There are many different thoughts that may come to mind when thinking of present day youth football leagues. A person from another state may think of kids building teamwork skills and their physical abilities, while a person from Texas may think of the gridiron, violent games expressed between these eight and nine year old players. Stefan Fatsis’s article “Rich Kids Are Soft, Poor Kids Need to be Together Up” uncovers the real, explicit experience these kids receive and how it affects them and their community, good or bad. In order to evaluate Fatsis’s article thoroughly, it is important to consider the use of rhetorical strategies and structure.
One of the claims Fatsis makes is the “violent imagery” created in the coach’s speeches and the use of their vulgar language around the young players. The author uses the Esquire Network series, Friday Night Tykes (FNT) as his illustration to his readers, assuming the reader has watched the show. He uses the example “You have the opportunity, today, to rip their heads off and let them bleed” (pr.1) from the show, to represent the relationship being expressed between the coaches and players. He assumes he is showing his pathos at this point in the article and that attention of the readers is being grabbed. Another point of the article’s structure and stance involves the coach’s perspective between positive adult leadership and their vulgar, negative style on the field. One specific coach from the Outlaws explains how parents specifically put their kids on his team to prevent them from growing up to be a wimp. With this comment the author then follows up by stating “In other words, the coaches are loud and tough because perceived consequences of being quiet and soft-drugs, gangs, crime, poverty-are too severe” (pr. 13). It’s now obvious the author becomes more open-minded from watching the show because earlier in the article he stated “Coaching through fear, threat, hostility, intimidation, physical punishment, and profanity is inappropriate at any age” (pr. 9). The author’s stance is easily seen here; the use of passion he expresses discussing the inappropriate coaching style, indicates he may also be a parent. Therefore, his ethos is established at this point and affects his stance throughout the article. Fatsis now recognizes the distinction of how the coaching style must be similar to its community in order to prevent the players learning towards those negative consequences. This becomes another major claim in his argument because his ethos may differ from what these players’ experiences are. He mentions a comment made by Reuben Buford May, a sociology professor at Texas A&M University, “the coaches have to be as harsh as the community that the young men’s attention. They cannot have their attention without reflecting what they see every day because that is what the young men respond to.” (pr. 9) Fatsis then address that the “Colts and Outlaws-by far are the best teams in San Antonio” because of May’s remark that they are “responding to the cultural sensibilities of the community in which they are working” (pr. 11). The author notices that the tough love and talk push these players to be the best that they can be. The author then claims that the coaching “can be intense without being negative” (pr. 13) and follow it up with some solution to change behavioral norms in the community rather than to reflect them. He suggests that “they can encourage kids to play hard, support their teammates and respect their opponents instead of focusing on killing the other team” (pr. 13). This suggestion is exactly what the readers expected to hear. After Fatsis expressed the issue with both sides considered, he then needed a solution to eliminate this problem. Expecting that the readers are parents concerned about the coaching of their kids in their community, these solutions are opportunities he has given for them to take into action. Fatsis’s purpose is both informative and persuasive, but only partially effective. Although he has prevented different stances on his arguments he cannot fully predict his readers have the same view as himself. He does not present different styles to readers who may not be familiar with young football leagues, or may not be a parent as passionate as him about this issue. Therefore, he cannot predict that a change can be made in many communities due to his article. Stefan Fatsis’s article takes a shocking story to open people’s eyes that may be in this situation and hope to make a change. However, his claims do not relate to a wide variety of readers and cannot be fully delivered as well as he wanted. While he makes good arguments and solutions, his use of rhetorical devices would not likely motivate people who have no involvement in young football leagues. Work Cited Page
Fatsis, Stefan. “Rich White Kids and Poor Black Kids Get Coached Differently. Is that a problem?” Slate Magazine, N.P. 24 Mar. 2014. Web. 12 Apr. 2014