|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Apr 26, 2021 22:31:15 GMT -5
The textbook definition of pay to play. Not really sure what that is supposed to mean. There are extremely talented ladies on that team and they all would make any other team in the state. They are not paying to play. And there are plenty of talented ladies behind them that are paying the same school and are playing JV or not playing at all. Not sure either, but I'm gonna take a crack at it, and if I'm wrong.... I'm wrong. ALL of the players' parents at Westminster have the ability to pay for their players to be on the elite teams and programs from a very young age. Heck, most private schools are this way... AND... it's not even just the private schools... look at the teams that everyone is naming as dominant teams.... Walton, Johns Creek, Roswell, West Forsyth, Dunwoody, Lassiter, etc... all very wealthy communities. Now look at the less advantageous areas and see how their teams are doing. There's an objectively, definitive link in the ability to "pay to play" (and train) from early ages all the way to high school and how good their HS teams are. Not through the schools, but through the clubs and private sessions. |
|
|
|
Post by futbolhero on Apr 26, 2021 22:38:40 GMT -5
Not really sure what that is supposed to mean. There are extremely talented ladies on that team and they all would make any other team in the state. They are not paying to play. And there are plenty of talented ladies behind them that are paying the same school and are playing JV or not playing at all. Not sure either, but I'm gonna take a crack at it, and if I'm wrong.... I'm wrong. ALL of the players' parents at Westminster have the ability to pay for their players to be on the elite teams and programs from a very young age. Heck, most private schools are this way... AND... it's not even just the private schools... look at the teams that everyone is naming as dominant teams.... Walton, Johns Creek, Roswell, West Forsyth, Dunwoody, Lassiter, etc... all very wealthy communities. Now look at the less advantageous areas and see how their teams are doing. There's an objectively, definitive link between the ability to "pay to play" (and train) from early ages all the way to high school. Not through the schools, but through the clubs and private sessions. We got at least one smart one here. Congrats you deciphered my comment. |
|
|
|
Post by futbolhero on Apr 26, 2021 22:40:57 GMT -5
Not really sure what that is supposed to mean. There are extremely talented ladies on that team and they all would make any other team in the state. They are not paying to play. And there are plenty of talented ladies behind them that are paying the same school and are playing JV or not playing at all. Not sure either, but I'm gonna take a crack at it, and if I'm wrong.... I'm wrong. ALL of the players' parents at Westminster have the ability to pay for their players to be on the elite teams and programs from a very young age. Heck, most private schools are this way... AND... it's not even just the private schools... look at the teams that everyone is naming as dominant teams.... Walton, Johns Creek, Roswell, West Forsyth, Dunwoody, Lassiter, etc... all very wealthy communities. Now look at the less advantageous areas and see how their teams are doing. There's an objectively, definitive link between the ability to "pay to play" (and train) from early ages all the way to high school. Not through the schools, but through the clubs and private sessions. Not to mention some if not all of these Atlanta area private schools and clubs have legacy players/families. Name and checkbook can get you a long ways if you aren’t afraid to use it. |
|
|
|
Post by unitedwestand on Apr 27, 2021 4:38:27 GMT -5
Not sure either, but I'm gonna take a crack at it, and if I'm wrong.... I'm wrong. ALL of the players' parents at Westminster have the ability to pay for their players to be on the elite teams and programs from a very young age. Heck, most private schools are this way... AND... it's not even just the private schools... look at the teams that everyone is naming as dominant teams.... Walton, Johns Creek, Roswell, West Forsyth, Dunwoody, Lassiter, etc... all very wealthy communities. Now look at the less advantageous areas and see how their teams are doing. There's an objectively, definitive link between the ability to "pay to play" (and train) from early ages all the way to high school. Not through the schools, but through the clubs and private sessions. Not to mention some if not all of these Atlanta area private schools and clubs have legacy players/families. Name and checkbook can get you a long ways if you aren’t afraid to use it. Are you saying that because they can afford private training that it's not fair? I'm not a firm believer in equity. Life isn't fair. No one is stopping kids from working on their own. The kids going to trainers still have to put in the work and know how to apply what they're learning in game situations. At the end of the day you just have to grind. My son pays for his own training. He got a job and pays his trainers because I won't. He's old enough to invest in himself and every other kid should learn this. Parents are doing their children a disservice making them feel like victims. Kids need to have that dog! Priorities and time management along with husstle will equal alot of things out. Genetics matter as well! Pay to play is when a kid isn't good enough but they always get playing time or make the top rosters over kids that are decisively better than them. Not kids that have parents who are willing to invest in them. I.e. training and playing club ball! |
