|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 21, 2015 10:17:40 GMT -5
Should top teams at clubs be treated differently than other teams in the same age group? (preferential treatment etc...) I'm thinking with regards to u8 -- u12 teams.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Oct 21, 2015 10:31:11 GMT -5
A thousand times no.... especially at that age. Top teams at that age are mostly comprised of the early bloomers. Top players (no, not all, but some) will change many times before settling out at... U19?
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 21, 2015 10:32:16 GMT -5
Maybe I should make it more generic to "top pools" vs just teams.
|
|
quest
Jr. Academy
Posts: 33
|
Post by quest on Oct 21, 2015 13:07:26 GMT -5
No
|
|
|
Post by jash on Oct 21, 2015 14:16:45 GMT -5
Maybe I should make it more generic to "top pools" vs just teams. Oh, in that case, then... no :-)
|
|
|
Post by youthsoccerdad on Oct 21, 2015 14:42:08 GMT -5
Maybe I should make it more generic to "top pools" vs just teams. So it should read - "Should top pools at clubs be treated differently than other?" I don't think so at younger ages (before U12), at our club there has been so much movement over the 18 months it would not make any sense to claim any kid is the top. Couple that with the "top pool" at our club lose scrimmages as many times as they win against the second pool that none of it makes sense. Then to really mix it all up you have the whole age thing changing next year which will remix everything up.
|
|
|
Post by soccerfutbolfam on Oct 21, 2015 15:45:58 GMT -5
Should top teams at clubs be treated differently than other teams in the same age group? (preferential treatment etc...) I'm thinking with regards to u8 -- u12 teams. NO. Good teams - really good teams know they are good. They also know how to encourage others and learn to be humble. I can't remember who said it this summer, one of the pros said - after you have a victory, you still have to win again. Something like that... and it's true. Once you've won a game, you still have to keep winning. And what happens when you start treating these teams different? You decrease the morale of the others and place kids on a pedestal they will eventually fall off of.
|
|
|
Post by TheMadOx on Oct 22, 2015 8:52:55 GMT -5
Maybe not for U8-U10....but U11 and U12??? At these ages, players need different focuses...At our club, the lower players are given more technical training and are separated from top players ready for high pace tactical training...If you attempt to throw in those players that are not technically ready, you can not proceed with the tactical part at a high pace. So, in some regards, yes these players need to be treated differently if you are focusing on growing your pool of players large enough to fill 11v11 squads. You will need these "lower" players to fill these teams and they must be technically ready to compete.
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous on Oct 22, 2015 9:28:07 GMT -5
Should top teams at clubs be treated differently than other teams in the same age group? (preferential treatment etc...) I'm thinking with regards to u8 -- u12 teams. No. An issue is that you give those players a sense of superiority over the other teams. This then creates a barrier that results in players not wanting to move between teams. It also causes a sense of entitlement with parents. (Girls anyway)
|
|
|
Post by soccerdadinga on Oct 22, 2015 9:35:43 GMT -5
This really depends on the depth of the club and really is a crucial question when folks leave Academy for Select. A really large club should be able to differentiate players. The problem is not the top players at the top team. Many times they are head and shoulders, literally sometimes, above every other kid. The problem is that the top of the 2nd team and the bottom of the 1st team can look awfully similar. I have seen that at many clubs. And so its one thing to say that the top players should be treated differently, but quite another to say that every player on that "top" team should be.
At some point in time, a club will need those 2nd team players, either because of injuries, movement to other clubs, lack of success of the top team, etc. And so it doesn't make sense to castigate them to some lesser level of person because of their perceived current skills set. And many times, the top team happens to really be the oldest team. (There are exceptions, but generally speaking that's true.)
There is also the counterpoint of placing kids where they can get training appropriate to their skill level. If they have not mastered ball control, field awareness, touch, timing, tactics and spatial awareness in small spaces, I am not certain why it makes more sense to put them in larger spaces or speed up the game. If kids cannot trap and settle the ball quickly, that deficit will infect their play and other kids who do have that skill should not be held back.
But I haven't seen that many clubs that have a top team completely filled with top players before ODP helps to point them out to the large clubs.
The other part that I have seen with great frequency is in Select if the "top" team does not get top results, players and parents bolt. You will see parents recruiting against their friends, trying to find whatever position their player does not play to improve the team. You will see parents/players alike looking for a better opportunity. And so it's not just the club that treats the top teams/players differently, the top players treat the club differently as well.
