|
|
Post by Panenka on Sept 25, 2023 21:51:05 GMT -5
Where do you live? I think driving hours for kids sports is a tremendous waste of time, money and resources. Agree driving around is not ideal. We live in North Fulton County, so area like Duluth, Johns Creek, Alpharetta, Milton, Cumming, Suwanee are probably ideal. Thanks for asking. |
|
|
|
Post by docnfulton on Sept 27, 2023 12:14:02 GMT -5
Different clubs handle Academy age groups differently. More and more clubs have gone to player pools in academy, especially U10-9 ages. Some coaches and clubs focus more on winning in games, others more on player development. On the boys side, most clubs can add games on playdates to increase playing time. I am the academy scheduler plus coach our 2014 boys. I use an app to document playing time so that I know each player has at least 50% game time unless there is a reason (showing up late, unexcused absence, behavioral issues, etc). That is from years of games where I’m trying to manage a lot of things on an gameday.
Academy should be about development and improvement, which primarily comes from practices and training. I would still encourage you to speak with the coach. Let him/her know it seems like your player is playing less than 50% on game days and what does the coach recommend. If the team has fixed rosters from tryouts a Gold roster, a Silver roster, etc, you may ask if your player can play down on a lower level team to have more playing time. If you are at a typical academy then you won’t be able to transfer unless you have paid in full but many clubs handle this on a case by case basis.
|
|
|
|
Post by bolo on Sept 27, 2023 12:51:14 GMT -5
Different clubs handle Academy age groups differently. More and more clubs have gone to player pools in academy, especially U10-9 ages. Some coaches and clubs focus more on winning in games, others more on player development. On the boys side, most clubs can add games on playdates to increase playing time. I am the academy scheduler plus coach our 2014 boys. I use an app to document playing time so that I know each player has at least 50% game time unless there is a reason (showing up late, unexcused absence, behavioral issues, etc). That is from years of games where I’m trying to manage a lot of things on an gameday. Academy should be about development and improvement, which primarily comes from practices and training. I would still encourage you to speak with the coach. Let him/her know it seems like your player is playing less than 50% on game days and what does the coach recommend. If the team has fixed rosters from tryouts a Gold roster, a Silver roster, etc, you may ask if your player can play down on a lower level team to have more playing time. If you are at a typical academy then you won’t be able to transfer unless you have paid in full but many clubs handle this on a case by case basis. Great advice. I remember using Excel spreadsheets to try to keep up with subs and playing time when I coached one of my kids in the early days at the Y. If a player or two didn't show up, I was totally lost! And to reiterate what many have said in this thread, for U12 and under, absent any issues like missing practice or being disruptive, every player is supposed to be playing at least 50% of the game. Have heard this at multiple clubs around town, at varying levels, including the very top. If your coach/DOC isn't adhering to that, he is way out on an island, and should be called out on it. Good luck. |
|
|
|
Post by mamadona on Sept 27, 2023 13:46:04 GMT -5
Different clubs handle Academy age groups differently. More and more clubs have gone to player pools in academy, especially U10-9 ages. Some coaches and clubs focus more on winning in games, others more on player development. On the boys side, most clubs can add games on playdates to increase playing time. I am the academy scheduler plus coach our 2014 boys. I use an app to document playing time so that I know each player has at least 50% game time unless there is a reason (showing up late, unexcused absence, behavioral issues, etc). That is from years of games where I’m trying to manage a lot of things on an gameday. Academy should be about development and improvement, which primarily comes from practices and training. I would still encourage you to speak with the coach. Let him/her know it seems like your player is playing less than 50% on game days and what does the coach recommend. If the team has fixed rosters from tryouts a Gold roster, a Silver roster, etc, you may ask if your player can play down on a lower level team to have more playing time. If you are at a typical academy then you won’t be able to transfer unless you have paid in full but many clubs handle this on a case by case basis. Great advice. I remember using Excel spreadsheets to try to keep up with subs and playing time when I coached one of my kids in the early days at the Y. If a player or two didn't show up, I was totally lost! And to reiterate what many have said in this thread, for U12 and under, absent any issues like missing practice or being disruptive, every player is supposed to be playing at least 50% of the game. Have heard this at multiple clubs around town, at varying levels, including the very top. If your coach/DOC isn't adhering to that, he is way out on an island, and should be called out on it. Good luck. Same! Excel spreadsheet for coaching rec and if someone didn't show or was late I was totally confused. So fair! Made sure my own kid started on the bench half the time at least. 50% playing time is not a lot as it is! At the younger ages, I feel like the worst players should play more, not less! Game time is so important. |
|
|
|
Post by slickdaddy96 on Sept 27, 2023 16:59:43 GMT -5
