ADVERTISEMENT

So is it just five Power 5 signees from the WPIAL?

If Allegheny County population is only down 9%, it is IMPOSSIBLE that the HS age population is down 75%. Allegheny County is old, yes. But having a rudimentary knowledge of statistics, I can tell you that if the entire population is only down 9%, HS age kids cant be down by more than 20% and 20% might be stretching it.
When I was in school in the 80's, the largest schools were Butler, Penn Hills, Gateway, Norwin, NA, North Hills, Mt Lebo. The Woodland Hills happened. But those eastern suburbs grayed over and decayed. Butler, not sure what happened, meth capital of Western Pa. Schools like Mars, Pine Richland, South Fayette were cow schools, A and AA schools.
 
How is it that population decrease is only a "small" factor? I think it has to be the number 1 factor. Look at what the population decrease has done to our schools -- we have what is it, five 6A schools left in the WPIAL? And then compare that to the number of 6A schools on the eastern side of the state. And guess what, eastern PA's growth of school aged kids, as much greater as it is than the western side of PA, is still below the growth being seen in sun belt areas. There are simply way more kids in those other regions. When the number of P5 schools and scholarships remains constant, but the nationwide pool of kids grows, yet western PA's portion of that pool gets way smaller, this is going to happen.
are we correlating pittsburgh population with the whole
Wpial region ?
Butler county has increased 11% the past decade
Washington county has been steady with 0.7% growth
Allegheny increases 1.2% the past decade
 
When I was in school in the 80's, the largest schools were Butler, Penn Hills, Gateway, Norwin, NA, North Hills, Mt Lebo. The Woodland Hills happened. But those eastern suburbs grayed over and decayed. Butler, not sure what happened, meth capital of Western Pa. Schools like Mars, Pine Richland, South Fayette were cow schools, A and AA schools.

I forgot about North Hills. They were #1 in the US and now cant even make the WPIAL playoffs. A big school like Butler in a working class district should profuce a bunch but they dont even play football there. Basically, I think you need your working class districts to be large. USC, Peters, CM, SV, SF, PR, Hampton have grown but those are doctor/lawyer kids (generalizing). Need more car mechanic kids from North Hills or Penn Hills.
 
If Allegheny County population is only down 9%, it is IMPOSSIBLE that the HS age population is down 75%. Allegheny County is old, yes. But having a rudimentary knowledge of statistics, I can tell you that if the entire population is only down 9%, HS age kids cant be down by more than 20% and 20% might be stretching it.
In 1980, Pittsburgh metro (broader than Allegheny County) was like 1.2% of US population. Now it's like 0.7% of US population. Pittsburgh metro as a portion of all of US is down like 40%. And given that we are old, it's possible school aged kids in Pittsburgh metro in comparison to kids in the nation as a whole is down 75%.
 
Last edited:
I dunno how to interpret it. Overall population isn't hugely different than it was 40 years ago in the metro area, but the difference in D-1 talent in terms of numbers is striking. I have to think that a lot of is that football just isn't king anymore. Kids are drawn off to other sports like soccer and ice hockey, and often these are good athletes and not just bodies. I do think that the mills closing have made a difference, as I said before, but football has a negative connotation in some areas that are keeping kids from playing. Not that hockey is any safer, with respect to concussions, but the overall numbers just aren't what they used to be, even in districts that should be large enough to have freshman, JV, and varsity squads.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: FireballZ
In 1980, Pittsburgh metro (broader than Allegheny County) was like 1.2% of US population. Now it's like 0.7% of US population. Pittsburgh metro as a portion of all of US is down like 40%. And given that we are old, it's possible school aged kids in Pittsburgh metro in comparison to kids in the nation as a whole is down 75%.

No but keep trying
 
It still appears that many of the best athletes in the school are three-sport athletes playing football, basketball, and track with some playing baseball. I don’t know if it’s everywhere, but a lot of soccer players seem limited to soccer playing for their school in the fall, some form of indoor in the winter, and club/travel in the spring. I also don’t see too many big kids playing soccer and size is such a factor in football.