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Apr 27, 2021 5:34:54 GMT -5
Pay to play is when a kid isn't good enough but they always get playing time or make the top rosters over kids that are decisively better than them. Not kids that have parents who are willing to invest in them. I.e. training and playing club ball! I disagree. I’m not saying it should be free and I’m not offering a solution because I don’t have one but pay to play is when kids with wealthy parents get to play club soccer and poor kids get to play rec (or not at all). Notwithstanding a tiny percentage who bridge the class divide by some gift in the form of financial aid... It is what it is. |
|
|
|
Post by kickpuncher on Apr 27, 2021 10:38:53 GMT -5
The GHSA Girls soccer playoffs are a joke. There were 7 games in 7A first round playoffs with scores of 5+ to zero. Four of them were 10-0. This out of “fairness” nonsense to give to these bumble no where schools to the same number of playoff teams is about as logical as ice fishing in the Caribbean. Though it’s probably more out of lazy/cheapness as making a seeding committee would require effort and money. Either way, only region champs and runner ups should get an automatic bid, everyone else is based off rankings. Just perspective, the Boys 7A first round had three games of 5+ to zero scores too. It's not just soccer, because all of the major sports playoffs are setup the same way with the same flaws. As an example: This year, in every sport, region 1 plays region 4 in the first round. Region 1 has 4 teams which means that regardless of how awful that fourth place team is in region 1 (and I can promise they have been beyond atrocious in a couple of sports) they are guaranteed to make the playoffs just to get completely obliterated by the first team from Region 4. This all happen while multiple other and better teams sit at home because they happened to be the fifth best team in a seven team region. In reality, that fifth best team had no shot to win state so it doesn't impact the ultimate outcome, but it does matter just because it is an unfairly weighted way to get down to the best teams. Again, I can't state just how awful some of those 4th place teams have been from small regions. I can't speak for soccer but a couple other sports had almost nonfunctional teams make state just because they had to based on only having four teams in the region. Solutions? Flawed but certainly better. Some states take the top 32 teams based on some sort of ranking metric and lay out a bracket of 1 vs 32, 2 vs 31 etc. I'd imagine using something like the Maxpreps power rankings would be a start. Those come with their own flaws. I don't know exactly what formula it uses, but I do know it would need some serious adjusting if it were to be the method used to rank teams. The sport I am most familiar with made it clear that average teams with weak schedules were far too highly ranked for reasons that were unclear. Those falsely inflated rankings became very clear when the state tourney came around so it kind of fixed it's own problem in the long run, but it did allow some weaker teams to sit too highly in the rankings. However, using a ranking system would have kept 5 really bad teams out of the playoffs and replaced them with 5 forgettable but more legitimate teams. Again, teams that weren't going anywhere but were certainly better than some of the 4th ranked teams from weak regions. GHSA would want to fight back and talk about travel and logistics but the reality of that issue boils down to having 4-6 large schools that are geographically isolated from the other 45 schools in 7A (probably more spread out in lower classes). My guess is that using a power ranking system to build a state playoff would results in less overall travel because those far flung schools tend to be in smaller regions which means they are unfairly rewarded for things that aren't determined on the field of play. Unfortunately, GHSA does not come across as a nimble and inventive bureaucracy. They have an air of "we do it this way because we have always done it this way" hovering around them. That usually means useful change comes along 5-10 years after everyone else knew it needed to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerloafer on Apr 27, 2021 11:11:22 GMT -5
Need a quick metric to determine the academic success level of a high school? Check the ranking of their girls soccer team.
Academic success is primarily driven by socioeconomic factors. (I said primarily, not all).