Great advice. I remember using Excel spreadsheets to try to keep up with subs and playing time when I coached one of my kids in the early days at the Y. If a player or two didn't show up, I was totally lost! And to reiterate what many have said in this thread, for U12 and under, absent any issues like missing practice or being disruptive, every player is supposed to be playing at least 50% of the game. Have heard this at multiple clubs around town, at varying levels, including the very top. If your coach/DOC isn't adhering to that, he is way out on an island, and should be called out on it. Good luck. Same! Excel spreadsheet for coaching rec and if someone didn't show or was late I was totally confused. So fair! Made sure my own kid started on the bench half the time at least. 50% playing time is not a lot as it is! At the younger ages, I feel like the worst players should play more, not less! Game time is so important. I'm just curious on your statement. So at U13 and above in a competitive league where the games do count and matter you believe the worst players should get more playing time and everyone should still get 50% playing time minimum, or were you saying recreation soccer? I agree with rec soccer everyone should get at least 50% because the games mean absolutely nothing, but once you are in select playing 11v11 you should earn your playing time, and everyone should know ahead of time you are not guaranteed any playing time much less 50%. I understand the bench players in these games need to get some playing time but there is always time to do that in situations where a player needs a 2-5 minute breather, a game is out of reach either for or against the team, a starter is injured, etc.... |
|
|
|
Post by Panenka on Sept 27, 2023 21:11:39 GMT -5
Different clubs handle Academy age groups differently. More and more clubs have gone to player pools in academy, especially U10-9 ages. Some coaches and clubs focus more on winning in games, others more on player development. On the boys side, most clubs can add games on playdates to increase playing time. I am the academy scheduler plus coach our 2014 boys. I use an app to document playing time so that I know each player has at least 50% game time unless there is a reason (showing up late, unexcused absence, behavioral issues, etc). That is from years of games where I’m trying to manage a lot of things on an gameday. Academy should be about development and improvement, which primarily comes from practices and training. I would still encourage you to speak with the coach. Let him/her know it seems like your player is playing less than 50% on game days and what does the coach recommend. If the team has fixed rosters from tryouts a Gold roster, a Silver roster, etc, you may ask if your player can play down on a lower level team to have more playing time. If you are at a typical academy then you won’t be able to transfer unless you have paid in full but many clubs handle this on a case by case basis. Can you help me understand what the benefit is for the Academy and for the kids to have player pools within the same age? I'm noticing that is becoming popular but don't see the benefit for kids. To me it's a way to attract more kids to the academy to make more money and make everyone feel they are part of the TOP team but in reality it's a disguise because instead of saying for example Top team (top) and Second team (second) they now say Top 1 and Top 2. Parents and players prefer to hear and say I'm part of the Top team......but if the child is in Top 2 and is never or rarely invited to play with the Top 1 team then this is misleading. I get the impression this adds confusion and uncertainty for players and parents while it must be very challenging for a coach to truthfully make a new roster each week depending on how each kid trained and stood out from the pool. I hope I'm wrong, so please help me understand the benefits. Thank you |
|
|
|
Post by mamadona on Sept 28, 2023 7:40:22 GMT -5
Same! Excel spreadsheet for coaching rec and if someone didn't show or was late I was totally confused. So fair! Made sure my own kid started on the bench half the time at least. 50% playing time is not a lot as it is! At the younger ages, I feel like the worst players should play more, not less! Game time is so important. I'm just curious on your statement. So at U13 and above in a competitive league where the games do count and matter you believe the worst players should get more playing time and everyone should still get 50% playing time minimum, or were you saying recreation soccer? I agree with rec soccer everyone should get at least 50% because the games mean absolutely nothing, but once you are in select playing 11v11 you should earn your playing time, and everyone should know ahead of time you are not guaranteed any playing time much less 50%. I understand the bench players in these games need to get some playing time but there is always time to do that in situations where a player needs a 2-5 minute breather, a game is out of reach either for or against the team, a starter is injured, etc.... I said the younger ages. If the best players at U9, U10 etc play the entire game and the worst only play 50% then the gap will only increase. The worst players need game playing time to improve! So at least 50% but preferably 2/3 is definitely achievable for younger ages academy play. |
|
|
|
Post by jcsoccerdad on Sept 28, 2023 8:48:16 GMT -5
That's an interesting approach on dividing playing time. You are essentially penalizing better players who are probably putting in more hours in to practice and train on their own. I think 50% adequate for most academy players and if the games mean something (tournaments) then the better players for sure need to be on the field more. If the worst players want to improve they need to train more on their own. There are players on my sons team that train 4-5 days a week. They play a lot in games. Then there some some that only touch a soccer ball in the 2 days of practice and in games. If you want more playing time you should work for it.
