|
|
Post by anonymoustoo on Sept 23, 2013 16:06:39 GMT -5
Is it better to play most of the game on a higher level classic team that struggles or a team one level lower that is more stable......coaching is equivalent?
|
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Sept 23, 2013 16:18:00 GMT -5
I would favor more playing time. If you are struggling you will likely be Relegated thus putting the team where it belonged in the first place. That's the great thing about promotion and relegation.
Which team is more stable, i.e. made up of players with similar dedication?
|
|
|
|
Post by anonymoustoo on Sept 23, 2013 16:24:31 GMT -5
yep that is what we went with, however child is playing new position that he doesn't really enjoy but it benefits the team. It doesn't really take advantage of the child's strengths imo...however the coaches hands are tied. He is an excellent coach and seems to know what he is doing. Team will have to fight hard to keep from getting relegated. Lower level team was fun, child played a lot too and probably had more fun. He was really ready to move up though as a player. We will see.
|
|
|
|
Post by spectator on Sept 23, 2013 22:37:56 GMT -5
The game is the best teacher so playing time on a developing team trumps bench warming on an elite one in my humble opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by bogan on Dec 10, 2020 12:27:30 GMT -5
I would favor more playing time. If you are struggling you will likely be Relegated thus putting the team where it belonged in the first place. That's the great thing about promotion and relegation. Which team is more stable, i.e. made up of players with similar dedication? I agree-promotion and relegation is the way to go. |
|