A highly ranked girls soccer team indicates two things:
- a culture that respects the equality of girls as athletes
- the economic means to invest in developing the girls athletic prowess
|
|
|
|
Post by nole95 on Apr 27, 2021 11:25:02 GMT -5
At this point, I think West Forsyth is the team to beat in 7A. Yes, they did lose to Lambert in PKs in the regular season, but all sorts of craziness went on in that game. Including an extremely questionable red card to West’s best player and scorer 16 minutes in. They turned around two weeks later and pretty much dominated an excellent Johns Creek team. I would not be surprised to see a West-Lambert final, which would be very interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by unitedwestand on Apr 27, 2021 11:31:02 GMT -5
Pay to play is when a kid isn't good enough but they always get playing time or make the top rosters over kids that are decisively better than them. Not kids that have parents who are willing to invest in them. I.e. training and playing club ball! I disagree. I’m not saying it should be free and I’m not offering a solution because I don’t have one but pay to play is when kids with wealthy parents get to play club soccer and poor kids get to play rec (or not at all). Notwithstanding a tiny percentage who bridge the class divide by some gift in the form of financial aid... It is what it is. How? If this was true half the NBA wouldn't be in the NBA! Historically poor kids in the inner city make it big in the NBA and Football, how can that be with your view point? How is that possible? AAU and football are both more expensive than soccer. Baseball is as well! I just don't agree with you. Hardwork and genetics are a bigger factor than finances. It is what it is as you said. But kids need to put in that work and not be taught that they're victims. |
|
|
|
Post by unitedwestand on Apr 27, 2021 11:36:08 GMT -5
At this point, I think West Forsyth is the team to beat in 7A. Yes, they did lose to Lambert in PKs in the regular season, but all sorts of craziness went on in that game. Including an extremely questionable red card to West’s best player and scorer 16 minutes in. They turned around two weeks later and pretty much dominated an excellent Johns Creek team. I would not be surprised to see a West-Lambert final, which would be very interesting. Lambert is going to have their hands full with Brookwood. Don't get ahead of yourself there. That's going to be an excellent game. And Parkview is a young, physical, aggressive team. The entire team pretty much all play ECNL and they have 1 of the best coaches in the country. Both should be excellent games. But... I wouldn't count my chickens before they hatch. |
|
|
|
Post by DunwoodySoccerDad on Apr 27, 2021 11:46:40 GMT -5
I disagree. I’m not saying it should be free and I’m not offering a solution because I don’t have one but pay to play is when kids with wealthy parents get to play club soccer and poor kids get to play rec (or not at all). Notwithstanding a tiny percentage who bridge the class divide by some gift in the form of financial aid... It is what it is. How? If this was true half the NBA wouldn't be in the NBA! Historically poor kids in the inner city make it big in the NBA and Football, how can that be with your view point? How is that possible? AAU and football are both more expensive than soccer. Baseball is as well! I just don't agree with you. Hardwork and genetics are a bigger factor than finances. It is what it is as you said. But kids need to put in that work and not be taught that they're victims. Easy - because a lot of the coaching you get at the youth level in basketball, football, etc. is coming from dads who played those sports and volunteer their time. And those sports are so ingrained in American society that some kids learn from other kids and/or their family members. Soccer has been around in this country a long time but just never approached the popularity widespread that sports like football, basketball and baseball have had. Think about most parents coaching rec soccer - many of them never played the sport growing up but can teach kids the basics at the U5-U8 level in rec leagues. After that, if a kid is serious about soccer, they need someone coaching them who played the sport for a long time. In our country, those types of people can be hard to find, so club soccer fills the void with paid coaches. |
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Apr 27, 2021 11:48:10 GMT -5
I've watched a handful of good games and to me -- I just love the crowds, the student sections chanting and riding players - the sense of playing for something! Watching girls put it all on the line because you lose you go home and for many their soccer careers are over.
|
|
|
|
Post by unitedwestand on Apr 27, 2021 12:03:41 GMT -5
How? If this was true half the NBA wouldn't be in the NBA! Historically poor kids in the inner city make it big in the NBA and Football, how can that be with your view point? How is that possible? AAU and football are both more expensive than soccer. Baseball is as well! I just don't agree with you. Hardwork and genetics are a bigger factor than finances. It is what it is as you said. But kids need to put in that work and not be taught that they're victims. Easy - because a lot of the coaching you get at the youth level in basketball, football, etc. is coming from dads who played those sports and volunteer their time. And those sports are so ingrained in American society that some kids learn from other kids and/or their family members. Soccer has been around in this country a long time but just never approached the popularity widespread that sports like football, basketball and baseball have had. Think about most parents coaching rec soccer - many of them never played the sport growing up but can teach kids the basics at the U5-U8 level in rec leagues. After that, if a kid is serious about soccer, they need someone coaching them who played the sport for a long time. In our country, those types of people can be hard to find, so club soccer fills the void with paid coaches. Yeah, that's all true. Still doesn't validate his point. Those sports are MORE EXPENSIVE than club soccer!!! Blaming "pay to Play" as not being fair and holding other kids down doesn't add up. When the more expensive sports have a massive amount of inner city kids making it big. And playing AAU. Those scouts aren't going to rec basketball games. 1 season of highschool football at my local high school cost 2k for a season. That's not a full calendar year like club. So once again their argument isn't valid in my eyes. |
|
|
|
Post by flix on Apr 27, 2021 12:15:06 GMT -5
Drugs are bad m’kay.