|
|
|
|
Post by docnfulton on Sept 28, 2023 9:04:22 GMT -5
Different clubs handle Academy age groups differently. More and more clubs have gone to player pools in academy, especially U10-9 ages. Some coaches and clubs focus more on winning in games, others more on player development. On the boys side, most clubs can add games on playdates to increase playing time. I am the academy scheduler plus coach our 2014 boys. I use an app to document playing time so that I know each player has at least 50% game time unless there is a reason (showing up late, unexcused absence, behavioral issues, etc). That is from years of games where I’m trying to manage a lot of things on an gameday. Academy should be about development and improvement, which primarily comes from practices and training. I would still encourage you to speak with the coach. Let him/her know it seems like your player is playing less than 50% on game days and what does the coach recommend. If the team has fixed rosters from tryouts a Gold roster, a Silver roster, etc, you may ask if your player can play down on a lower level team to have more playing time. If you are at a typical academy then you won’t be able to transfer unless you have paid in full but many clubs handle this on a case by case basis. Can you help me understand what the benefit is for the Academy and for the kids to have player pools within the same age? I'm noticing that is becoming popular but don't see the benefit for kids. To me it's a way to attract more kids to the academy to make more money and make everyone feel they are part of the TOP team but in reality it's a disguise because instead of saying for example Top team (top) and Second team (second) they now say Top 1 and Top 2. Parents and players prefer to hear and say I'm part of the Top team......but if the child is in Top 2 and is never or rarely invited to play with the Top 1 team then this is misleading. I get the impression this adds confusion and uncertainty for players and parents while it must be very challenging for a coach to truthfully make a new roster each week depending on how each kid trained and stood out from the pool. I hope I'm wrong, so please help me understand the benefits. Thank you I have found over the years that players change a great deal over one soccer year (fall/spring). Pooling allows a coach to adapt to that when it comes to games. I typically force rank players on a spreadsheet monthly, just a raw subjective 1-15 players. My data shoes movement through the year, especially U10-9 but really the Academy ages. Some players stagnate or decline due to a wide range of reasons not limited to soccer and athletic development. Others improve steadily. Fixed roster teams often produce better teams but may sacrifice player development. Not always but sometimes. It depends on the philosophy of the club. Academy soccer is to prepare each player for 11v11 play at U13. Boys and girls change so much from 8 to 12 years of age. |
|
|
|
Post by rudy on Sept 28, 2023 9:23:42 GMT -5
My take is that players should get roughly 50% play during the games. Once they reach select (u13), the game changes. Players have to work to earn playing time. This includes work at home, extra training and this includes year long practice. This is not just for soccer but all sports and many things in life.
|
|
|
|
Post by mamadona on Sept 28, 2023 13:11:33 GMT -5
That's an interesting approach on dividing playing time. You are essentially penalizing better players who are probably putting in more hours in to practice and train on their own. I think 50% adequate for most academy players and if the games mean something (tournaments) then the better players for sure need to be on the field more. If the worst players want to improve they need to train more on their own. There are players on my sons team that train 4-5 days a week. They play a lot in games. Then there some some that only touch a soccer ball in the 2 days of practice and in games. If you want more playing time you should work for it. How is it penalizing the good players to let the worse ones also play let's say close to equal time? I think it would be great at the younger ages, to have almost equal playing time, it might lead to better team spirit and a chance for the weaker ones to improve more, which would lead to stronger teams in the future! Soccer in the US is not working great so don't think that everything we have now is optimal... I believe in earning playing time to a certain extent but I'm also leaning towards I would like more equal time and the benefits of that. When my kid was one of the weakest players, whenever she got the chance to play more in a game she pretty much ALWAYS did better and was happier and looked more confident. Not playing just means the weakest players get even weaker. (Right not she's doing pretty good, she did work slightly harder but also got lucky to have some coaches that like her.) |
|
|
|
Post by jcsoccerdad on Sept 28, 2023 14:06:16 GMT -5
Sorry, I misunderstood. I am okay with 50% playing time for all kids, good and bad. From your post, it sounded like you thought the worst kids should get more playing time than the better kids. My mistake!
