Club Soccer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What bronze-level teams are doing all this alleged traveling? Name them or stop making stuff up. The whining is out of control

http://google.com

So nobody, then? Got it

[Anonymous]

Just say you can't afford it because you live outside your means. No need to be spiteful about you only being able to afford rec. There is nothing wrong with rec.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's called capitalism and individual choice. Everything in the US works this way. The market ultimately decides how these things work, not some top down authority saying how everything should be. Customers willing to pay for something drives it. Is it the ideal way to develop soccer players? Probably not but not necessarily because the same types of systems exist in other sports and it works (sometimes).

I don't know -- we're not as dominant in basketball as we used to be.

You're right -- the market is deciding such things. US Soccer *could* step in and try to sort it all out, but they're already facing enough lawsuits.

So the key is trying to educate parents to make better choices. Along those lines: No, volunteer parents aren't necessarily worse than "pro" coaches. A volunteer parent may have the same level of coaching education as the "pro," and they're going to be better at dealing with kids than some 25-year-old who hasn't around 9-year-olds since he was 9 himself.

I see so many travel coaches out there who I can't believe get paid for what they do. Meanwhile, in Iceland, everyone and his dog has a B license.

The distinction is not between volunteers and professional soccer coaches. It's between volunteers and people getting paid to do a job. Clubs are businesses and need to find workers to pay to coach their teams. Sometimes there are "real" coaches with real experience and talent who apply for these jobs. Sometimes it's just someone trying to make a living. Just like some volunteers can be very qualified while some can just be doing it because there was a need. In general, the more you are paying the higher chance there is to get a qualified coach. Of course it doesn't always work out perfectly but again, the market and capitalism does its thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's called capitalism and individual choice. Everything in the US works this way. The market ultimately decides how these things work, not some top down authority saying how everything should be. Customers willing to pay for something drives it. Is it the ideal way to develop soccer players? Probably not but not necessarily because the same types of systems exist in other sports and it works (sometimes).

I don't know -- we're not as dominant in basketball as we used to be.

You're right -- the market is deciding such things. US Soccer *could* step in and try to sort it all out, but they're already facing enough lawsuits.

So the key is trying to educate parents to make better choices. Along those lines: No, volunteer parents aren't necessarily worse than "pro" coaches. A volunteer parent may have the same level of coaching education as the "pro," and they're going to be better at dealing with kids than some 25-year-old who hasn't around 9-year-olds since he was 9 himself.

I see so many travel coaches out there who I can't believe get paid for what they do. Meanwhile, in Iceland, everyone and his dog has a B license.

The distinction is not between volunteers and professional soccer coaches. It's between volunteers and people getting paid to do a job. Clubs are businesses and need to find workers to pay to coach their teams. Sometimes there are "real" coaches with real experience and talent who apply for these jobs. Sometimes it's just someone trying to make a living. Just like some volunteers can be very qualified while some can just be doing it because there was a need. In general, the more you are paying the higher chance there is to get a qualified coach. Of course it doesn't always work out perfectly but again, the market and capitalism does its thing.

This is why I'm turning more socialist as I get older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just say you can't afford it because you live outside your means. No need to be spiteful about you only being able to afford rec. There is nothing wrong with rec.

Wow. Project much?

Every significant discussion on player development in the United States includes a lot of fretting about the cost of club soccer and the misapplication of resources. That includes people who pay for travel soccer or are paid to run travel soccer. It ain't just people who make less than you do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What bronze-level teams are doing all this alleged traveling? Name them or stop making stuff up. The whining is out of control

http://google.com

So nobody, then? Got it

Or any club that enters its third team in EDP and plays EDP Cup in New Jersey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone missed the point of lessons learned from playing in team sports. There is more to sports than ending up playing in college.

Yes we have to think of all the mediocre fullbacks who are now coaching and talking about development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the life of me I do not understand the select/club sports mindset.