|
|
|
|
Post by DunwoodySoccerDad on Apr 27, 2021 12:17:21 GMT -5
Easy - because a lot of the coaching you get at the youth level in basketball, football, etc. is coming from dads who played those sports and volunteer their time. And those sports are so ingrained in American society that some kids learn from other kids and/or their family members. Soccer has been around in this country a long time but just never approached the popularity widespread that sports like football, basketball and baseball have had. Think about most parents coaching rec soccer - many of them never played the sport growing up but can teach kids the basics at the U5-U8 level in rec leagues. After that, if a kid is serious about soccer, they need someone coaching them who played the sport for a long time. In our country, those types of people can be hard to find, so club soccer fills the void with paid coaches. Yeah, that's all true. Still doesn't validate his point. Those sports are MORE EXPENSIVE than club soccer!!! Blaming "pay to Play" as not being fair and holding other kids down doesn't add up. When the more expensive sports have a massive amount of inner city kids making it big. And playing AAU. Those scouts aren't going to rec basketball games. 1 season of highschool football at my local high school cost 2k for a season. That's not a full calendar year like club. So once again their argument isn't valid in my eyes. But do the talented kids actually pay anything in those sports? You really think some stud running back playing for Walton HS has to pay $2k to play varsity football? I don't know the ins & outs of HS football costs but being an avid college FB fan, I'd bet you any amount of money that the best players aren't paying a dime to play. The point I'm making and I think he's making too is that at the younger ages (6 to say 12 or 13), club soccer is expensive compared to most sports. You can learn a ton from volunteer coaches in baseball, basketball and football at the youth level because so many dads played those sports. Then they get to middle school and high school and are identified as being very talented, so booster clubs help pay for their fees, equipment, etc. to play those sports. |
|
|
|
Post by unitedwestand on Apr 27, 2021 12:33:20 GMT -5
Yeah, that's all true. Still doesn't validate his point. Those sports are MORE EXPENSIVE than club soccer!!! Blaming "pay to Play" as not being fair and holding other kids down doesn't add up. When the more expensive sports have a massive amount of inner city kids making it big. And playing AAU. Those scouts aren't going to rec basketball games. 1 season of highschool football at my local high school cost 2k for a season. That's not a full calendar year like club. So once again their argument isn't valid in my eyes. But do the talented kids actually pay anything in those sports? You really think some stud running back playing for Walton HS has to pay $2k to play varsity football? I don't know the ins & outs of HS football costs but being an avid college FB fan, I'd bet you any amount of money that the best players aren't paying a dime to play. The point I'm making and I think he's making too is that at the younger ages (6 to say 12 or 13), club soccer is expensive compared to most sports. You can learn a ton from volunteer coaches in baseball, basketball and football at the youth level because so many dads played those sports. Then they get to middle school and high school and are identified as being very talented, so booster clubs help pay for their fees, equipment, etc. to play those sports. I get your point but team elite isn't free. Georgia Jackets isn't free. They do allow guest players and the top 10 kids don't pay to play baseball or basketball. And all of those are ABSOLUTELY more expensive than academy soccer. That's factual. I have multiple kids and club soccer is definitely cheaper. Go to any baseball website or top AAU team in the Metro area and look at their fees. It's the way of the land in youth sports in America unfortunately! What I'm saying is that you can't blame the financial structure completely. Because these other sports cost more and economically poor kids make it to the highest levels and to college. Only the top 1 percent are playing for free and you'd be surprised which kids are playing at the big 6 for free. That's my point. And at least the club soccer fees are similar. In baseball and AAU basketball they vary drastically depending upon what the quality of the team is that you're playing on. |
|
|
|
Post by nole95 on Apr 27, 2021 12:34:35 GMT -5
At this point, I think West Forsyth is the team to beat in 7A. Yes, they did lose to Lambert in PKs in the regular season, but all sorts of craziness went on in that game. Including an extremely questionable red card to West’s best player and scorer 16 minutes in. They turned around two weeks later and pretty much dominated an excellent Johns Creek team. I would not be surprised to see a West-Lambert final, which would be very interesting. Lambert is going to have their hands full with Brookwood. Don't get ahead of yourself there. That's going to be an excellent game. And Parkview is a young, physical, aggressive team. The entire team pretty much all play ECNL and they have 1 of the best coaches in the country. Both should be excellent games. But... I wouldn't count my chickens before they hatch. I tend to agree with you about the Lambert-Brookwood game. They played earlier in the season with Lambert winning 3-2, which was one of the toughest games Lambert had all season. That should be a good game. As for West-Parkview, until someone figures out how to stop West's leading scorer and best player, they are going to be a very tough team to beat. West has a pretty good defense and a good supporting cast to get the ball to their top scorer. She currently leads the state with something like 48 goals. Her two worst games were against Westmister (scored once) and Lambert (red card 16 minutes into the game). It's possible that these round of 8 games for both teams might be tougher than who they would potentially face in the semi-finals. |