|
|
|
|
Post by mamadona on Sept 28, 2023 16:58:52 GMT -5
Sorry, I misunderstood. I am okay with 50% playing time for all kids, good and bad. From your post, it sounded like you thought the worst kids should get more playing time than the better kids. My mistake! Ok! I'm not suggesting weak players play more than strong ones. It wouldn't be fair to the good kids of course, but it would improve the weaker ones more. Same as weak students getting more time with the teacher (the game is the teacher!) etc. There are pros and cons with each scenario. On older elite teams of course I realize that the best players need to play a lot more. But not on younger, less elite teams. So about equal time would be my ideal. Also, if you were to have equal playing time, it wouldn't be 50% for all. It would be more like 2/3 or 3/4 for all. Instead of 100% for some and 50% or less for some. When I coached U10 rec everyone played about 7/10ths of a game! Lol. Except the goalies who played more to get enough field time as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Panenka on Sept 28, 2023 23:07:22 GMT -5
Can you help me understand what the benefit is for the Academy and for the kids to have player pools within the same age? I'm noticing that is becoming popular but don't see the benefit for kids. To me it's a way to attract more kids to the academy to make more money and make everyone feel they are part of the TOP team but in reality it's a disguise because instead of saying for example Top team (top) and Second team (second) they now say Top 1 and Top 2. Parents and players prefer to hear and say I'm part of the Top team......but if the child is in Top 2 and is never or rarely invited to play with the Top 1 team then this is misleading. I get the impression this adds confusion and uncertainty for players and parents while it must be very challenging for a coach to truthfully make a new roster each week depending on how each kid trained and stood out from the pool. I hope I'm wrong, so please help me understand the benefits. Thank you I have found over the years that players change a great deal over one soccer year (fall/spring). Pooling allows a coach to adapt to that when it comes to games. I typically force rank players on a spreadsheet monthly, just a raw subjective 1-15 players. My data shoes movement through the year, especially U10-9 but really the Academy ages. Some players stagnate or decline due to a wide range of reasons not limited to soccer and athletic development. Others improve steadily. Fixed roster teams often produce better teams but may sacrifice player development. Not always but sometimes. It depends on the philosophy of the club. Academy soccer is to prepare each player for 11v11 play at U13. Boys and girls change so much from 8 to 12 years of age. Appreciate the explanation. That clarifies the intent of the pool. My son is not in a Pool system yet, but every time I heard about the pool from parents in our Academy I got the impression it's super dynamic in terms of changing kids from one team to another, almost on a weekly or bi-weekly basis which that seems tedious. I can def understand the value if it's done less frequent, perhaps set the roster once at the beginning of the fall and evaluate again in spring and change the roster if needed, so kids can move up or down based on performance. Thank you for clarifying. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtydurham on Oct 11, 2023 10:48:35 GMT -5
Assuming the coach turns a deaf ear and nothing changes in the Fall... what are y'alls thoughts on leaving after the Fall season, and not waiting until after the Spring?
|
|
|
|
Post by playfromtheback on Oct 11, 2023 12:32:45 GMT -5
Assuming the coach turns a deaf ear and nothing changes in the Fall... what are y'alls thoughts on leaving after the Fall season, and not waiting until after the Spring? We are having some struggles with our club and there is a good chance we will leave after the fall. |
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Oct 11, 2023 14:47:38 GMT -5
Assuming the coach turns a deaf ear and nothing changes in the Fall... what are y'alls thoughts on leaving after the Fall season, and not waiting until after the Spring? If you don't mind the wasted money and the impact that it will have on the team, go for it. Clubs are not going to give a refund so you will likely be paying twice and buying a new uniform. |
|
|
|
Post by newguy on Oct 11, 2023 19:19:22 GMT -5
Assuming the coach turns a deaf ear and nothing changes in the Fall... what are y'alls thoughts on leaving after the Fall season, and not waiting until after the Spring? If you don't mind the wasted money and the impact that it will have on the team, go for it. Clubs are not going to give a refund so you will likely be paying twice and buying a new uniform. Maybe we should set up a uniform swap meet for players moving to greener grass so they can trade uniforms. |
|
gob31
Jr. Academy
Posts: 26
|
Post by gob31 on Oct 12, 2023 10:10:00 GMT -5
Assuming the coach turns a deaf ear and nothing changes in the Fall... what are y'alls thoughts on leaving after the Fall season, and not waiting until after the Spring? If you don't mind the wasted money and the impact that it will have on the team, go for it. Clubs are not going to give a refund so you will likely be paying twice and buying a new uniform. We were in this situation last year but ultimately decided to stay and finish the spring season. My son had made a bunch good friends on his team and didn't want to start over mid-season somewhere else. It was pool play so wouldn't have hurt the team or club, but we also wanted to instill in him the value of honoring the commitment to his team for the season. Once we made the decision, the spring season was easier because we knew we were leaving and could just enjoy watching him play. We knew we were leaving, so the stress of what comes next was gone. The financial piece was also looming. There is no way you'll get a dollar back from your current club, and best case scenario is half price at the new one, along with a full uniform (and if you're really unlucky, you'll get to buy a new uniform set in June). |
|
gob31
Jr. Academy
Posts: 26
|
Post by gob31 on Oct 12, 2023 10:22:35 GMT -5
