Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SUNDAY, May 15, 1994 TAG: 9405150033
SECTION: SPORTS PAGE: D-13 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
I believe your article fails to do justice to the problem of kids not signing up for football by attributing apathy and laziness to the kids, instead of considering what football is offering them.
You (an adult) work all day. After you return home for a quick bite to eat, it is time to go out and learn some new and relatively demanding subject for anywhere from two to four hours. You must commit to doing this every day after work, rain or shine, tired or energetic. Additionally, you need to do this task one or both days of the weekend. And finally, you need to take an unpaid week in the summer to even more intensively throw yourself into learning this subject.
Do we have a lot of takers? Do we see a lot of adults spending grueling hours toiling at tasks voluntarily? I don't think so.
Why do we expect kids to act differently than the rest of us? When we add the fact that high school football may mean a physical injury that lasts the rest of your life, and an emotional injury in terms of self-esteem because many coaches are not sensitive to kids' needs and care only about winning, I don't think it is a bad decision not to participate.
When schools offer kids a chance to participate in athletics that are fun and cooperative instead of competitive to the point of being cutthroat, perhaps those students who are interested in sports will be willing to participate.
As long as we have coaches who . . . seem determined to break every student's independence and spirit, I think kids are correctly making the decision not to participate. Their decision not to participate in football is based on good judgment, not apathy or laziness.
DIANNE FRIEDMAN RADFORD
by CNB