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Apr 27, 2021 12:47:03 GMT -5
Yeah, that's all true. Still doesn't validate his point. Those sports are MORE EXPENSIVE than club soccer!!! Blaming "pay to Play" as not being fair and holding other kids down doesn't add up. When the more expensive sports have a massive amount of inner city kids making it big. And playing AAU. Those scouts aren't going to rec basketball games. 1 season of highschool football at my local high school cost 2k for a season. That's not a full calendar year like club. So once again their argument isn't valid in my eyes. But do the talented kids actually pay anything in those sports? You really think some stud running back playing for Walton HS has to pay $2k to play varsity football? I don't know the ins & outs of HS football costs but being an avid college FB fan, I'd bet you any amount of money that the best players aren't paying a dime to play. The point I'm making and I think he's making too is that at the younger ages (6 to say 12 or 13), club soccer is expensive compared to most sports. You can learn a ton from volunteer coaches in baseball, basketball and football at the youth level because so many dads played those sports. Then they get to middle school and high school and are identified as being very talented, so booster clubs help pay for their fees, equipment, etc. to play those sports. I was the team doctor of many big schools in the area and kids do have to pay for their equipment and other expenses. They do fundraisers and booster club stuff but if they don't raise enough to cover it then they pay it. I have seen many of the football kids' parents struggle to pay it but they do pay. |
|
|
|
Post by DunwoodySoccerDad on Apr 27, 2021 12:49:02 GMT -5
But do the talented kids actually pay anything in those sports? You really think some stud running back playing for Walton HS has to pay $2k to play varsity football? I don't know the ins & outs of HS football costs but being an avid college FB fan, I'd bet you any amount of money that the best players aren't paying a dime to play. The point I'm making and I think he's making too is that at the younger ages (6 to say 12 or 13), club soccer is expensive compared to most sports. You can learn a ton from volunteer coaches in baseball, basketball and football at the youth level because so many dads played those sports. Then they get to middle school and high school and are identified as being very talented, so booster clubs help pay for their fees, equipment, etc. to play those sports. I get your point but team elite isn't free. Georgia Jackets isn't free. They do allow guest players and the top 10 kids don't pay to play baseball or basketball. And all of those are ABSOLUTELY more expensive than academy soccer. That's factual. I have multiple kids and club soccer is definitely cheaper. Go to any baseball website or top AAU team in the Metro area and look at their fees. It's the way of the land in youth sports in America unfortunately! What I'm saying is that you can't blame the financial structure completely. Because these other sports cost more and economically poor kids make it to the highest levels and to college. Only the top 1 percent are playing for free and you'd be surprised which kids are playing at the big 6 for free. That's my point. And at least the club soccer fees are similar. In baseball and AAU basketball they vary drastically depending upon what the quality of the team is that you're playing on. I'm fully aware of the recent trends in sports like baseball and how expensive it is to join a travel team. Totally get that. But how recently did that start? Another question is - in baseball, basketball and football, do the really top players HAVE to spend that type of money to make it to the top? Or is that a choice that some kids/parents make in order to try to make it to the top, knowing that the chances are very, very slim that they will? I just think in looking at the current soccer landscape that it's easier for a very talented but poor/disadvantaged kid to make it in baseball, football or basketball than it is in soccer. |
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Apr 27, 2021 12:59:29 GMT -5
Lambert is going to have their hands full with Brookwood. Don't get ahead of yourself there. That's going to be an excellent game. And Parkview is a young, physical, aggressive team. The entire team pretty much all play ECNL and they have 1 of the best coaches in the country. Both should be excellent games. But... I wouldn't count my chickens before they hatch. I tend to agree with you about the Lambert-Brookwood game. They played earlier in the season with Lambert winning 3-2, which was one of the toughest games Lambert had all season. That should be a good game. As for West-Parkview, until someone figures out how to stop West's leading scorer and best player, they are going to be a very tough team to beat. West has a pretty good defense and a good supporting cast to get the ball to their top scorer. She currently leads the state with something like 48 goals. Her two worst games were against Westmister (scored once) and Lambert (red card 16 minutes into the game). It's possible that these round of 8 games for both teams might be tougher than who they would potentially face in the semi-finals. Sounds like Lambert figured out how to stop West's leading scorer and best player. |
|
|
|
Post by unitedwestand on Apr 27, 2021 13:17:31 GMT -5