Can you help me understand what the benefit is for the Academy and for the kids to have player pools within the same age? I'm noticing that is becoming popular but don't see the benefit for kids. To me it's a way to attract more kids to the academy to make more money and make everyone feel they are part of the TOP team but in reality it's a disguise because instead of saying for example Top team (top) and Second team (second) they now say Top 1 and Top 2. Parents and players prefer to hear and say I'm part of the Top team......but if the child is in Top 2 and is never or rarely invited to play with the Top 1 team then this is misleading. I get the impression this adds confusion and uncertainty for players and parents while it must be very challenging for a coach to truthfully make a new roster each week depending on how each kid trained and stood out from the pool. I hope I'm wrong, so please help me understand the benefits. Thank you I have found over the years that players change a great deal over one soccer year (fall/spring). Pooling allows a coach to adapt to that when it comes to games. I typically force rank players on a spreadsheet monthly, just a raw subjective 1-15 players. My data shoes movement through the year, especially U10-9 but really the Academy ages. Some players stagnate or decline due to a wide range of reasons not limited to soccer and athletic development. Others improve steadily. Fixed roster teams often produce better teams but may sacrifice player development. Not always but sometimes. It depends on the philosophy of the club. Academy soccer is to prepare each player for 11v11 play at U13. Boys and girls change so much from 8 to 12 years of age. My experience with pool play at large clubs is that the first team is very protected in terms of movement, especially down. The second team may have a bit more movement, but not much, and then everything below that (some have as many as 5 teams in an age group) is a bit of a free for all, depending on how interested the coaches are in evaluating the kids. The 4th or 5th team coach, however, is not typically the highest level. Often, they are young coaches just getting started, which can be good if they have energy and are organized, but can also be terrible if not. The top kids are protected in large part because there is a fear of them leaving. You may have a 9-year-old who is on the top team but should probably drop a level. Dropping them means the parents might start looking around for other clubs though because there is so much ego involved. There are valid arguments to be made for and against both pool play and set teams at the academy level, but when it comes to dealing with parent and kid stress over the course of a season, set teams make more sense to me. Parents know where their kid stands, who their coach will be, and who their teammates will be week in and week out. In an ideal world, there would be evaluations and potential movement between fall and spring to account for player growth on the different teams, but I haven't seen that happen much. |
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Oct 12, 2023 13:10:11 GMT -5
My experience with pool play at large clubs is that the first team is very protected in terms of movement, especially down. The second team may have a bit more movement, but not much, and then everything below that (some have as many as 5 teams in an age group) is a bit of a free for all, depending on how interested the coaches are in evaluating the kids. The 4th or 5th team coach, however, is not typically the highest level. Often, they are young coaches just getting started, which can be good if they have energy and are organized, but can also be terrible if not. The top kids are protected in large part because there is a fear of them leaving. You may have a 9-year-old who is on the top team but should probably drop a level. Dropping them means the parents might start looking around for other clubs though because there is so much ego involved. There are valid arguments to be made for and against both pool play and set teams at the academy level, but when it comes to dealing with parent and kid stress over the course of a season, set teams make more sense to me. Parents know where their kid stands, who their coach will be, and who their teammates will be week in and week out. In an ideal world, there would be evaluations and potential movement between fall and spring to account for player growth on the different teams, but I haven't seen that happen much. GOOD post. Imagine having to juggle coaches and players coming and going. It’s not easy to run a club. But we pay a lot so we feel entitled to being catered to. |
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Oct 13, 2023 5:25:29 GMT -5
My experience with pool play at large clubs is that the first team is very protected in terms of movement, especially down. The second team may have a bit more movement, but not much, and then everything below that (some have as many as 5 teams in an age group) is a bit of a free for all, depending on how interested the coaches are in evaluating the kids. The 4th or 5th team coach, however, is not typically the highest level. Often, they are young coaches just getting started, which can be good if they have energy and are organized, but can also be terrible if not. The top kids are protected in large part because there is a fear of them leaving. You may have a 9-year-old who is on the top team but should probably drop a level. Dropping them means the parents might start looking around for other clubs though because there is so much ego involved. There are valid arguments to be made for and against both pool play and set teams at the academy level, but when it comes to dealing with parent and kid stress over the course of a season, set teams make more sense to me. Parents know where their kid stands, who their coach will be, and who their teammates will be week in and week out. In an ideal world, there would be evaluations and potential movement between fall and spring to account for player growth on the different teams, but I haven't seen that happen much. Agree with a lot of this. I have seen clubs separate pool play out into pool 1, pool 2 and so on. This is a happy medium as it is one coach for each pool and the coaches do tend to move the kids up and down within their pool. Players may even guest up or down if there are not the kind of numbers needed for the lower pools. I was the TM of a pool 1 at a big club and initially we had 18 girls in pool 1 and like 6 in pool 2 