How good are travel teams in the low tier?

[Anonymous]

I saw a lowest level travel team for an area club. It felt like they would lose to a rec team.
I am surprised this is one of the top teams in the league.
Defenders were chasing across the goal leaving players wide open. Some weren't running back when the ball was past them.
This was late in the season, so I would have expected the coach would have corrected this by now.
The other team was undefeated but had a player that probably should have been playing a few levels up.
This team had trouble on goal kicks, while the first team was doing this well, and offense overall was fine.
I was also surprised late in the match with a one goal lead, the coach put in a player who wasn't running back on defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I saw a lowest level travel team for an area club. It felt like they would lose to a rec team.
I am surprised this is one of the top teams in the league.
Defenders were chasing across the goal leaving players wide open. Some weren't running back when the ball was past them.
This was late in the season, so I would have expected the coach would have corrected this by now.
The other team was undefeated but had a player that probably should have been playing a few levels up.
This team had trouble on goal kicks, while the first team was doing this well, and offense overall was fine.
I was also surprised late in the match with a one goal lead, the coach put in a player who wasn't running back on defense.

I think you have your answer. Some are pretty bad. They would be better off playing rec.

[Anonymous]

We have played the b team of big clubs in EDP premier levels in U11 and U12 and they are not that good. We are a small travel club that only has enough kids to field one team per age group. It could be the coaching but I just don’t think the kids are that good. At least not yet. I would never pay travel fees for my kids if they were on the B team. Absolutely not worth the time and money. If my kids aren’t good enough for the A team at a big club, we’re dropping to rec or staying at a small club. Parents are as crazy on B and lower teams than on the A teams.

[Anonymous]

This begs the question: Why do so many people on the DCUM soccer forum randomly watch other teams/clubs play, then feel compelled to post about it?

[Anonymous]

It also depends on the club. Clubs like Arlington have five levels of teams so talent is spread out and yes the lower team is like a high level rec team. (usually those kids have come straight over from their ADP program). McLean has three levels so their bottom team is usually playing against one of Arlington‘s mid tier teams. Just using this as an example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It also depends on the club. Clubs like Arlington have five levels of teams so talent is spread out and yes the lower team is like a high level rec team. (usually those kids have come straight over from their ADP program). McLean has three levels so their bottom team is usually playing against one of Arlington‘s mid tier teams. Just using this as an example.

Both Arlington and mclean have huge player pools to chose from so their lower teams are like expensive rec teams for full disclosure.

[Anonymous]

There really is no threshold to play travel soccer. If enough kids want to play and parents are willing to pay then clubs will keep forming more teams. The distinction between a travel and rec program is only the time and money commitment. Playing on a travel team does not mean you are a better player. There is a travel team for just about any player. Personally, I have no problem with this as its driven by demand and if parents want to pay money for an activity their kid enjoys, all power to them. Travel sports teams are really just a fancy term for a high priced kids activity no different than piano lessons or sleep away camp.

[Anonymous]

I’m not sure what people are expecting to see when they watch a “lowest level” travel team. A lowest level travel team is going to have almost exclusively first-year travel players, so don’t be shocked if you aren’t impressed. Most have had nothing beyond volunteer rec coaching, which is obviously going to be hit or miss. The vast majority of teams - travel and rec - are way too focused on winning, so a ‘strong’ rec player is going to be encouraged to go and make a play as opposed to trusting teammates to do their part. Small-sided u-little soccer is good in that kids get touches on the ball, but the flip side is, often, stronger players are being taught/learning to try to do everything by themselves on both offense and defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure what people are expecting to see when they watch a “lowest level” travel team. A lowest level travel team is going to have almost exclusively first-year travel players, so don’t be shocked if you aren’t impressed. Most have had nothing beyond volunteer rec coaching, which is obviously going to be hit or miss. The vast majority of teams - travel and rec - are way too focused on winning, so a ‘strong’ rec player is going to be encouraged to go and make a play as opposed to trusting teammates to do their part. Small-sided u-little soccer is good in that kids get touches on the ball, but the flip side is, often, stronger players are being taught/learning to try to do everything by themselves on both offense and defense.

I hear you but fact is there’s U13 teams that are the bottom tier in their club…in the top division of their league.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure what people are expecting to see when they watch a “lowest level” travel team. A lowest level travel team is going to have almost exclusively first-year travel players, so don’t be shocked if you aren’t impressed. Most have had nothing beyond volunteer rec coaching, which is obviously going to be hit or miss. The vast majority of teams - travel and rec - are way too focused on winning, so a ‘strong’ rec player is going to be encouraged to go and make a play as opposed to trusting teammates to do their part. Small-sided u-little soccer is good in that kids get touches on the ball, but the flip side is, often, stronger players are being taught/learning to try to do everything by themselves on both offense and defense.

I hear you but fact is there’s U13 teams that are the bottom tier in their club…in the top division of their league.

So what? It just means there are teams at other clubs even worse than they are. What is your point?

[Anonymous]

Are the kids having fun? Are they playing with kids of similar skill? If so, then why do you care?

Families choose travel over rec for many reasons, including a paid/non-parent coach, other kids who want to play soccer, enough players to field teams within the age group, access to better fields.

For many of the lower level travel leagues, nobody is traveling very far. So the games are 10 minutes further than you'd otherwise play at in Rec. It's not like they are traveling 5 hours away.

I have a player on a "B" team at a big club and she is really enjoying her season. Why is that not enough? If she were playing Rec, she'd be in a U10-12 combined division where half the kids don't even want to be there. I'll pay extra for her to have an enjoyable experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are the kids having fun? Are they playing with kids of similar skill? If so, then why do you care?

Families choose travel over rec for many reasons, including a paid/non-parent coach, other kids who want to play soccer, enough players to field teams within the age group, access to better fields.

For many of the lower level travel leagues, nobody is traveling very far. So the games are 10 minutes further than you'd otherwise play at in Rec. It's not like they are traveling 5 hours away.

I have a player on a "B" team at a big club and she is really enjoying her season. Why is that not enough? If she were playing Rec, she'd be in a U10-12 combined division where half the kids don't even want to be there. I'll pay extra for her to have an enjoyable experience.

This is a great take.

I'd only add, though, that maybe a part of the problem comes from the marketing that clubs engage in. For example, calling their entire program "Elite." When we first moved to the area a few years ago, we arrived late in the summer. Most rosters of top teams were set. My oldest son was offered a spot on PAC's 4th team, the "PAC Elite YG Silver." We liked PAC and he spent a very nice year there, but there was nothing elite about that team. A few good players (many of them also late arrivals), but it was a rude awakening when we matched up with mid-level teams (usually at tournaments) that had decent players up and down the roster.

I do see more clubs going without the "academy" and "elite" monikers these days. Good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are the kids having fun? Are they playing with kids of similar skill? If so, then why do you care?

Families choose travel over rec for many reasons, including a paid/non-parent coach, other kids who want to play soccer, enough players to field teams within the age group, access to better fields.

For many of the lower level travel leagues, nobody is traveling very far. So the games are 10 minutes further than you'd otherwise play at in Rec. It's not like they are traveling 5 hours away.

I have a player on a "B" team at a big club and she is really enjoying her season. Why is that not enough? If she were playing Rec, she'd be in a U10-12 combined division where half the kids don't even want to be there. I'll pay extra for her to have an enjoyable experience.

THank you - this is us. My son plays on the "B" team as a keeper. He is okay but doesn't really practice much or have significant motivation. Honestly, he doesn't deserve to be on the A team. However, his natural talent is such that he would be frustrated on a rec team. We haven't traveled more than 90 minutes.
I think you will find the whole cross section of families on low tier travel teams from those that share our belief to those that think that their kid is the next Messi and deserves to be on the A team.

[Anonymous]

Are the kids having fun? Are they playing with kids of similar skill? If so, then why do you care?

Families choose travel over rec for many reasons, including a paid/non-parent coach, other kids who want to play soccer, enough players to field teams within the age group, access to better fields.

For many of the lower level travel leagues, nobody is traveling very far. So the games are 10 minutes further than you'd otherwise play at in Rec. It's not like they are traveling 5 hours away.

I have a player on a "B" team at a big club and she is really enjoying her season. Why is that not enough? If she were playing Rec, she'd be in a U10-12 combined division where half the kids don't even want to be there. I'll pay extra for her to have an enjoyable experience.


THank you - this is us. My son plays on the "B" team as a keeper. He is okay but doesn't really practice much or have significant motivation. Honestly, he doesn't deserve to be on the A team. However, his natural talent is such that he would be frustrated on a rec team. We haven't traveled more than 90 minutes.
I think you will find the whole cross section of families on low tier travel teams from those that share our belief to those that think that their kid is the next Messi and deserves to be on the A team.

I agree. My son is on the B team as a midfielder. He just doesn't have the aggression to be on a higher level team, it is not his personality. But he loves playing soccer, gets exercise through it, and has made a lot of friends through the team. We are fortunate to be in a financial position where it is not a problem for us to pay for travel soccer, even if it is just for fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are the kids having fun? Are they playing with kids of similar skill? If so, then why do you care?

Families choose travel over rec for many reasons, including a paid/non-parent coach, other kids who want to play soccer, enough players to field teams within the age group, access to better fields.

For many of the lower level travel leagues, nobody is traveling very far. So the games are 10 minutes further than you'd otherwise play at in Rec. It's not like they are traveling 5 hours away.

I have a player on a "B" team at a big club and she is really enjoying her season. Why is that not enough? If she were playing Rec, she'd be in a U10-12 combined division where half the kids don't even want to be there. I'll pay extra for her to have an enjoyable experience.

THank you - this is us. My son plays on the "B" team as a keeper. He is okay but doesn't really practice much or have significant motivation. Honestly, he doesn't deserve to be on the A team. However, his natural talent is such that he would be frustrated on a rec team. We haven't traveled more than 90 minutes.
I think you will find the whole cross section of families on low tier travel teams from those that share our belief to those that think that their kid is the next Messi and deserves to be on the A team.

You are an awesome parent, really. I just could not drive my kids 90 mins to games when I recognize that they’re not practicing much or have the motivation. Maybe because I have other kids and that time can be used better. But unless my kid is motivated and practicing and striving to play the best competition he can for himself, he can suck it up in rec league if he just plans on coasting on his natural talent. Or we need to work on finding something else he can be excited about even if that means jumping around and trying to find a sport or activity he can really get into.