I get your point but team elite isn't free. Georgia Jackets isn't free. They do allow guest players and the top 10 kids don't pay to play baseball or basketball. And all of those are ABSOLUTELY more expensive than academy soccer. That's factual. I have multiple kids and club soccer is definitely cheaper. Go to any baseball website or top AAU team in the Metro area and look at their fees. It's the way of the land in youth sports in America unfortunately! What I'm saying is that you can't blame the financial structure completely. Because these other sports cost more and economically poor kids make it to the highest levels and to college. Only the top 1 percent are playing for free and you'd be surprised which kids are playing at the big 6 for free. That's my point. And at least the club soccer fees are similar. In baseball and AAU basketball they vary drastically depending upon what the quality of the team is that you're playing on. I'm fully aware of the recent trends in sports like baseball and how expensive it is to join a travel team. Totally get that. But how recently did that start? Another question is - in baseball, basketball and football, do the really top players HAVE to spend that type of money to make it to the top? Or is that a choice that some kids/parents make in order to try to make it to the top, knowing that the chances are very, very slim that they will? I just think in looking at the current soccer landscape that it's easier for a very talented but poor/disadvantaged kid to make it in baseball, football or basketball than it is in soccer. You just hit my point on the head. It's a choice!!! No one is forcing anyone to pay or to play. I DON'T believe in equity. I believe in equality but not equity. You have to grind for it. Life Lessons. It's why we put our kids in sports in the first place. And like I said the top 1 percent don't pay in any sport including soccer. And soccer wasn't expensive when I was a kid and I graduated high school in the early 2000s. Sports across the board have increased drastically over the last decade or 2. And I played basketball, football, and soccer. All throughout high school. Also ran track. And we haven't even begun to talk about track fees or cheerleading fees or gymnastics. Soccer is not close to being the most expensive. But you have valid points about it being ridiculous but we feed the system by participating. |
|
|
|
Post by 04gparent on Apr 27, 2021 13:29:02 GMT -5
I get your point but team elite isn't free. Georgia Jackets isn't free. They do allow guest players and the top 10 kids don't pay to play baseball or basketball. And all of those are ABSOLUTELY more expensive than academy soccer. That's factual. I have multiple kids and club soccer is definitely cheaper. Go to any baseball website or top AAU team in the Metro area and look at their fees. It's the way of the land in youth sports in America unfortunately! What I'm saying is that you can't blame the financial structure completely. Because these other sports cost more and economically poor kids make it to the highest levels and to college. Only the top 1 percent are playing for free and you'd be surprised which kids are playing at the big 6 for free. That's my point. And at least the club soccer fees are similar. In baseball and AAU basketball they vary drastically depending upon what the quality of the team is that you're playing on. I'm fully aware of the recent trends in sports like baseball and how expensive it is to join a travel team. Totally get that. But how recently did that start? Another question is - in baseball, basketball and football, do the really top players HAVE to spend that type of money to make it to the top? Or is that a choice that some kids/parents make in order to try to make it to the top, knowing that the chances are very, very slim that they will? I just think in looking at the current soccer landscape that it's easier for a very talented but poor/disadvantaged kid to make it in baseball, football or basketball than it is in soccer. I totally disagree. Number 1 it is hard for any athlete to make it big. They all grind and develop their skills in all sports. There is no easier or cheaper path. We may be more familier with Soccer, but many of us have other children that play other sports where it is just as expensive if not more (cheer, baseball, basketball, football). Let's talk basketball. The days of a basketball player who only plays rec or even AAU making it big are gone. The EYBL has replaced AAU for the best of the best. AAU is the wild wild west. Anyone can form a AAU team and its up to the parents to find the best fit. However, the EYBL model is slightly different. The clubs/teams have partnerships with shoe and apparel companies (with the hopes of signing a future star). Parent funding only supplements. Parents are still responsible for travel. I personally know several top basketball prospects. All of them work with a private coaches to improve their game. Even the ones from low-income families. The families sacrifice to make it work with the hopes of a substantial financial reward.They are not on the blacktop somewhere playing pick up games all day. Some private soccer trainers are not expensive. The trainers are willing to work with parents. All clubs have programs to help children play if there is a demonstrated need. NO EXCUSES! Soccer teams probably practice the least amount of time per week than most other major sports Most clubs practice 3 x week for 1.5 hours = 4.5 hours a week. No one will become elite in that amount of practice time... Basketball, baseball and football are all double that for the elite teams. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Apr 27, 2021 15:26:57 GMT -5
Just to throw another wrench into the mix about pay to play conversation....
The skills of soccer seems to be the most difficult to master and take years to hone before one can become competent in soccer. Meanwhile, in other sports mentioned, Football and Basketball, there are several stories of players not even entering into the sport until reaching high school. When was the last time (or even 1st time) you EVER heard of a player showing up freshman year and saying I want to try soccer... and then becoming scholarship worthy.