that first fall. So we ended up sending players to play in the 3rd team game every single week, but we also combined the practices once per week too. It was actually good for the pool 1 2nd team girls as it let them dominate games and play positions maybe they weren’t suited for on a higher team. It let both coaches see all of the players in the age group. The spring they added 2 or 3 more players to pool 2 to have a full team but still needed players to rotate in. We added some play ups to pool 1 and had 20. The next year there was more growth and we kept the same coaches but still moved players around and brought up kids from pool 2. So it really was one big pool but it was more “set” so it was easier on the players and the parents. The coach of the top pool also set the teams for two weeks in a row so it made it easier for parent planning. We lost only one player after that first year to another club. That girl’s parents are still a little over the top. She went to 3 clubs in her first three years and it wasn’t because of a “bad” coach either. They were looking for the most dominant team in the age group and then once she played one year at that most dominant club they pushed for her to play up an age group. She is a stud player. Anyway, the point was that the parents were pretty happy with the arrangement and all kids got a lot of playing time if they wanted it. The top team kids also rotated and every child played on the second team for at least two weeks. |
|
|
|
Post by rifle on Oct 13, 2023 6:22:40 GMT -5
My experience with pool play at large clubs is that the first team is very protected in terms of movement, especially down. The second team may have a bit more movement, but not much, and then everything below that (some have as many as 5 teams in an age group) is a bit of a free for all, depending on how interested the coaches are in evaluating the kids. The 4th or 5th team coach, however, is not typically the highest level. Often, they are young coaches just getting started, which can be good if they have energy and are organized, but can also be terrible if not. The top kids are protected in large part because there is a fear of them leaving. You may have a 9-year-old who is on the top team but should probably drop a level. Dropping them means the parents might start looking around for other clubs though because there is so much ego involved. There are valid arguments to be made for and against both pool play and set teams at the academy level, but when it comes to dealing with parent and kid stress over the course of a season, set teams make more sense to me. Parents know where their kid stands, who their coach will be, and who their teammates will be week in and week out. In an ideal world, there would be evaluations and potential movement between fall and spring to account for player growth on the different teams, but I haven't seen that happen much. Agree with a lot of this. I have seen clubs separate pool play out into pool 1, pool 2 and so on. This is a happy medium as it is one coach for each pool and the coaches do tend to move the kids up and down within their pool. Players may even guest up or down if there are not the kind of numbers needed for the lower pools. I was the TM of a pool 1 at a big club and initially we had 18 girls in pool 1 and like 6 in pool 2 that first fall. So we ended up sending players to play in the 3rd team game every single week, but we also combined the practices once per week too. It was actually good for the pool 1 2nd team girls as it let them dominate games and play positions maybe they weren’t suited for on a higher team. It let both coaches see all of the players in the age group. The spring they added 2 or 3 more players to pool 2 to have a full team but still needed players to rotate in. We added some play ups to pool 1 and had 20. The next year there was more growth and we kept the same coaches but still moved players around and brought up kids from pool 2. So it really was one big pool but it was more “set” so it was easier on the players and the parents. The coach of the top pool also set the teams for two weeks in a row so it made it easier for parent planning. We lost only one player after that first year to another club. That girl’s parents are still a little over the top. She went to 3 clubs in her first three years and it wasn’t because of a “bad” coach either. They were looking for the most dominant team in the age group and then once she played one year at that most dominant club they pushed for her to play up an age group. She is a stud player. Anyway, the point was that the parents were pretty happy with the arrangement and all kids got a lot of playing time if they wanted it. The top team kids also rotated and every child played on the second team for at least two weeks. That sounds like a really good arrangement that you described. Setup out of necessity, apparently - based on numbers. I’m curious… is this “stud player” still playing the game? |
|
|
|
Post by randomparent on Oct 13, 2023 6:50:01 GMT -5
My experience with pool play at large clubs is that the first team is very protected in terms of movement, especially down. The second team may have a bit more movement, but not much, and then everything below that (some have as many as 5 teams in an age group) is a bit of a free for all, depending on how interested the coaches are in evaluating the kids. The 4th or 5th team coach, however, is not typically the highest level. Often, they are young coaches just getting started, which can be good if they have energy and are organized, but can also be terrible if not. The top kids are protected in large part because there is a fear of them leaving. You may have a 9-year-old who is on the top team but should probably drop a level. Dropping them means the parents might start looking around for other clubs though because there is so much ego involved. There are valid arguments to be made for and against both pool play and set teams at the academy level, but when it comes to dealing with parent and kid stress over the course of a season, set teams make more sense to me. Parents know where their kid stands, who their coach will be, and who their teammates will be week in and week out. In an ideal world, there would be evaluations and potential movement between fall and spring to account for player growth on the different teams, but I haven't seen that happen