Forum Index
»
Sports General Discussion
Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
99.9% of it. Little kids in South America and all over Europe have walls plastered with soccer celebs. My kids do too--but not many American kids do. I have been amazed when we traveled around the US summer how we say so, so many kids wearing International and Soccer jerseys. Just about every state we were in--my boys found a pick-up soccer game and like-minded kids wearing German, Chilean, Spain, Italy jerseys. This was not the case a decade or so ago. It does speak to how the sport has grown amongst the younger set in this Country. |
Anonymous
+1 on this response. I hope there comes a day when the average non-soccer aware person in America comes to realize how off-base the "best athlete" argument is. For anyone who is interested, here are a couple of links to articles that explain why this theory makes very little sense: http://www.sounderatheart.com/2010/5/29/1492647/the-immortal-best-athletes-myth https://bigdealmcneiljm.wordpress.com/2014/06/25/if-americas-best-athletes-played-soccer-wed-still-suck/ |
Anonymous
+100 My sons play soccer, flag football,Basketball and baseball. Hands down they've gotten in the best physical condition from soccer and basketball. The consistent running and lateral moves. Flag football is very stop and go--and only in a few plays. Baseball is slow as shit and they barely get any exercise. The older one runs hard 50 min in a game--and some weekends there are 4 games. This is how I was easily able to transition to track/marathon running and field hockey and lacrosse in HS. It prepares and conditions the body. Speed is also a critical requirement as players move up---which is why many have to drop it. |
Anonymous
|
Nobody suggested great athletes are interchangeable and if only LeBron James or MIchael Jodran played soccer we'd be great. Just that there are a lot of choices available and with soccer not the most popular sport in the US, there are lots of really athletic kids who might be great soccer players if they gave it a chance and stuck with it, but they pick another sport before you ever get to see what they could do. There are kids in both my kids' age groups that would love to play travel soccer and easily could, but then they couldn't play baseball because there are only so many hours in a day so they pick baseball. (will avoid side conversation about kids having to specialize so early on).
But really this is besides the point. There are probably many factors that go into why US lags behind other countries . I just have a hard time understanding how this birth year rule is going to make a substantial enough difference to make it worthwhile when under the new system there are a so many kids who are going to have a much harder time, particularly at the youngest ages when we should be trying to sell them on soccer. There are plenty of people on here saying "they'll adjust" or "if it is too intimidating they can quit and try again in a few years" or my favorite that they can just play in their own "kindergarten only league" (because there are so many leagues out there for three months worth of kindergarten birthdays and I am sure plenty of people who want to step up and run a league for them?). Personally I just think this is a time when we should be making it as easy as possible at the rec levels for kids to get involved and stay involved in sports. But people are entitled to disagree on this and to have different priorities, and obviously enough people at US Soccer must have considered this and determined that the tradeoff is worth it - probably because these rec kids with fall birthdays are statistically not the kids they are hoping this new rule will help them identify. |
Anonymous
I made the comment about the idea of a kindergarten-only league that you are sneering at. While I think it is extremely odd that so many people think their kindergartners will be undone by the prospect of playing with first graders, it would not be particularly difficult to set up a kindergarten-only program. There are hundreds of soccer training companies in our area, and probably in most areas of the country where there are well-established rec programs. Some of them already run their own camps, clinics and mini-leagues for groups that want to learn and play outside the larger rec and travel system, and I'm sure many more would be happy to do so if there is a market for it. If you are not getting carded or registering with US Club Soccer, USYSA, or other bodies that have to do what US Soccer says you can divide your teams and leagues up using whatever age group classifications you like. I'm not saying this is a sensible way for anyone to spend their money, but it can be done without requiring the parents who are outraged by the mandate having to put in much effort. |
Anonymous
So if you register with US soccer for travel, can your rec leagues follow a school year schedule? Internationally I think there are a lot of school teams that run through the school year. We don't have sports for the most part in our elementary and middle schools. |