Is it possible it starts with youth football? I don’t see as many young teams in my area and I don’t know why the numbers dropped. Is it possible all the concerns with concussions fewer kids are playing at a young age? I also don’t know if they have the same type of offseason commitment as some of the top coaches get at the perennial powers at the high school level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boseman7
It still appears that many of the best athletes in the school are three-sport athletes playing football, basketball, and track with some playing baseball. I don’t know if it’s everywhere, but a lot of soccer players seem limited to soccer playing for their school in the fall, some form of indoor in the winter, and club/travel in the spring. I also don’t see too many big kids playing soccer and size is such a factor in football.

Is it possible it starts with youth football? I don’t see as many young teams in my area and I don’t know why the numbers dropped. Is it possible all the concerns with concussions fewer kids are playing at a young age? I also don’t know if they have the same type of offseason commitment as some of the top coaches get at the perennial powers at the high school level.

One thing I would immediately do is eliminate tackle football before middle school. Football isn't a skill sport. Its a size/athleticism sport. You dont need to be "learning" to play WR, QB, or OL at age 8.

I would make it all flag football and see the participation numbers go through the roof. Then when middle school tackle football rolls around, you have a pool of 100 kids instead of 30. Some will quit but some will develop such a love for it, they will continue to play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boseman7
I'm trying find some numbers on the internet to see if the number is close to 75%. I cannot find numbers, but I did find an article saying that Pittsburgh has the smallest percentage of school age children out of all large metro areas in the United States: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ighest-and-lowest-shares-of-children-under-18

If the county population has only decreased by 9%, it is statistically impossible to get anywhere close to 75% or even more than 20%.
 
One thing I would immediately do is eliminate tackle football before middle school. Football isn't a skill sport. Its a size/athleticism sport. You dont need to be "learning" to play WR, QB, or OL at age 8.

I would make it all flag football and see the participation numbers go through the roof. Then when middle school tackle football rolls around, you have a pool of 100 kids instead of 30. Some will quit but some will develop such a love for it, they will continue to play.
Some here will mock you but you aren’t wrong

Even my uncle who played D1 football warned me and my cousin not to start with peewee and pop Warner(to not get burned out ) -
Of course we didn’t listen —and I definitely was tired of it by middle school .
 
  • Like
Reactions: boseman7
If the county population has only decreased by 9%, it is statistically impossible to get anywhere close to 75% or even more than 20%.
I would think it is if you are comparing Pittsburgh metro versus the whole US where, as noted above, we are down 40% when looking at overall population.

Also, looking at just Pittsburgh and ignoring how we fit in with the rest of the US, Pittsburgh metro as a whole is down closer to 12% (went from about 2.65 mil in 1980 to 2.37 mil now).
 
Some here will mock you but you aren’t wrong

Even my uncle who played D1 football warned me and my cousin not to start with peewee and pop Warner(to not get burned out ) -
Of course we didn’t listen —and I definitely was tired of it by middle school .

There is absolutely no point to play tackle football before middle school. Its 100% ONLY for the former HS player turned dad coaches. I am sure, if you asked the fat kids who they put on the line if they'd rather play flag football where they can catch a few passes, they'd prefer that.

The name of the game is participation. If you eliminated tackle football, numbers would go through the roof. I think those summer practices in 90 degree weather and the 4 day/week practices during the season also scares kids/parents away.
 
One thing I would immediately do is eliminate tackle football before middle school. Football isn't a skill sport. Its a size/athleticism sport. You dont need to be "learning" to play WR, QB, or OL at age 8.

I would make it all flag football and see the participation numbers go through the roof. Then when middle school tackle football rolls around, you have a pool of 100 kids instead of 30. Some will quit but some will develop such a love for it, they will continue to play.
They would be huge. The Steelers are also growing the girls flag football program this year and it would also start as an early feeder program. I could see that being a big sport in the next decade as well.
 
I agree with the premise that youth football is driven by dads who think they were high school football AA's. That's very very prevalent in my district. It's also pathetic.
 