much. Agree with a lot of this. I have seen clubs separate pool play out into pool 1, pool 2 and so on. This is a happy medium as it is one coach for each pool and the coaches do tend to move the kids up and down within their pool. Players may even guest up or down if there are not the kind of numbers needed for the lower pools. I was the TM of a pool 1 at a big club and initially we had 18 girls in pool 1 and like 6 in pool 2 that first fall. So we ended up sending players to play in the 3rd team game every single week, but we also combined the practices once per week too. It was actually good for the pool 1 2nd team girls as it let them dominate games and play positions maybe they weren’t suited for on a higher team. It let both coaches see all of the players in the age group. The spring they added 2 or 3 more players to pool 2 to have a full team but still needed players to rotate in. We added some play ups to pool 1 and had 20. The next year there was more growth and we kept the same coaches but still moved players around and brought up kids from pool 2. So it really was one big pool but it was more “set” so it was easier on the players and the parents. The coach of the top pool also set the teams for two weeks in a row so it made it easier for parent planning. We lost only one player after that first year to another club. That girl’s parents are still a little over the top. She went to 3 clubs in her first three years and it wasn’t because of a “bad” coach either. They were looking for the most dominant team in the age group and then once she played one year at that most dominant club they pushed for her to play up an age group. She is a stud player. Anyway, the point was that the parents were pretty happy with the arrangement and all kids got a lot of playing time if they wanted it. The top team kids also rotated and every child played on the second team for at least two weeks. That sounds like it was well planned and communicated. Hopefully that Academy director is still there. I have had multiple kids that have been involved in pool play. For one kid it was pool play in name only. It basically was, here is our wiz kid coach, the voice of the club, the guy everyone wants at tryouts. After dues are paid, he goes off to his top group and the rest get his 19 year old cousin or the 70 year old burnout. Thankfully mine was on the top team. The club is unable to retain wiz kid coach so they rotate them constantly every 2-3 years and you get different versions of pool play. Another kid it was true pool play for my kid. First team this week, second team next week, big tournament you are on the third team. Next week I think you are player of the week on the first team. Most kids just stayed on one team, somehow mine was selected for this CIA experiment on youth brain development. Great game, you scored three goals, later that night we get the email that says you have been dropped down a level. Another kid it was pool play, somehow they club didn't hire but like 2 other guys so it was three coaches for 60 kids. This pool play was more about teaching 10 year old's autonomy. Set up some cones, give them the most complicated rotation that as an adult, I could not understand. Go talk to some parents and wander around the field and come back in thirty minutes. Another version of pool play is you send a check in to for the clubs executive director. Since no coach is assigned to your team, and parents have no idea who each other are due to the constant switching, at tryout time the club drops 20% of the kids, not with any ill intent. They literally just didn't know the kids played for their club. That is my experience with pool play at multiple clubs. Obviously others experience is probably different. |
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Oct 13, 2023 19:17:04 GMT -5
Agree with a lot of this. I have seen clubs separate pool play out into pool 1, pool 2 and so on. This is a happy medium as it is one coach for each pool and the coaches do tend to move the kids up and down within their pool. Players may even guest up or down if there are not the kind of numbers needed for the lower pools. I was the TM of a pool 1 at a big club and initially we had 18 girls in pool 1 and like 6 in pool 2 that first fall. So we ended up sending players to play in the 3rd team game every single week, but we also combined the practices once per week too. It was actually good for the pool 1 2nd team girls as it let them dominate games and play positions maybe they weren’t suited for on a higher team. It let both coaches see all of the players in the age group. The spring they added 2 or 3 more players to pool 2 to have a full team but still needed players to rotate in. We added some play ups to pool 1 and had 20. The next year there was more growth and we kept the same coaches but still moved players around and brought up kids from pool 2. So it really was one big pool but it was more “set” so it was easier on the players and the parents. The coach of the top pool also set the teams for two weeks in a row so it made it easier for parent planning. We lost only one player after that first year to another club. That girl’s parents are still a little over the top. She went to 3 clubs in her first three years and it wasn’t because of a “bad” coach either. They were looking for the most dominant team in the age group and then once she played one year at that most dominant club they pushed for her to play up an age group. She is a stud player. Anyway, the point was that the parents were pretty happy with the arrangement and all kids got a lot of playing time if they wanted it. The top team kids also rotated and every child played on the second team for at least two weeks. That sounds like a really good arrangement that you described. Setup out of necessity, apparently - based on numbers. I’m curious… is this “stud player” still playing the game? The stud is still playing. Will be curious to see if she burns out. |
|
|
|
Post by rpsoccer on Oct 14, 2023 15:45:01 GMT -5
Agree with a lot of this. I have seen clubs separate pool play out into pool 1, pool 2 and so on. This is a happy medium as it is one coach for each pool and the coaches do tend to move the kids up and down within their pool. Players may even guest up or down if there are not the kind of numbers needed for the lower pools. I was the TM of a pool 1 at a big club and initially we had 18 girls in pool 1 and like 6 in pool 2 that first fall. So we ended up sending players to play in the 3rd team game every single week, but we also combined the practices once per week too. It was actually good for the pool 1 2nd team girls as it let them dominate games and play positions maybe they weren’t suited for on a higher team. It let both coaches see all of the players in the age group. The spring they added 2 or 3 more players to pool 2 to have a full team but still needed players to rotate in. We added some play ups to pool 1 and had 20. The next year there was more growth and we kept the same coaches but still moved players around and brought up kids from pool 2. So it really was one big pool but it was more “set” so it was easier on the players and the parents. The coach of the top pool also set the teams for two weeks in a row so it made it easier for parent planning. We lost only one player after that first year to another club. That girl’s parents are still a little over the top. She went to 3 clubs in her first three years and it wasn’t because of a “bad” coach either. They were looking for the most dominant team in the age group and then once she played one year at that most dominant club they pushed for her to play up an age group. She is a stud player. Anyway, the point was that the parents were pretty happy with the arrangement and all kids got a lot of playing time if they wanted it. The top team kids also rotated and every child played on the second team for at least two weeks. That sounds like it was well planned and communicated. Hopefully that Academy director is still there. I have had multiple kids that have been involved in pool play. For one kid it was pool play in name only. It basically was, here is our wiz kid coach, the voice of the club, the guy everyone wants at tryouts. After dues are paid, he goes off to his top group and the rest get his 19 year old cousin or the 70 year old burnout. Thankfully mine was on the top team. The club is unable to retain wiz kid coach so they rotate them constantly every 2-3 years and you get different versions of pool play. Another kid it was true pool play for my kid. First team this week, second team next week, big tournament you are on the third team. Next week I think you are player of the week on the first team. Most kids just stayed on one team, somehow mine was selected for this CIA experiment on youth brain development. Great game, you scored three goals, later that night we get the email that says you have been dropped down a level. Another kid it was pool play, somehow they club didn't hire but like 2 other guys so it was three coaches for 60 kids. This pool play was more about teaching 10 year old's autonomy. Set up some cones, give them the most complicated rotation that as an adult, I could not understand. Go talk to some parents and wander around the field and come back in thirty minutes. Another version of pool play is you send a check in to for the clubs executive director. Since no coach is assigned to your team, and parents have no idea who each other are due to the constant switching, at tryout time the club drops 20% of the kids, not with any ill intent. They literally just didn't know the kids played for their club. That is my experience with pool play at multiple clubs. Obviously others experience is probably different. I guess is a common practice, I am kind of new at select level. There are SCCL teams with players from ECNL*, at least this season, I am not sure if parents are happy that their ECNL* kids are playing at SCCL games. Obviously those teams are dominating at their SCCL division. |
|
thatonekeeper28
Jr. Academy
I put in my birthday wrong and I don't know how to change it
Posts: 11
|
Post by thatonekeeper28 on Oct 17, 2023 7:21:37 GMT -5
When you're younger, I think that playing time is needed, but once you reach ages like U15 or U16, the best player should play, if you don't like it, get better.
|
|
|
|
Post by olderthandirt on Oct 17, 2023 9:24:15 GMT -5
When you're younger, I think that playing time is needed, but once you reach ages like U15 or U16, the best player should play, if you don't like it, get better.
So, by your reasoning, players 12 through whatever should never play in a game unless there is an injury or one of the starters misses a game for some reason. Of course, the club will still expect to be paid the full amount and players 12 through whatever will still need to travel to every game in case there is an injury, right?
Good luck with that …
|
|
|
|
Post by oraclesfriend on Oct 18, 2023 14:08:49 GMT -5
When you're younger, I think that playing time is needed, but once you reach ages like U15 or U16, the best player should play, if you don't like it, get better. Don’t forget that coaches also have something called confirmation bias. Players 12 through 16-18 can become better than 1-11, but they won’t see it. There are also issues with powerful and influential parents who find ways to sway coaches on playing time. All kids are there to learn the game of soccer and to have fun. Even high school aged kids deserve some playing time, encouragement and opportunity to SHOW ON THE FIELD how much they have learned. The DA days of only 3-5 subs are over. H*ll even the pros get 5-6 subs depending on the type of game. |
|
|
|
Post by soccerparent02 on Oct 18, 2023 16:45:53 GMT -5
When you're younger, I think that playing time is needed, but once you reach ages like U15 or U16, the best player should play, if you don't like it, get better. Don’t forget that coaches also have something called confirmation bias. Players 12 through 16-18 can become better than 1-11, but they won’t see it. There are also issues with powerful and influential parents who find ways to sway coaches on playing time. All kids are there to learn the game of soccer and to have fun. Even high school aged kids deserve some playing time, encouragement and opportunity to SHOW ON THE FIELD how much they have learned. The DA days of only 3-5 subs are over. H*ll even the pros get 5-6 subs depending on the type of game. By the time u13/14 comes around, the top players are playing on the top teams on the strongest clubs. The players know who the best players are. The top 50 in the state are known. Like anything, there are players who are just better. The very best teams get better by improving their subs as players 12 - 16 provide good minutes. |
|