I played all these sports growing up, and I'm not trying to demean what it take to be good in any of them, but soccer is unique in that the foundation of skills needed to be successful at an elite level take many years to develop. Football, is very basic... are you coordinated, do you have average speed at least, and most important are you able to take the physical contact? Same as in basketball, sure you need some coordination and athletic prowess, but you can become a pretty proficient shooter with about 6 months of shooting drills. You don't even have to necessarily become proficient in certain aspects like dribbling if you can master other aspects of the game... or are unnaturally tall.
I'm not saying there is any fault in paying to have your kids play at the elite levels... heck I'm on this website just like you (if I wasn't paying I wouldn't be). But to deny that kids from affluent areas don't get a huge advantage and tend to have HS teams lead the HS soccer rankings and perform well in state tourneys... that it is all chalked up in the "want to" of the player and parents is a bit of a stretch.
|
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Apr 27, 2021 15:35:18 GMT -5
Just to throw another wrench into the mix about pay to play conversation.... The skills of soccer seems to be the most difficult to master and take years to hone before one can become competent in soccer. Meanwhile, in other sports mentioned, Football and Basketball, there are several stories of players not even entering into the sport until reaching high school. When was the last time (or even 1st time) you EVER heard of a player showing up freshman year and saying I want to try soccer... and then becoming scholarship worthy. I played all these sports growing up, and I'm not trying to demean what it take to be good in any of them, but soccer is unique in that the foundation of skills needed to be successful at an elite level take many years to develop. Football, is very basic... are you coordinated, do you have average speed at least, and most important are you able to take the physical contact? Same as in basketball, sure you need some coordination and athletic prowess, but you can become a pretty proficient shooter with about 6 months of shooting drills. You don't even have to necessarily become proficient in certain aspects like dribbling if you can master other aspects of the game... or are unnaturally tall. I'm not saying there is any fault in paying to have your kids play at the elite levels... heck I'm on this website just like you (if I wasn't paying I wouldn't be). But to deny that kids from affluent areas don't get a huge advantage and tend to have HS teams lead the HS soccer rankings and perform well in state tourneys... that it is all chalked up in the "want to" of the player and parents is a bit of a stretch. Alex Morgan didnt start playing soccer in till she was 14. I would say she’s done pretty well for herself. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Apr 27, 2021 15:45:58 GMT -5
Just to throw another wrench into the mix about pay to play conversation.... The skills of soccer seems to be the most difficult to master and take years to hone before one can become competent in soccer. Meanwhile, in other sports mentioned, Football and Basketball, there are several stories of players not even entering into the sport until reaching high school. When was the last time (or even 1st time) you EVER heard of a player showing up freshman year and saying I want to try soccer... and then becoming scholarship worthy. I played all these sports growing up, and I'm not trying to demean what it take to be good in any of them, but soccer is unique in that the foundation of skills needed to be successful at an elite level take many years to develop. Football, is very basic... are you coordinated, do you have average speed at least, and most important are you able to take the physical contact? Same as in basketball, sure you need some coordination and athletic prowess, but you can become a pretty proficient shooter with about 6 months of shooting drills. You don't even have to necessarily become proficient in certain aspects like dribbling if you can master other aspects of the game... or are unnaturally tall. I'm not saying there is any fault in paying to have your kids play at the elite levels... heck I'm on this website just like you (if I wasn't paying I wouldn't be). But to deny that kids from affluent areas don't get a huge advantage and tend to have HS teams lead the HS soccer rankings and perform well in state tourneys... that it is all chalked up in the "want to" of the player and parents is a bit of a stretch. Alex Morgan didnt start playing soccer in till she was 14. I would say she’s done pretty well for herself. HAHA! touche! Yes, she is an exception. Although it was that she didn't start playing CLUB soccer until 14. She did play soccer before that age, she played multiple sports, she just didn't concentrate on it. She was also graced with size and speed, and power. Note: her touch still isn't the highest quality and I would say it is probably from lacking that foundation that others have. |
|
|
|
Post by DunwoodySoccerDad on Apr 27, 2021 15:56:14 GMT -5