And what's happening now is that with DA/ECNL, the best players gravitate to those clubs to form very good teams. Which makes it odd then to treat the top team as so much better when its Classic I/Athena A, when there are arguably 2 levels of better soccer there. Your top team is some other clubs 2nd team.
So players -- to be clear we typically mean young kids -- deserve to be treated with respect and a desire to improve their skillset in soccer, so that the game expands.
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Oct 22, 2015 11:48:01 GMT -5
Absolutely not. Teams and players should all treated equal until they are getting paid. If they collect a paycheck then it's a different story. Same goes for the coaches too.
|
|
|
Post by youthsoccerdad on Oct 22, 2015 16:04:09 GMT -5
Maybe not for U8-U10....but U11 and U12??? At these ages, players need different focuses...At our club, the lower players are given more technical training and are separated from top players ready for high pace tactical training...If you attempt to throw in those players that are not technically ready, you can not proceed with the tactical part at a high pace. So, in some regards, yes these players need to be treated differently if you are focusing on growing your pool of players large enough to fill 11v11 squads. You will need these "lower" players to fill these teams and they must be technically ready to compete. There is a big assumption that the lower kids are lower because of technical skills. While that can be the case I can see numerous examples where kids that have greater mental or physical maturity are on the top team even if their technical skills are below another child. Again, next year it will all change. Many of these top players will look quite average when competing against kids that are bigger / stronger than they are and many of those average second team kids are going to look like messi when going against younger opposition. Not in every case but in most.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 22, 2015 16:06:19 GMT -5
Ok, how about at clubs where top teams pay more? Typically its for an extra night of practice.
So, the question might have been to basic, but everyone who answered no, would you still agree with your answer being no if its -
Should a top team or top pool of players be treated the same as the bottom team or bottom pool. For example a club with 8-10 teams in an age group. Would you recommend treating team 1 the same as team 10?
|
|
|
Post by jash on Oct 22, 2015 16:24:08 GMT -5
It's a fairly open-ended question, with lots of nuances. Treated the same doesn't have to mean the exact same training plan, for example. But there should be no special privileges or preferential treatment. If one team is offered extra training (for extra money, perhaps) then all should be.
My guess is you'll find most of the 'yes' answers come from parents of top younger players who haven't yet dealt with joining up with the players from lower teams to make a larger squad.
I've heard of (and to some degree witnessed) parents who think that only the top 6 players should be playing in U9 games, and forget the rest -- they can sit on the bench and watch, and be privileged to practice with the elites. First of all, what does that even mean? At that age it can literally change from week to week. And second of all, what are you going to do when you go 8v8 or 11v11?
My number one response to this remains the same. If you have a crystal ball and you know which players will absolutely positively be the best in 3 years, then go for it. Treat them differently. Otherwise you may be giving preferential treatment to a kid who is the tallest and fastest now but will never have the game vision you want. And similarly you may leave the next Messi behind because he is too small now and cannot help you in games.
Train them all, and don't be elitist.
|
|
|
Post by sidelinemama on Oct 22, 2015 17:46:11 GMT -5
Well in full disclosure, I voted no. But we are at a smaller club. It seems that many have outlined why they should NOT be treated differently. Can someone please clarify to me WHY they should be treated differently~money not withstanding, I don't even know how you would treat them differently? Sorry if I'm confused.
|
|
|
Post by soccerdadinga on Oct 22, 2015 18:25:19 GMT -5
I don't think that they should be treated "differently", but to answer your question, perhaps it's a good way to think about how they are treated differently.
1. Top teams travel to tournaments lower teams do not. So this is one instance where you can imagine that a top team would be able to compete and a lower team may not. (Think Disney, perhaps.) Of course, there are very few clubs in Atlanta that are so good that they need to play out of state talent to be competitive, but that's one instance.
2. Training. If most of the kids on the top team can settle the ball quickly and accurately pass it over long distances, you can imagine where the top team may play soccer on a larger field size to practice spacing, tactics, etc., in a way that a team with more players that cannot do that would not be able to. Again, US Soccer is explicitly trying to stop that phenomenon of players playing 11v11 just so parents can say that they do.
But of course that's not really what I think most of us who would vote no to that question responded to. It's the feeling that, even though you pay a lot of money, commit a crapload of time and energy to going to practices and games and the rest, your kid can be treated as a second class citizen because he/she is not "as good" as the top team players. When your kids get beyond U8-U12 and you see the level of talent out there in Georgia, and the aggregation of talent at the largest clubs, then the top team thing seems so silly, particularly when those 2nd team players (or God-forbid 3rd or 4th team players) that are castigated as being horrible are who the club has to rely on to make up for injuries, kids dropping out, moving to other teams or moving away.
I think that its completely fine to tailor training and teams to kids abilities, but all kids -- remember U8 - U12 are just kids -- deserve to be treated fairly. What I have found funny and sad over time is that the top teams at U8-U12 eventually give way to the fact that there are some kids who are better athletes and happen to be at other clubs. And so what happens is that parents and coaches recruit them against the top players. So the top team isn't so fixed. Worse yet, after ODP identifies the best kids, they migrate towards the best clubs. Meaning that at all but 4-5 clubs, the top team that is treated so much better is another clubs 2nd team.
My own experience is that this is a much more serious problem on the Girls side. There are lots of excellent Boys teams at small clubs and it feels much less personal.
|
|
|
Post by spectator on Oct 22, 2015 19:37:02 GMT -5
"Treated differently" as in elevated to being told not to speak to any players on the 'lessor' teams (yes this did happen) - no no h-e-double hockey sticks no.
"treated differently' as in top team pays more in fees for extra trainings, more competitive tournaments, then yes - but the only 'difference' in any youth sport should be financial not emotional - especially not with teen girls.
|
|
|
Post by soccerdadinga on Oct 22, 2015 19:58:36 GMT -5
I am sure that happens and coaches saying that if you don't do X well, you'll be put on the 2nd team, because they play like crap, or players not speaking to 2nd players when they play up, or parents holding events for just the 1st team when younger players have been invited to play on the team, etc. There's a lot of nonsense that goes on and most of it is on the Girls side.
Some of it comes from parents who need to feel better by making others feel worse -- or need to feel smug. Some is the players. But I've only seen this with Soccer on the Girls side. (Maybe LAX has the same thing too, not sure.) But its because folks want to live their social status, or relive high school on the winning team, through their daughters, or act out their own anxieties through their daughters. It's odd that youth sports bring this out in folks.
But then again, it's considered completely fine to yell at referees for making the wrong "Offsides" or Handball call, by parents who have absolutely no clue what either those penalties are. Or to scream at the ref to call a foul after a perfectly legal shoulder tackle. Try screaming at the refs in a basketball game, at almost any level, and they will put you out of the game. It happens.
|
|
|
Post by setpieces on Oct 23, 2015 1:27:21 GMT -5
I am sure that happens and coaches saying that if you don't do X well, you'll be put on the 2nd team, because they play like crap, or players not speaking to 2nd players when they play up, or parents holding events for just the 1st team when younger players have been invited to play on the team, etc. There's a lot of nonsense that goes on and most of it is on the Girls side. Some of it comes from parents who need to feel better by making others feel worse -- or need to feel smug. Some is the players. But I've only seen this with Soccer on the Girls side. (Maybe LAX has the same thing too, not sure.) But its because folks want to live their social status, or relive high school on the winning team, through their daughters, or act out their own anxieties through their daughters. It's odd that youth sports bring this out in folks. But then again, it's considered completely fine to yell at referees for making the wrong "Offsides" or Handball call, by parents who have absolutely no clue what either those penalties are. Or to scream at the ref to call a foul after a perfectly legal shoulder tackle. Try screaming at the refs in a basketball game, at almost any level, and they will put you out of the game. It happens. I have the experience of a boy and a girl at a larger club and I have seen preferential treatment of the top team for both. Do I agree with it? At the younger ages, U8 - U12 it's not really that important to differentiate as there are so many changes with players that occur quickly at these ages (technical skills, motor skills, growth, maturity, soccer IQ, personality, etc). I agree that there's not much difference at the younger ages between the lower half of the top team players and the top half of the 2nd team. I still don't fully understand why some of these selections are made during tryouts. Team pools should be used for all the academy ages because players can change from day to day and week to week and shouldn't be relegated to a specific team for the whole season.
As players get older, the difference does become more apparent. U13/U14 top teams usually travel to more competitive tournaments and play in more competitive leagues. Understanding that there are higher expectations, more practice means more money. I will say that the nonsense of special treatment outside of the monetary and travel commitment appears to be much more prevalent on the girls side. I can only assume that this is due to parents (and some coaches) living vicariously through their children/players. Threats by a coach of dropping a player to a lower team are pointless and demotivating for kids. I'm sure they know when they're not playing their best and could use more encouragement than criticism in those times. Soccer is as much about confidence as it is ability. Parents treating guest players or play ups from the 2nd team are setting a terrible example for their children. Many of these mean spirited players have learned this behavior from their parents. It's quite ridiculous since none of this will matter by U17/18 but I guess they can always say my kid was "the best" when they played...
|
|