Why are we paying thousands of dollars to join clubs so kids can play on the bronze team, to travel to Topeka, to play another bronze team, to go 1-3, stay in a hotel, eat crappy food, while mom and dad bring the younger siblings along, just so they can end up fighting over who forgot to pack snacks for the kids.

How about, you save the money, spend time with the family doing something fun, productive or educational, and play school or Rec ball.

Your kid isn’t going to college on a scholarship or going to the Olympics. Most won’t even be playing the sport they are in after their sophomore year of high school.

Books have been written on this topic. No one reads them because they can't afford to, given all the money they're spending on club sports.

The smart people in soccer know we shouldn't be putting 9-year-old kids in red, bronze, silver, fuchsia or gold silos. Clubs should have professional training available for anyone who wants it. Kids should be playing, not traveling. You don't become a better soccer player in an airplane or a car, traveling to play a team that's no better or worse than the one five miles away or the one with your next-door neighbor.

Our typical peer nation doesn't have "travel" as we have it. They have professional academies, and then they have what most would consider "rec" soccer. (It helps that soccer is so big in most other countries that you may have your choice of a dozen clubs within a 10-mile drive, or a couple within walking distance in a big city.) They have networks of scouts and "representative" clubs so that talented pro academy-level players can be identified.

And they're doing better than we are.

So what? Who cares what other nations are doing? We have our way and it has nothign to do with going pro. It is about fun. And I agree, all but the top couple of levels should not be on cross country trips. But so what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For the life of me I do not understand the select/club sports mindset.

Why are we paying thousands of dollars to join clubs so kids can play on the bronze team, to travel to Topeka, to play another bronze team, to go 1-3, stay in a hotel, eat crappy food, while mom and dad bring the younger siblings along, just so they can end up fighting over who forgot to pack snacks for the kids.

How about, you save the money, spend time with the family doing something fun, productive or educational, and play school or Rec ball.

Your kid isn’t going to college on a scholarship or going to the Olympics. Most won’t even be playing the sport they are in after their sophomore year of high school.

Books have been written on this topic. No one reads them because they can't afford to, given all the money they're spending on club sports.

The smart people in soccer know we shouldn't be putting 9-year-old kids in red, bronze, silver, fuchsia or gold silos. Clubs should have professional training available for anyone who wants it. Kids should be playing, not traveling. You don't become a better soccer player in an airplane or a car, traveling to play a team that's no better or worse than the one five miles away or the one with your next-door neighbor.

Our typical peer nation doesn't have "travel" as we have it. They have professional academies, and then they have what most would consider "rec" soccer. (It helps that soccer is so big in most other countries that you may have your choice of a dozen clubs within a 10-mile drive, or a couple within walking distance in a big city.) They have networks of scouts and "representative" clubs so that talented pro academy-level players can be identified.

And they're doing better than we are.

So what? Who cares what other nations are doing? We have our way and it has nothign to do with going pro. It is about fun. And I agree, all but the top couple of levels should not be on cross country trips. But so what?

If this were unique to soccer then maybe there would be a point to making the comparison. But this is how youth sports and youth activities in general work in this country. Volleyball, hockey, basketball, cheer, lacrosse, baseball, even things like robotics and chess. They all have national travel leagues and tournaments that cost a lot of money. There is no going back to "how it was" in the old days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the life of me I do not understand the select/club sports mindset.

Why are we paying thousands of dollars to join clubs so kids can play on the bronze team, to travel to Topeka, to play another bronze team, to go 1-3, stay in a hotel, eat crappy food, while mom and dad bring the younger siblings along, just so they can end up fighting over who forgot to pack snacks for the kids.

How about, you save the money, spend time with the family doing something fun, productive or educational, and play school or Rec ball.

Your kid isn’t going to college on a scholarship or going to the Olympics. Most won’t even be playing the sport they are in after their sophomore year of high school.