Coaching is a tiny factor in why some schools aren't producing power 5's.

If coaching were the issue, we wouldn't see the WPIAL performing as well as they do at the state level.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSpecialSauce
There is absolutely no point to play tackle football before middle school. Its 100% ONLY for the former HS player turned dad coaches. I am sure, if you asked the fat kids who they put on the line if they'd rather play flag football where they can catch a few passes, they'd prefer that.

Those same fat kids wouldn't be catching many balls if they're playing with fast smaller kids.



The name of the game is participation. If you eliminated tackle football, numbers would go through the roof. I think those summer practices in 90 degree weather and the 4 day/week practices during the season also scares kids/parents away.

When it comes to participation, you should read the chapter written by George Curry in the "The Football Coaches Bible."

I've coached HS and youth football. "Some" parents are scared to let their kids play tackle football but it's in the minority. Most kids don't play because their parents don't want to make the sacrifice needed to be good at anything. It's the same reason in school. Whatever the community values, whether it be academics or athletics - the kids typically reflect it.

In Aliquippa, the community values football from the time those kids can hold a ball in their hands. It's no coincidence they have one of the best programs in the state when they get to HS. Southern Columbia on the other side of the state is the same way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSpecialSauce
Those same fat kids wouldn't be catching many balls if they're playing with fast smaller kids.





When it comes to participation, you should read the chapter written by George Curry in the "The Football Coaches Bible."

I've coached HS and youth football. "Some" parents are scared to let their kids play tackle football but it's in the minority. Most kids don't play because their parents don't want to make the sacrifice needed to be good at anything. It's the same reason in school. Whatever the community values, whether it be academics or athletics - the kids typically reflect it.

In Aliquippa, the community values football from the time those kids can hold a ball in their hands. It's no coincidence they have one of the best programs in the state when they get to HS. Southern Columbia on the other side of the state is the same way.
I don't think kids under 12 should play tackle football. Especially linemen. You cannot prevent helmet to helmet contact in both practice and games and that repetitive contact can't be good for long term neurological health.
 
There is absolutely no point to play tackle football before middle school. Its 100% ONLY for the former HS player turned dad coaches. I am sure, if you asked the fat kids who they put on the line if they'd rather play flag football where they can catch a few passes, they'd prefer that.

The name of the game is participation. If you eliminated tackle football, numbers would go through the roof. I think those summer practices in 90 degree weather and the 4 day/week practices during the season also scares kids/parents away.
I have been a coach, official, have sons who played, and played when I was younger. There are more positives than negatives. The schools that have good youth programs usually also have good high school programs. Most youth leagues have age and weight limits. There is a big transition for most kids playing tackle football the first year. A kid playing football for the first time in middle school is behind the 8-ball when it comes to the proper blocking and tackling techniques and other fundamentals. It’s just like any other sport. There are good and bad youth coaches in every sport and they can make a world of difference both positive and negative.
 
Last edited:
One thing I would immediately do is eliminate tackle football before middle school. Football isn't a skill sport. Its a size/athleticism sport. You dont need to be "learning" to play WR, QB, or OL at age 8.

I would make it all flag football and see the participation numbers go through the roof. Then when middle school tackle football rolls around, you have a pool of 100 kids instead of 30. Some will quit but some will develop such a love for it, they will continue to play.
Absolutely correct!
 
I don't think kids under 12 should play tackle football. Especially linemen. You cannot prevent helmet to helmet contact in both practice and games and that repetitive contact can't be good for long term neurological health.

If you teach lineman correctly - you can drastically limit helmet to helmet contact.

The game is way safer today then it was 10-20-30 years ago.

We have rules in place that limit contact in practice.

