Poll: Kid Banned From Scoring For Being Too Awsome

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

It's a youth league which is meant to be fun. The kid can still score touchdowns, play the game and have fun. Now, the other kids can have a better chance at getting better and having more fun.

If it were a competitive league then this wouldn't be fair.

 

[Dexiro]

I see nothing wrong with this. It says right there in the article, they just want to make sure the other 21 players get a chance to play the game rather than having one guy hog the ball the entire time. It's about having fun more than it's about winning and one guy hogging the ball isn't very fun.

 

[gertmenkel]

That sucks... if you are good at something you should not be held back because you're better than the rest.

On the other hand, he will be able to tell his kids: "I was so amazing I had to be held back to keep it fair for the other team."

EDIT: I suck at English grammar.

 

[Hashime]

Just a question for the crowd here, how many of you have ever played house football / any team sport really, and how many of you have played on or against a team that completely dominated. In both circumstances it was not particularly fun. I remember playing a team in house league with a RB who was so fast no one could catch him on our team. We got pounded 65-12. As a kid losing that badly did not feel good and made members of our team not show up for practice that week. Refer to my earlier post for my opinion on the matter.

 

[chadachada123]

Merely being a kid's league doesn't, in itself, justify such a rule. Holding him back now could have drastic effects on his career in the future. He's at the age where he needs as much practice as possible, or else he may NOT be the next real-life Cole Train.

In any event, it's only for a year, so I doubt it will have THAT much of an effect on his future football career.

 

[chadachada123]

Just a question for the crowd here, how many of you have ever played house football / any team sport really, and how many of you have played on or against a team that completely dominated. In both circumstances it was not particularly fun. I remember playing a team in house league with a RB who was so fast no one could catch him on our team. We got pounded 65-12. As a kid losing that badly did not feel good and made members of our team not show up for practice that week. Refer to my earlier post for my opinion on the matter.

That's less of an argument for nerfing one's own team and more of an argument for pairing good teams with other good teams, and crap teams with other crap teams.

 

[BoredRolePlayer]

Remember kids if you do good in life using the skills you have to your advantage life will kick you in the nuts and say NO.

 

[alandavidson]

WHAAAAAAT?

Seriously, that's ridiculous. They're going to stop a kid from being good at football. That's just dumb.

 

[tunderball]

It seems a little unfair on the kid but a very reasonable idea overall for the team and heres why...
Every team has a kid similar to that who is absolutely rapid, but look at the video he's running in zigzags through the opposistion just trying to find an opening. As he gets older and the other teams get much better at defence that will not happen as much if at all and the player and the team will have to be much cleverer. At least this way the entire team has a chance to grow as players which they will have to do to compete later instead of relying on the kid who can run fast all the time.

 

[McNinja]

The article also says that next year he'll be in middle-school, where there are no rules like this one, so he can do as much scoring as he wants.

 

[Jodah]

Given that its a youth league (lets face it, youth football isn't the most legitimate league) and the kid in question is okay with it then W/E. If, however, one of those things were to change it would be a big deal.

 

[Nigh Invulnerable]

Wait, what? you mean teenagers have a stronger self esteem than kids!?

Yeah I do, a fifteen year old isn't gong to go home and cry himself to sleep because he lost.

Clearly you've never seen professional players weeping like sissies after losing a playoff game, and they're "grown men".

I think this is reasonable, though it'd be better if coach just moved him to another position.

 

[shroomie]

I'm neither for nor against this decision and I'm not really a sports fan so I dont care either way. On the one hand if someone is really good then they shouldn't be held back but also Football is a game that is to be enjoyed by all who play it, not just one guy. Some kids might get a bit annoyed or jealous but don't want to quit as they like to play so they start hating on the good guy.

 

[Alduin Silas]

That kid has a future, and quite a lot of buzz surrounding this ruling, he keeps that up, it's the major leagues for him. Every coach will be thinking that "damn, this guy's good for his age, keep an eye on him."

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Well that's a dumb rule. It's not his fault he's better than everyone else at something.

 

[Callate]

I think a lot of people aren't reading the article.

Honestly, it seems pretty reasonable. He can still play, he just can't score if he's already scored three times and his team is 14 points ahead. They can still pass to someone else, he can still score, he just can't solely dominate every game. And the moment someone kicks a field goal, he can score again. If he's really that good, I don't doubt the important lesson to learn is not to take the other members of his team for granted.

He isn't really expanding his skills in any way to just keep scoring over and over while the opposing team tries to stop him. And it hurts the other players on both teams; the players on the opposite team stop enjoying the game as their opponents gain a lead they can never hope to catch, and the players on his own never do anything but give him the ball and let him carry them.

Further, he seems okay with it, and he will only fall under the rule for one more year.

It's a freaking youth football league, people. For eleven-year-olds. There are things more important to learn at that point than "and someone who's naturally good is just going to inevitably crush you no matter how hard you work, so don't even try."

 

[Aiedail256]

I don't object, for the sole reason that he's only prevented from scoring if his team is already up two TD's or more. He's not prohibited from causing his team to win, only from turning a decisive win into a curb-stomp battle.

 

[internetzealot1]

Goddammit Arkansas, why do you have to mess with your game. Its been fine so far, now you just want to casualize it.