Anonymous
| Sorry folks but if you think only kindergartners and other young kids are going to be effected by this you are wrong. My fifth grader is on a house team that's been together for years and she's the only one with one of these birthdays. If she has to go play soccer with middle school girls next year, I can guarantee that will be the end of the road for her. I am sure this will be as common a problem as miserable kindergarten kids. |
Anonymous
I don't understand this point. It seems like just about exactly the same number of kids will have a hard time as will with any system with a one year age group. Basically the less developed kids near the end of the cut off. Moving the cutoff just shifts the burden from June / July kids to November / December kids. |
Anonymous
It's the grade that makes a big difference in Rec because Rec is school-based. My pre-K kid was a great soccer player but would not have fit in well with a team full of Kindergarten players. Kindergartners have learned basic social skills that allow them to be taught at practice at a level above preschool kids. The kids also know each other from school. When a kid gets to the end of 2nd grade to tryout for travel...a kid that started in K already has 6 full seasons of soccer under his belt and much more confidence. Travel isn't based on school and isn't grouped that way. It's apples and oranges. Rec with older kids is often made up of kids that want a team with friends but don't care as much about the competition or level of play. Most probably wouldn't play if they weren't with their friends/classmates. This is a big difference that is being overlooked. It makes sense for 'competitive' soccer leagues to align with the World---but rec and house league that isn't developing future college, national and international players---makes no sense at all. |
Anonymous
You are correct, but I think the people who think it is hard on kids are worried about a couple of things. The first is the disruption to current teams. Because the mandate isn't grandfathered in, kids who are in the Sept.-December group will have to move to a different team, or convince all the younger kids on their current team to play up. They will not be allowed to play down with the kids they were playing with before the mandate. At least this is true for travel programs. I'm not clear on whether the rules will apply to all rec teams at every age group. Others seem concerned about the idea of kids having to play with kids in a higher grade, even though they still will be playing with kids who are less than a year older, as is the case now. Many people here have said they think this is intimidating for the younger kids, and will take a lot of the fun out of playing, which will consequently lead to a decrease in participation in soccer in the country. This one doesn't make sense to me. Having been through both rec and travel programs with my kids, I can't imagine caring about this, but enough people have raised the issue that it appears to be a source of real anxiety for some. |
Anonymous
The difference is that the June/August kids were still playing with their grade unless they redshirted. The Sept/Dec. kids won't be. \And if they don't phase it in, many kids will have to switch teams. |
Anonymous
The way understand it, technically speaking no player will have to try out for a different team -- for example, older kids on U12 this year would try out for U13 whereas the younger kids on the U12 could try out for U12 or U13. I guess the competition would likely be somewhat tougher than previously , though, for U13. |
Anonymous
|
If you don't understand why switching to birth year all the way down to youngest rec leagues is a big deal, you ...
A. haven't been reading. B. have no sense of empathy whatsover. C. can't see beyond your own kid. D. all of the above. Meanwhile, I simply don't see the argument IN FAVOR of making the switch. You're not bringing U5 leagues into accord with U5 leagues around the world -- we've already proved that false. I'm still waiting to see the argument that the U-Little rec leagues have to be set up the same way as the U-Teen elite leagues. Especially when it's so easy to make the transition when you're already switching to more selective teams and eventually into two-year age groups. |
Anonymous
Actually - my son's Fall U-10 team is listed as a 2005. He has an October Birthday and would stay with this team. The Jan-July 2005 kids in the grade ahead of him are technically playing 'up' in a 2004 U-11 team under the new rules. The current U-9s are a 2006 team. The U8s are a 2007 team. This is how it's listed in our Club website. In this scenario-- nobody is having to move up a team. |
Anonymous
But lots of kids will shift down. 3/4's of our 4th grade U-10 team is 2006 so they would adjust down. It's correct kids aren't trying out up--it's a shift down across the board. Some of the grade above will shift down in each group. |