The PIAA only allows for 60 minutes of "contact" a week. I'm not sure we come close to reaching that #. The overwhelming majority of football practice doesn't involve live contact - period. Most schools typically go "live" 15 minutes a day and if you're a big school, you're rotating guys in and out. If you're small school - you typically can't go live very much if at all. Most of the time is spent on technique with the big boys up front. When it comes to tackling - we don't even need to have helmets or pads on to accomplish a sound approach to tackling.. If you go to a college or NFL practice, the majority of the time, it's done in uppers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheSpecialSauce
I have been a coach, official, have sons who played, and played when I was younger. There are more positives than negatives. The schools that have good youth programs usually also have good high school programs. Most youth leagues have age and weight limits. There is a big transition for most kids playing tackle football the first year. A kid playing football for the first time in middle school is behind the 8-ball when it comes to the proper blocking and tackling techniques and other fundamentals. It’s just like any other sport. There are good and bad youth coaches in every sport and they can make a world of difference both positive and negative.
I agree with this 100%. I was certainly no division 1 athlete but I was pretty good at sports relative to the kids I grew up with. I played on the all star baseball teams, the travel basketball and soccer teams, was the second best tennis player on my high school team, etc. Despite my constant pleading, my mom wouldn't let me play football until Jr. High (which was abnormal in the early 90s) and when I started playing football in 7th grade I was way behind the 8 ball competing against guys who had been playing since they were six. As a result I didn't enjoy football because I wasn't that good at it. I firmly believe if I grew up playing football as a kid I would have been better in Jr. High and continued playing into high school. But since I was just average and the team was bad I decided that was enough for me.
 
I’m going to talk about two main factors that I think are really driving this perception. The rise of charter schools has really done a number to a lot of kids who might even consider wanting to play football but they can’t play or won’t play because it’s too much work to get all the stuff needed to play in there District. You look at a school like Woodland Hills that has a lot of their kids running to charter schools and that’s a big factor. Also the level of coaching around here is awful. So many kids playing out of position never being given a chance to actually play their position, and then you have them running systems that don’t show the talent that they actually have. Then these coaching staffs do a piss poor job of promoting their players. I actually don’t think the level of talent has gone down I just think that a lot of those guys choose not to play football and I’ve talk to a lot of kids who just don’t wanna play football because they don’t wanna deal with their schools coaching staffs
 
61 in 86-87
50 in 07-08
14 in 19-20

Like I said, population decrease is only a small factor. Up until 10 or so years ago, the area was producing about as many players as it had in the 80s, adjusted for population. Then it fell of a cliff. There are reasons, as discussed, for SOME drop-off such as growing popularity in other sports but that doesn't explain this level of a drop. I mean, the Pgh area might actually be the worst metro area in the nation for P5 talent.

I think we are all missing the bigger picture. Maybe its just coaching/infrastructure. What's happened to WH, PH, and Gateway? If you put the coaches of TJ and BV at Gateway and WH, do they make the necessary changes from youth levels all the way up to the HS team to start producing 3-4 P5 a year like they used to? That's just an example but why dont the Eastern suburbs produce P5s anymore?
That actually happens a lot where there is a schism in the youth football program in a lot of these districts and by the time these kids get the high school they find out that they don’t know how to play their school system and then they get benched and never play because the coach things are not good. I see this happen every year. Too many districts have two different peewee teams and it messes up the growth and development of the players because you have too many guys playing out of position or worse not having enough people on the team and getting injured with concussions early so that their parents make them quit football
 
I’m going to talk about two main factors that I think are really driving this perception. The rise of charter schools has really done a number to a lot of kids who might even consider wanting to play football but they can’t play or won’t play because it’s too much work to get all the stuff needed to play in there District. You look at a school like Woodland Hills that has a lot of their kids running to charter schools and that’s a big factor. Also the level of coaching around here is awful. So many kids playing out of position never being given a chance to actually play their position, and then you have them running systems that don’t show the talent that they actually have. Then these coaching staffs do a piss poor job of promoting their players. I actually don’t think the level of talent has gone down I just think that a lot of those guys choose not to play football and I’ve talk to a lot of kids who just don’t wanna play football because they don’t wanna deal with their schools coaching staffs
What area are you referring to? There are no charter schools with a football team in the WPIAL that are worth a lick.

WPIAL teams have had a lot of success the last 2 years and those teams are led by good coaching staffs.

