multiple teams (rec league/little league competition and talent) into the one team (travel team talent and competition). As a result, from the sky view, I think it mirrors the trend in most places. For a history lesson, in my youth, Lebanon had 3 teams who competed with 5 Richlands teams one season. From my 2 coaching stints, Richlands went from 4 teams to 2. (There was a 10-year gap.) Richlands has other issues right now, but overall this is my oversimplified opinion of the trend, combined with the outside factors mentioned earlier (specialization, etc.). As other communities began competing in the league, as they dropped to one, some became harder to compete with year after year. If you prioritize competing, as some posters have said, you make decisions to develop one small core group of players to win a championship and a lot of kids getting little attention or playing time. Those turned to other sports or simply lose interest. It’s funny (or sad), looking back now, one of the Blues advantages under Vaught and Mance was depth. Those second half performances were often a combination of halftime adjustments and fresher players, particularly the linemen who rotated. From personal experience, I eventually became a one-way starter. Only our absolute best had to play both ways.

Do you think the same thing is happening at Lebanon with football? I know they have 1 team. I think essentially, though you only play a single game, football has kind of become a travel sport.

How do you suggest reversing the trend? (Not being smart here, sincere question.) Some Union fans and Galax fans in the past had some good suggestions, but it would take some buy-in. Some of those include in-house, shorter season, working with the varsity coaches, and 8-man or some other version that helps with more/smaller teams with more playing time for everyone

Do you think this comes from the results of the feeder programs and different strategies for development in the youth programs? Some Union fans have kindly shared with me on this board the in-house, shorter season feeder system that keeps more interested and playing for a longer time. This leads to a greater number of players. I don’t know about Graham, but seeing them being referred to as the Little G-men, I assume they have the 1 town/1 team that seems to only develop the core of the team and fewer numbers. Would this be accurate? FYI-I know Richlands is down to 1 team at each age level. It used to be 5-6 teams at one time.

I didn’t realize Galax had that many transfers, but to both of your points, they are/were great coaches. However, not always the case, but sometimes it isn’t always the great coaches getting the transfers. Sometimes the location simply combines with the misfortunes of your neighbors. I don’t know enough about Galax, but for whatever reason, before Princeton got good and Bluefield wasn’t Bluefield, Graham got the talent from all over. It goes without saying that the pipeline out of McDowell County has often run south toward Richlands and Tazewell, but more recently down 52 to Bluefield and Graham. Finally, I don’t know how great a coach Aaron Lowe is or Todd Tiller was, but the misfortunes of Richlands has moved some of that talent to the Tigers.

Thanks for sharing this interview. Fresh off the Clock and Mountain Mojo do a great job of covering old and new. Thomas Jones is still the best high school running back that I have ever seen.

Dixon did a great job with the talent at his disposal, much like Palmer at Graham. I don’t know about long-term prospects of success, but Tester’s strength in my opinion is not what he will do, though I know he will add on, but more due to what he’s already done. He’s worked with a talented group that has grown more and more cohesively playing together under his leadership. The players already know their roles, so it’s more a matter of refining and executing. There isn’t much guesswork left. Basically, they have a head start on the majority of the teams they will face that are of a similar skill level. My guess is that is more of the key to Hurley’s past success. They leaned into developing or structuring the most talented classes (holding back groups or athletes strategically)when they came around more than simply punching above their weight. Smart, nonetheless, if true.

I saw the Union weight room attendance stats year over year. Very impressive results from Coach Harless, the coaches, and especially the kids.

After seeing Ryan’s post, I wish the first part of the statement were true and we had a few more at Richlands. I’m going to have faith that there are 25 very good ones. Regardless, it’s shocking how football has lost its luster. Being part of a team was such an honor. The desire to play was there no matter the circumstances. Different times now.

If that’s true, we could certainly use a few of those Union players.

It doesn’t really matter either, but to your point he obviously knows how to attract the kids. That said, how much of that success at LB came from being able to attract kids from other school districts? I’m sure it was rampant in the Roanoke area, but of course during that time I would hear from friends in the area that LB was the beneficiary more often than not (except for Salem, of course). I think Union is Union, and personally feel like this is an upgrade. I really hope they succeed, but of course I hope for more parity. I hope GC is good enough to give them fits, along with Ridgeview to provide a true measuring stick and rivalry. I’ll also reserve judgment on that confidence until seeing what really shakes out of the Bluefield offseason. I’m pretty confident greater talent resources are in that local area. It just depends upon how much of it lands on which side of the state line. With the Beavers on a high, I’m at a loss with the G-men. Either way, I’m curious to see whether the genius of Harless comes from on the field, often the criticism of Bears fans when they have fallen short, or simply being able to get the best athletes on the field which I feel the Bears consistently have already most years. Good luck to all! I’m glad it’s football season.

I know in high school it’s not as possible, but it would be interesting to think if it would work to have the same effect that the transfer portal has on the NCAA. (NIL complicates or simplifies it somewhat.) The biggest no longer stockpiles talent on its roster deep, and those not playing transfer and excel at other schools. I’m sure the Bears have subs that could easily start at other schools. It’s just fun to think about, as well as if Graham ends up having 1/2, but has similar results by season’s end comparing the different routes.