Just to throw another wrench into the mix about pay to play conversation.... The skills of soccer seems to be the most difficult to master and take years to hone before one can become competent in soccer. Meanwhile, in other sports mentioned, Football and Basketball, there are several stories of players not even entering into the sport until reaching high school. When was the last time (or even 1st time) you EVER heard of a player showing up freshman year and saying I want to try soccer... and then becoming scholarship worthy. I played all these sports growing up, and I'm not trying to demean what it take to be good in any of them, but soccer is unique in that the foundation of skills needed to be successful at an elite level take many years to develop. Football, is very basic... are you coordinated, do you have average speed at least, and most important are you able to take the physical contact? Same as in basketball, sure you need some coordination and athletic prowess, but you can become a pretty proficient shooter with about 6 months of shooting drills. You don't even have to necessarily become proficient in certain aspects like dribbling if you can master other aspects of the game... or are unnaturally tall. I'm not saying there is any fault in paying to have your kids play at the elite levels... heck I'm on this website just like you (if I wasn't paying I wouldn't be). But to deny that kids from affluent areas don't get a huge advantage and tend to have HS teams lead the HS soccer rankings and perform well in state tourneys... that it is all chalked up in the "want to" of the player and parents is a bit of a stretch. EXACTLY - thank you. |
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Apr 27, 2021 15:57:15 GMT -5
Just to throw another wrench into the mix about pay to play conversation.... The skills of soccer seems to be the most difficult to master and take years to hone before one can become competent in soccer. Meanwhile, in other sports mentioned, Football and Basketball, there are several stories of players not even entering into the sport until reaching high school. When was the last time (or even 1st time) you EVER heard of a player showing up freshman year and saying I want to try soccer... and then becoming scholarship worthy. I played all these sports growing up, and I'm not trying to demean what it take to be good in any of them, but soccer is unique in that the foundation of skills needed to be successful at an elite level take many years to develop. Football, is very basic... are you coordinated, do you have average speed at least, and most important are you able to take the physical contact? Same as in basketball, sure you need some coordination and athletic prowess, but you can become a pretty proficient shooter with about 6 months of shooting drills. You don't even have to necessarily become proficient in certain aspects like dribbling if you can master other aspects of the game... or are unnaturally tall. I'm not saying there is any fault in paying to have your kids play at the elite levels... heck I'm on this website just like you (if I wasn't paying I wouldn't be). But to deny that kids from affluent areas don't get a huge advantage and tend to have HS teams lead the HS soccer rankings and perform well in state tourneys... that it is all chalked up in the "want to" of the player and parents is a bit of a stretch. Alex Morgan didnt start playing soccer in till she was 14. I would say she’s done pretty well for herself. She played youth soccer for her dad and through AYSO teams and leagues starting at like age 6. Since it’s AYSO is a competitor to USYS everyone just assumes it’s not “real” soccer. |
|
|
|
Post by unitedwestand on Apr 27, 2021 17:22:52 GMT -5
Just to throw another wrench into the mix about pay to play conversation.... The skills of soccer seems to be the most difficult to master and take years to hone before one can become competent in soccer. Meanwhile, in other sports mentioned, Football and Basketball, there are several stories of players not even entering into the sport until reaching high school. When was the last time (or even 1st time) you EVER heard of a player showing up freshman year and saying I want to try soccer... and then becoming scholarship worthy. I played all these sports growing up, and I'm not trying to demean what it take to be good in any of them, but soccer is unique in that the foundation of skills needed to be successful at an elite level take many years to develop. Football, is very basic... are you coordinated, do you have average speed at least, and most important are you able to take the physical contact? Same as in basketball, sure you need some coordination and athletic prowess, but you can become a pretty proficient shooter with about 6 months of shooting drills. You don't even have to necessarily become proficient in certain aspects like dribbling if you can master other aspects of the game... or are unnaturally tall. I'm not saying there is any fault in paying to have your kids play at the elite levels... heck I'm on this website just like you (if I wasn't paying I wouldn't be). But to deny that kids from affluent areas don't get a huge advantage and tend to have HS teams lead the HS soccer rankings and perform well in state tourneys... that it is all chalked up in the "want to" of the player and parents is a bit of a stretch. Dude that's life. Sounds like you have a problem with life in general. More affluent families give their kids more opportunities to be successful. Which, leads me back to my main point, I don't believe in Equity! You have to get up and work if you want something in life. Not just in terms of a sport. Don't we put our kids in sports to gain valuable life lessons!?! I also don't agree with socialism either and I'm not going to fault a family that can provide for their children. I'm just going to figure out how to give my children the same advantages. If I don't like the school system that they're in then I'll move my kids to a different school district. |
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Apr 27, 2021 17:32:00 GMT -5
Good conversation. Sorry I contributed to the thread-Jack.
Good luck with your tournament games.
|
|
|
|
Post by goalsforsoccer on Apr 27, 2021 17:48:10 GMT -5
Did you know that there are VERY few places to play soccer in your free time, without a paid coach? Speaking for Gwinnett residents. As most fields are locked because clubs maintain the fields. Take pickneyville park, great place to play soccer, but only for those that play with UFA. Try calling Gwinnett and see how many places you can “grind” in your free time... Hard to get better and train like the affluent when you can’t even find a field.
|
|