The trend that I’ve seen are kids or their parents get upset that their kid isn’t playing enough, so they switch to another sport or just quit altogether. Some will also switch schools to get PT.
 
That actually happens a lot where there is a schism in the youth football program in a lot of these districts and by the time these kids get the high school they find out that they don’t know how to play their school system and then they get benched and never play because the coach things are not good. I see this happen every year. Too many districts have two different peewee teams and it messes up the growth and development of the players because you have too many guys playing out of position or worse not having enough people on the team and getting injured with concussions early so that their parents make them quit football

The biggest districts having 2 teams per age group is a good thing. Its better to have 20 kids on 2 teams than 40 kids on 1 team. Does that mean you'll have some skinny kids on offensive line? I guess but that's better than sitting the bench on a bigger team.





































[/QUOTE]
 
I posted his quote before, and I hate giving Mark Madden any credit, but until the captain of the cheerleading squad is banging the star of the soccer team instead of the star of the football team, soccer will never be as popular in high school sports.

Many other factors in this, kids are just starting to lose interest. Why do you think Nickelodeon is doing an NFL broadcast on Christmas Day?
The population is stagnant and old
 
  • Like
Reactions: FireballZ
What area are you referring to? There are no charter schools with a football team in the WPIAL that are worth a lick.

WPIAL teams have had a lot of success the last 2 years and those teams are led by good coaching staffs.

The trend that I’ve seen are kids or their parents are upset that their kid is playing enough, so they switch to another sport or just quit altogether.
I routinely see kids who are from the city league, Penn Hills, Woodland Hills, McKeesport, catch buses and ride shares to charter schools who often don’t have football teams or only have a few people playing so they suck. The city of Pittsburgh is a pretty big area for a kid to not go to Perry but choose to go to a random charter school but he wants to play football but he hast to go through this arduous process to play football most kids are just gonna say forget it. Not to mention when you talk about coaching staffs and them having success very few of these coaching staffs in the WPI AL know how to develop kids from scratch. They rely on what The peewee coaches have said about former players and they wouldn’t know how to develop raw athletically gifted kids nor do they want to and they don’t want to take the time.
 
What area are you referring to? There are no charter schools with a football team in the WPIAL that are worth a lick.

WPIAL teams have had a lot of success the last 2 years and those teams are led by good coaching staffs.

The trend that I’ve seen are kids or their parents get upset that their kid isn’t playing enough, so they switch to another sport or just quit altogether.

He means kids who would have liked to have played football, instead go to a charter school which doesn't have a team. I would say the types of kids going to charter school or homeschool arent the football player types anyway.

I would say this is drop is related to:

10% population loss
60% coaching (dad coaches being dickheads for the 9 year old team and HS coaching being bad)
30% local sports culture going away from football and into other sports.
 
The biggest districts having 2 teams per age group is a good thing. Its better to have 20 kids on 2 teams than 40 kids on 1 team. Does that mean you'll have some skinny kids on offensive line? I guess but that's better than sitting the bench on a bigger team.
[/QUOTE]
But it’s not good though. When those kids have to play special teams, offense and defense, and then factor in the injuries, along with the first year players that just don’t know what they’re doing that makes a lot of kids quit after their first year because they don’t have fun. And if a kid has a concussion? Forget about it is he is not playing for a month let alone the rest of the season. Then you end up with 13 kids playing against a team that has 35 kids that are experienced and they end up getting trounced. And with kids when they have bad memories or something these days they quit.
 
But it’s not good though. When those kids have to play special teams, offense and defense, and then factor in the injuries, along with the first year players that just don’t know what they’re doing that makes a lot of kids quit after their first year because they don’t have fun. And if a kid has a concussion? Forget about it is he is not playing for a month let alone the rest of the season. Then you end up with 13 kids playing against a team that has 35 kids that are experienced and they end up getting trounced. And with kids when they have bad memories or something these days they quit.
[/QUOTE]

It is better to have 2 teams of 20 kids than 1 team of 40 kids. I get what you are saying but playing and losing is better than sitting the bench and winning. If a star player quits football at age 10 because he had to play on a team with 13 players for a few games due to injuries, then that goes back to my point that tackle football shouldn't be played at this age anyway.
 
