Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

Our son played U10, 11 & 12 on an ODSL team. Our club also had NCSL teams at the same age groups. We are about to start NCSL this year. Here are my thoughts on ODSL. It was just fine. I had no problems with it. We were in Division 3 in ODSL and were competitive with boys on the NCSL team in our club that were at the NCSL Division 6 level. I'm sure the comparison differs at the different age groups and girls v. boys, but my personal opinion is that NCSL has higher level play and is more competitive at the top of the divisions because they have way more teams, and thus, many more levels of play. If your team and child is really good and playing at the top levels, then NCSL provides more opportunities for competitive play at those levels. That's my perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:And by nasty and superior I am referring to just the "shitsville" poster. All subsequent comments about ODSL were thoughtful and respectful.

We played some teams that couldn't even field a full team since their players didn't show up. Our team had to lend them players.

When you are paying $2-3k year total in travel fees...not even having legitimate games is ridiculous. It is: for the shits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And by nasty and superior I am referring to just the "shitsville" poster. All subsequent comments about ODSL were thoughtful and respectful.

We played some teams that couldn't even field a full team since their players didn't show up. Our team had to lend them players.

When you are paying $2-3k year total in travel fees...not even having legitimate games is ridiculous. It is: for the shits.

This is just it. Travel soccer really doesn't mean much these days because there are way too many teams, leagues and divisions. It's such a money maker. There is no shortage of people willing to shell out $ to watch their kids play their own teammates in a league game because some clubs can't even commit to fielding a team.

You can find a spot for any kid nowadays--if you are willing to drive around. How about this--instead of taking 45-65 kids per age group at 7-10 clubs go back to taking about 20. The other kids would stay in Rec and the would get to play with their friends/classmates longer and the Rec divisions would be very strong still---since there would still be a good talent pool--unlike now where everyone basically has to commit to travel at 8 to avoid a field of kids digging in the dirt or picking the ball up with their hands mid-play.

[Anonymous]

YES PP! That is my exact point. Travel takes way too many kids and all the good coaches. I wish there was a way to get clubs to go back to taking 20 kids instead. So ODSL fills the void for kids who are motivated, want to play, want to learn, might get better (or might not). Some may say that's a waste of money but that's the family's choice. We had a kid who played one year of ODSL and never had the experience described above with kids not showing up. I could see how that would be frustrating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In boys programs with five or six teams, in what league do the fifth and sixth teams play in?

Shitsville--ODSL. My kid was scoring double hatricks. We could have saved our $ and played Rec.

It serves no purpose to describe or label ODSL in this way. My oldest DD made the lowest WAGs team in her age division her first year and I was told it was a waste to have A child on a travel team if they did not make one of the top two teams. Two years later she made her clubs top team. Same story with my DDs best friend, but started in ODSL and just started with the clubs top team. Both girls have loved soccer the past two years and clearly got a lot out of their experiences.

Agree with PP that disparaging ODSL is juvenile. My DS spent his first two years of travel soccer on a team playing in ODSL while he was learning the game (and more importantly learning to love the game). After two years he was moved up to the club's WAGS Division 3 team, and after a couple more years playing in the upper divisions of WAGS he tried out for, and now plays on, a top 5 ranked team in Virginia at a different club. So ODSL is not very good soccer in general but it is a place for some kids to get their start in soccer with a higher caliber of coaching and more competitive level of play than most rec teams can offer.

WAGS is a girls' league. So either your DS is a DD or you're full of it.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand all this anger towards travel soccer programs with multiple teams per age group. If you think a C or D (3rd or 4th or 5th or whatever) team is a bad idea in a travel club, then don't put your kid on it. Our club doesn't have more than 3 teams per age group, but people accept spots on the B and C teams so their kids have access to the professional training and structure provided by a large club. Some kids may improve and move up, but others won't. Their parents still see value in having their kids participate in a more rigorous program than is offered through house or parent-coached ODSL teams. As the club adds teams, they also have to add coaching staff and field space/time so I doubt it's some huge money maker. These "lower" travel teams have the opportunity to get professional training, participate in leagues and tournaments against similarly skilled teams, and benefit from off season playing opportunities in indoor and futsal. All things not typically part of the house soccer experience.

I think the other thing to keep in mind is that there is really no way to tell which players have long term potential at U9, U10 and U11 - a kid who's a rock star at 9 may not pan out to be the next Messi by 16, and vice versa. Why not give kids who are interested in developing an environment where they can do so...even if they're starting on a lower level team at age 9 or 10? If those lower team players are assigned crap coaches and are not looked at for opportunities to move up, then, yes, that's a problem. Otherwise, they may just need some time and training to evolve.

And...don't blame travel for the problems with house programs. Go volunteer as a house commissioner/coach and try to fix it. The answer can't be to disband the lower travel teams - that's not gonna happen until there's a better alternative for decent (but not top level travel) players. I guess the cross-over leagues are a start.

Choice is a good thing and we have a lot of it here in the DC area - put your kid in the environment you think is best for them whether that's house/rec, ODSL or travel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all this anger towards travel soccer programs with multiple teams per age group. If you think a C or D (3rd or 4th or 5th or whatever) team is a bad idea in a travel club, then don't put your kid on it. Our club doesn't have more than 3 teams per age group, but people accept spots on the B and C teams so their kids have access to the professional training and structure provided by a large club. Some kids may improve and move up, but others won't. Their parents still see value in having their kids participate in a more rigorous program than is offered through house or parent-coached ODSL teams. As the club adds teams, they also have to add coaching staff and field space/time so I doubt it's some huge money maker. These "lower" travel teams have the opportunity to get professional training, participate in leagues and tournaments against similarly skilled teams, and benefit from off season playing opportunities in indoor and futsal. All things not typically part of the house soccer experience.

I think the other thing to keep in mind is that there is really no way to tell which players have long term potential at U9, U10 and U11 - a kid who's a rock star at 9 may not pan out to be the next Messi by 16, and vice versa. Why not give kids who are interested in developing an environment where they can do so...even if they're starting on a lower level team at age 9 or 10? If those lower team players are assigned crap coaches and are not looked at for opportunities to move up, then, yes, that's a problem. Otherwise, they may just need some time and training to evolve.

And...don't blame travel for the problems with house programs. Go volunteer as a house commissioner/coach and try to fix it. The answer can't be to disband the lower travel teams - that's not gonna happen until there's a better alternative for decent (but not top level travel) players. I guess the cross-over leagues are a start.

Choice is a good thing and we have a lot of it here in the DC area - put your kid in the environment you think is best for them whether that's house/rec, ODSL or travel.

+1 well put!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In boys programs with five or six teams, in what league do the fifth and sixth teams play in?

Shitsville--ODSL. My kid was scoring double hatricks. We could have saved our $ and played Rec.

It serves no purpose to describe or label ODSL in this way. My oldest DD made the lowest WAGs team in her age division her first year and I was told it was a waste to have A child on a travel team if they did not make one of the top two teams. Two years later she made her clubs top team. Same story with my DDs best friend, but started in ODSL and just started with the clubs top team. Both girls have loved soccer the past two years and clearly got a lot out of their experiences.

Agree with PP that disparaging ODSL is juvenile. My DS spent his first two years of travel soccer on a team playing in ODSL while he was learning the game (and more importantly learning to love the game). After two years he was moved up to the club's WAGS Division 3 team, and after a couple more years playing in the upper divisions of WAGS he tried out for, and now plays on, a top 5 ranked team in Virginia at a different club. So ODSL is not very good soccer in general but it is a place for some kids to get their start in soccer with a higher caliber of coaching and more competitive level of play than most rec teams can offer.

WAGS is a girls' league. So either your DS is a DD or you're full of it.

I was about to ask if their son suffered any abuse for playing on a girls' team for so many years. NTTAWWT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In boys programs with five or six teams, in what league do the fifth and sixth teams play in?

Shitsville--ODSL. My kid was scoring double hatricks. We could have saved our $ and played Rec.

It serves no purpose to describe or label ODSL in this way. My oldest DD made the lowest WAGs team in her age division her first year and I was told it was a waste to have A child on a travel team if they did not make one of the top two teams. Two years later she made her clubs top team. Same story with my DDs best friend, but started in ODSL and just started with the clubs top team. Both girls have loved soccer the past two years and clearly got a lot out of their experiences.

Agree with PP that disparaging ODSL is juvenile. My DS spent his first two years of travel soccer on a team playing in ODSL while he was learning the game (and more importantly learning to love the game). After two years he was moved up to the club's WAGS Division 3 team, and after a couple more years playing in the upper divisions of WAGS he tried out for, and now plays on, a top 5 ranked team in Virginia at a different club. So ODSL is not very good soccer in general but it is a place for some kids to get their start in soccer with a higher caliber of coaching and more competitive level of play than most rec teams can offer.

WAGS is a girls' league. So either your DS is a DD or you're full of it.

Ha!!! I have sons and daughters who have played WAGS, CCL NCSL, ODSL and SFL, so my mind was thinking NCSL but my fingers typed WAGS.

[Anonymous]

There's no excuse for a team showing up in ODSL without a full complement of players. ODSL allows clubs to call up players from the House league. Do it.

I think ODSL should be a lot bigger than it is. Maybe combine it with the crossover league.

We always hear about kids who play at a low level of travel at U9 and move up to the top teams by high school. Why not offer more programs for them? And for people who just want a little more than House but aren't going to make an NCSL team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand all this anger towards travel soccer programs with multiple teams per age group. If you think a C or D (3rd or 4th or 5th or whatever) team is a bad idea in a travel club, then don't put your kid on it. Our club doesn't have more than 3 teams per age group, but people accept spots on the B and C teams so their kids have access to the professional training and structure provided by a large club. Some kids may improve and move up, but others won't. Their parents still see value in having their kids participate in a more rigorous program than is offered through house or parent-coached ODSL teams. As the club adds teams, they also have to add coaching staff and field space/time so I doubt it's some huge money maker. These "lower" travel teams have the opportunity to get professional training, participate in leagues and tournaments against similarly skilled teams, and benefit from off season playing opportunities in indoor and futsal. All things not typically part of the house soccer experience.

I think the other thing to keep in mind is that there is really no way to tell which players have long term potential at U9, U10 and U11 - a kid who's a rock star at 9 may not pan out to be the next Messi by 16, and vice versa. Why not give kids who are interested in developing an environment where they can do so...even if they're starting on a lower level team at age 9 or 10? If those lower team players are assigned crap coaches and are not looked at for opportunities to move up, then, yes, that's a problem. Otherwise, they may just need some time and training to evolve.

And...don't blame travel for the problems with house programs. Go volunteer as a house commissioner/coach and try to fix it. The answer can't be to disband the lower travel teams - that's not gonna happen until there's a better alternative for decent (but not top level travel) players. I guess the cross-over leagues are a start.

Choice is a good thing and we have a lot of it here in the DC area - put your kid in the environment you think is best for them whether that's house/rec, ODSL or travel.

This post exemplifies the main problem with youth soccer. Parents have bought into paying insane amounts of money for very little value. Every time I hear "professional" training, I gag. 90% of "professional" coaches are substandard and are doing little if any more development of your sons or daughters than what many volunteer coaches could do. It is almost all about the money. There is not enough talent in ANY club to have a 4th, 5th or, god help us, a 6th team. In fact, most clubs don't even have enough for a 3rd team of $3000/year soccer. But as long as the McLeans and Great Falls of the world pay it, it will continue.

If you know the game, go watch the teams that play true football and then go watch them train and then compare that training to what you are paying $3000 to put your child into. If you don't, ask around and find out what teams play more than kick and chase and watch those teams train. Results in youth soccer are meaningless so don't go by which teams are scoring lots of goals or winning U11 leagues with the fastest kids around.

[Anonymous]

To the PP, I respectfully disagree. Yes, I'm sure there are bad travel coaches/bad travel clubs who are in it just for the money. But there are a number of very good clubs with programs in the DC area that are focused on teaching kids the skills to develop as players. If you haven't seen or experienced this, then you're looking in the wrong places.

This has nothing to do with how many "good" players there are - as far as I'm concerned, they all have the potential to develop/improve at these young ages. This is about demand for a program that provides the structure and training for kids who love playing soccer, want to get better and want more than a weekly house practice with a volunteer parent coach who may or may not know the game and how to teach the skills kids will need to play later in life. Again, if you don't want it, don't buy it.

And...U9 travel soccer doesn't cost $3000.

[Anonymous]

PP here again...AND many of us are well aware of the difference between kick and run clubs that choose the biggest/most athletic kids for their top U9/U10 travel teams and beat the snot out of everyone in tournaments, and those that put the emphasis on foot skills and development over game results. There are several clubs that are teaching the right things even to their B and C
teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the PP, I respectfully disagree. Yes, I'm sure there are bad travel coaches/bad travel clubs who are in it just for the money. But there are a number of very good clubs with programs in the DC area that are focused on teaching kids the skills to develop as players. If you haven't seen or experienced this, then you're looking in the wrong places.

This has nothing to do with how many "good" players there are - as far as I'm concerned, they all have the potential to develop/improve at these young ages. This is about demand for a program that provides the structure and training for kids who love playing soccer, want to get better and want more than a weekly house practice with a volunteer parent coach who may or may not know the game and how to teach the skills kids will need to play later in life. Again, if you don't want it, don't buy it.

And...U9 travel soccer doesn't cost $3000.

I am the PP, and with all due respect, there are very FEW clubs focused on developing soccer players. Please don't highlight how many licenses coaches have at these clubs you are referencing because licensing doesn't mean very much at all. And don't tell me how so-and-so club won a state cup. Go watch them play. Getting wins is much easier than development of soccer players and until US Soccer and youth soccer in the US acknowledge this and appreciate it fully, things will not improve.

Soccer coaching is like teaching. In order to be good at it, you need to put in the time and care to connect with each child. I repeat...90% of coaches don't put in nearly enough time or energy into it and thus aren't developing the kids at the pace commensurate with what we all are paying.

And...if you add up McLean's fees it is pretty damn close to $3000 even at U9. If it makes you feel better that at your club you are only paying $2000 for your 8 year-old, then keep writing those checks.

One more thing - training is where the lion's share of the development happens, not in games. Games are the fun part. So good training is EVERYTHING in development of youth soccer players.

[Anonymous]

"If you know the game, go watch the teams that play true football and then go watch them train and then compare that training to what you are paying $3000 to put your child into. If you don't, ask around and find out what teams play more than kick and chase and watch those teams train."


I'm interested in taking your advice. So which teams should I go watch to see "true football"?