|
|
Post by chicagofire97 on Sept 20, 2013 17:29:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by soccerpapi on Sept 20, 2013 18:33:53 GMT -5
Interesting article, I would add a few more reasons related to our quantity advantage (1) "pay to play" (2) "lack of affordability" for some (3) "win at all cost" mentality - less patience & focus on slow, but successful, technically focus development.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2013 19:04:17 GMT -5
too many clubs want volume/#s for quality of kids. this isn't rec, its ok to tell kids they aren't ready for competitive soccer.
too many clubs, the motto is, if you can pay, you can play. the bottom teams are $$$$. pay the coaches less, help fund the program etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by chicagofire97 on Sept 21, 2013 9:09:25 GMT -5
I don't disagree with soccerdude10, however we don't have a system in the USA where pro clubs pay to develop kids. Shouldn't our best coaches get paid well? And I know a majority of coaches are part time and have to hold a second job, so you can't really pay them any less than what they get.
Also, in rec, you usually get a coach with no experience, usually a parent volunteer. I saw decent kids get turned away from Academy and told to "go play rec for a year", but the quality was so bad (or non-existent), how were they to improve?
|
|