He means kids who would have liked to have played football, instead go to a charter school which doesn't have a team. I would say the types of kids going to charter school or homeschool arent the football player types anyway.

I would say this is drop is related to:

10% population loss
60% coaching (dad coaches being dickheads for the 9 year old team and HS coaching being bad)
30% local sports culture going away from football and into other sports.
Which charter schools in the WPIAL play football?

A kid might be going to a charter school because the family feels they can get a better education.

As I stated earlier, there are good and bad coaches at the youth level but the large majority are good guys in it for the right reason. I am in the thick of it.

Kids switching to other sports because they aren’t playing enough or think they can get a scholarship elsewhere play a factor.
 
Which charter schools in the WPIAL play football?

A kid might be going to a charter school because the family feels they can get a better education.

As I stated earlier, there are good and bad coaches at the youth level but the large majority are good guys in it for the right reason. I am in the thick of it.

Kids switching to other sports because they aren’t playing enough or think they can get a scholarship elsewhere play a factor.
That’s the problem charter school don’t have football teams but a lot of kids transfer to them and strictly become an academic only high school student. There’s some loopholes in some places where you can play in the district that you’re from but that requires a lot of Bending over backwards
 
That’s the problem charter school don’t have football teams but a lot of kids transfer to them and strictly become an academic only high school student. There’s some loopholes in some places where you can play in the district that you’re from but that requires a lot of Bending over backwards
Why is it considered a bad thing for a kid to want to receive a good education? Only 1-2% of all HS football players end up getting a football scholarship.

If a kid in the city wants to play for a quality coach, then Donta Green and Westinghouse is the place to go.
 
Why is it considered a bad thing for a kid to want to receive a good education? Only 1-2% of all HS football players end up getting a football scholarship.

If a kid in the city wants to play for a quality coach, then Donta Green and Westinghouse is the place to go.

Well, the "education" provided at charter schools by teachers making $20K/year is debatable. Most of these "schools" are just financial scams. However, lets say they indeed are getting a superb education. That's fantastic. But he's saying that the fact they are at a charter and not a school with a team takes away his ability to play D1. I disagree because there arent 4.4 kids sitting at home on their laptop at some fake charter school. The outcast type kids go to these schools
 
Well, the "education" provided at charter schools by teachers making $20K/year is debatable. Most of these "schools" are just financial scams. However, lets say they indeed are getting a superb education. That's fantastic. But he's saying that the fact they are at a charter and not a school with a team takes away his ability to play D1. I disagree because there arent 4.4 kids sitting at home on their laptop at some fake charter school. The outcast type kids go to these schools
You really should just keep quiet on topics that you don’t understand. Propel Charter Schools in Pittsburgh are sometimes more desirable for families in and around the city. They are typical brick and mortar schools. The average teacher salary is almost 50k. The new trend for high level athletes is to attend a Cyber School, so they can get their education but have more time to train and travel if need be. This already applies to high level gymnasts, hockey, baseball, and basketball players. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it creep into football. Kids can attend a cyber school and still play for their local district.
 
Last edited:
You really should just keep quiet on topics that you don’t understand. Propel Charter Schools in Pittsburgh are sometimes more desirable for families in and around the city. They are typical brick and mortar schools. The average teacher salary is almost 50k. The new trend for high level athletes is to attend a Cyber School, so they can get their education but have more time to train and travel if need be. This already applies to high level gymnasts, hockey, baseball, and basketball players. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it creep into football. Kids can attend a cyber school and still play for their local district.

Cyber school = not going to school.

Propel = going to "1A McKeesport" instead of regular 4A McKeesport. Test scores are the same. They're just smaller versions of the regular public school... which can be beneficial at times. They are probably one of the better examples of charters though I generally dont agree with all these tiny schools sprouting up. Some of these other charters, especially the online ones are just scams.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT