Playing time. Without a doubt, these are the two most charged words in youth sports, generating more positive and negative emotions among athletes, their parents and coaches than even the words “winning” and “losing.”
After 11 years of watching my five children play for about 50 different head coaches (one of them being me) on soccer, field hockey, basketball, ice hockey, baseball and lacrosse teams, I have devised a strong point of view about playing time, which can be summarized in 25 maxims:
1. The main reason kids play sports is not to have a chance to win games. The main reason kids play sports is to play.
2. Playing in games is fun. Rarely or never playing in games is boring and demoralizing.
3. The kids who get the most playing time have the most fun, improve the most and develop the strongest social bonds among their teammates. The kids who get the least playing time have the least fun, improve the least and are often excluded from the “in” social culture enjoyed by their teammates who play the most.
4. The only kids who say that the main reason they play sports is to win games are the kids who always start and always get a lot of playing time.
5. Kids who always start and always get a lot of playing time don’t notice, and/or don’t think it’s a problem, that other kids on the team play less, or not at all. (This is also true about parents of kids who always start and always get a lot of playing time.)
6. When a coach plays only the best players in a game, then loses the game, he/she actually loses in two ways: on the scoreboard and in the hearts of his/her bench players.
7. When a coach plays everyone in a game, then wins the game, he/she actually wins in two ways: on the scoreboard and in the hearts of his/her bench players.
8. When a coach plays everyone in a game, then loses the game, he/she can still point to a major victory: Today, everyone got to play.
9. “Fair” allocation of playing time does not necessarily imply “equal” sharing of playing time.
10. For bench players, getting into a game for even 30 seconds (or one shift, or one inning, or one play) is infinitely better than not getting into a game at all, and getting into even one game is infinitely better than getting into zero games.
11. The average level of satisfaction among players (and their parents) is higher in leagues that explicitly mandate playing time for all players in every game, than in leagues that do not.
12. A starter who plays a lot on a losing team has much more fun, and develops much more as a player, than a bench player who rarely or never plays on a winning team.
13. When a coach wins a championship or boasts an outstanding win-loss record after a season in which many players got little to no playing time, he/she is using “winning” as a way to mask a significant coaching deficiency. Many bench players will not have fond memories of that “winning” season, because they didn’t get to play.
14. The percentage of players on a team who continue to play the following season is directly related to the playing time philosophy adopted by that team’s coach. A greater focus on winning means fewer returning players; a greater focus on player development and fun means more returning players.
15. Coaches who rotate all players into games (at least sometimes) are universally respected by their players, their players’ parents and their opposing coaches — regardless of their win-loss records. Coaches who do not rotate all players into games (at least sometimes) risk sacrificing their reputations on the altar of “winning.”
16. In 100 percent of all cases, a coach who doesn’t play bench players (even when the team is winning or losing by a lot) was either never a bench player him/herself, or has never been the parent of a bench player. He/she is also cruel, whether intentionally or not.
17. The appropriateness of a certain playing time philosophy depends partly on the age and skill level of the players. However, a philosophy that makes “winning” the only goal (and “player development and fun” an arbitrary outcome) is never appropriate.
18. The easiest playing time philosophies to implement are the ones that focus completely on “winning” (only the best players play) or “player development and fun” (everyone plays equally, and key positions are shared by all). The ability to focus on both “winning” and “player development and fun” is what makes good coaches so good.
19. Whatever a coach’s philosophy is about playing time, the bench players are happier when the coach has communicated this philosophy — clearly and in detail — to all.
20. Whatever a coach says his/her philosophy about playing time is, his/her actions speak much louder than his/her words.
21. Kids notice if a coach is sticking to his/her previously stated playing time philosophy, or veering from it. And when a coach deviates from his/her philosophy (without an explanation), those players whose playing time decreases (or never materializes) cannot help but lose respect for the coach, even if the deviation helped the team win. (All of the above is also true about parents.)
22. When a coach has a playing time philosophy that involves getting all players into the game at some point: a) bench players work much harder in practice, and thus improve more than they otherwise would; b) the whole team feels part of every win and every loss; and c) fun and improvement for every member of the team is virtually guaranteed, regardless of the team’s win-loss record.
23. If a coach doesn’t have a philosophy about playing time that includes rotating in bench players, or if his/her only focus is on winning, he/she will forget about at least one bench player per game.
24. No matter what a coach’s playing time philosophy is, there will usually be at least one player (and one parent) who is dissatisfied with it. Yet, “I’ll never please everyone” must never become an excuse for a coach to lose sight of his/her responsibility to adopt a playing time philosophy that gets every kid involved, to clearly communicate this philosophy and to resist veering from it.
25. Players certainly learn important lessons when meaningful playing time (and the chance to play certain positions) must be “earned.”
But when a coach is particularly stubborn about granting playing time to bench players, sometimes the main lesson learned is, “When I’m a coach, I will handle playing time differently than that person does.”