Why? Because our kids enjoy it, and we can afford it. Not sure why you think club soccer can’t be a fun and productive activity for kids and parents, though if there is anyone from our area traveling to Topeka to watch their third team kid play soccer, I would feel bad for that parent and kid. I’ve never witnessed any such thing happening, though.

Re the bolded, my older kid is playing college at a top 20 school on a 2/3 athletic scholarship, and my younger made varsity as a freshman. We know many kids in the same boat. That can’t likely happen without club soccer in this country. Do I think it’s a terrible system that benefits the wealthy while funneling money to undeserving people like the leadership of ECNL? Yes, and as others have stated, the system isn’t set up to maximize the development of kids or coaches. But it’s the system we have and none of its flaws mean we and others aren’t going to participate if our kids want to play at a level more serious than rec.

[Anonymous]

you pay not for soccer you pay for life lessons . Already at u8 your kids will be introduced to the dirties politics that can be.
At the age 18 they are ready to work in US Senate if survived.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the life of me I do not understand the select/club sports mindset.

Why are we paying thousands of dollars to join clubs so kids can play on the bronze team, to travel to Topeka, to play another bronze team, to go 1-3, stay in a hotel, eat crappy food, while mom and dad bring the younger siblings along, just so they can end up fighting over who forgot to pack snacks for the kids.

How about, you save the money, spend time with the family doing something fun, productive or educational, and play school or Rec ball.

Your kid isn’t going to college on a scholarship or going to the Olympics. Most won’t even be playing the sport they are in after their sophomore year of high school.

Yeah. Always felt the same way. I played travel soccer and so did all of my siblings and it certainly wasn't something my parents would have been able to afford in this day and age. Nothing like today's expenses.

That said, my kids really loved it. I absolutely despised the politics of it. Saw such sh*t behavior of some coaches, HS, admin., parents, you name it. We had to move around to get the kids properly developed, avoid excessive travel young and find 'good' people.

Now my kid is headed off to play in college next year, something we never were gunning for. Self-driven. I checked out of the process when he started driving himself at 16 and looking for opportunities himself. I was beaten down by the system and it was so painful watching what my kid went through by some real *ssholes over the years. Rolled off his back because he loved the game and believed in himself. So thrilled to see how it ended up working out for him which seemed impossible 1 year ago.

[Anonymous]

The pay to play model sucks.

At least in Montgomery County you have 2 options for travel lite: MSI Classic and Sam Select Neither costs as much as travel, and all games ate in Montgomery County, with better competition than Rec. And, many MSI Classic teams are parent coached, and, are competitive

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The pay to play model sucks.

At least in Montgomery County you have 2 options for travel lite: MSI Classic and Sam Select Neither costs as much as travel, and all games ate in Montgomery County, with better competition than Rec. And, many MSI Classic teams are parent coached, and, are competitive

I realize you might not know this. Is the closest to "travel-lite" Loudoun Challenge for Loudoun?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's called capitalism and individual choice. Everything in the US works this way. The market ultimately decides how these things work, not some top down authority saying how everything should be. Customers willing to pay for something drives it. Is it the ideal way to develop soccer players? Probably not but not necessarily because the same types of systems exist in other sports and it works (sometimes).

I don't know -- we're not as dominant in basketball as we used to be.

You're right -- the market is deciding such things. US Soccer *could* step in and try to sort it all out, but they're already facing enough lawsuits.

So the key is trying to educate parents to make better choices. Along those lines: No, volunteer parents aren't necessarily worse than "pro" coaches. A volunteer parent may have the same level of coaching education as the "pro," and they're going to be better at dealing with kids than some 25-year-old who hasn't around 9-year-olds since he was 9 himself.

I see so many travel coaches out there who I can't believe get paid for what they do. Meanwhile, in Iceland, everyone and his dog has a B license.

Did the volunteer parent grow up in a soccer culture and played for decades at high club and International levels?
Now has coaching certifications and licenses and continues to attend coaching seminars?