Bait and Switch - Roster Size

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

THIS. And for players committed to play in college, game time is key to be ready. The idea that practice is enough is ridiculous and coaches know that. It's a moneygrab.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

And what do you do in games when faced with unique situations?
Revert to your training (which includes decision making under pressure)

[Anonymous]

If you have it in writing you could demand a refund.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

If the only touches you're getting all year is in team practices, game time isn't your biggest development issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

THIS. And for players committed to play in college, game time is key to be ready. The idea that practice is enough is ridiculous and coaches know that. It's a moneygrab.

How you gonna be a college commit and you can't get in the 18 from a 23 local club roster?
Worse you can't start on a local team?

How you going to make a college roster competing against regional, national and international players?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

THIS. And for players committed to play in college, game time is key to be ready. The idea that practice is enough is ridiculous and coaches know that. It's a moneygrab.

How you gonna be a college commit and you can't get in the 18 from a 23 local club roster?
Worse you can't start on a local team?

How you going to make a college roster competing against regional, national and international players?

That would be a good point if it were a 23 player roster. Except it's a 33+ player roster.

[Anonymous]

Money grab by clubs with too many teams - might as well play Rec if you are the 4th/5th or more team. Was better when clubs could only have 2 teams per age group

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

THIS. And for players committed to play in college, game time is key to be ready. The idea that practice is enough is ridiculous and coaches know that. It's a moneygrab.

How you gonna be a college commit and you can't get in the 18 from a 23 local club roster?
Worse you can't start on a local team?

How you going to make a college roster competing against regional, national and international players?

A valid point for most but the DC area and some other metropolitan areas are unique in this regard. Don't know the situation of other clubs, but Bethesda has quite a few second team players who are not only rostered but get significant minutes at major colleges - Johns Hopkins and Princeton are two for sure. Look at the basketball scene in this area as well. Alot of kids who play in the Catholic League are sixth men who are not good enough to start on their high school team but are good enough to start on a D1 college team. It happens. And more frequently than you'd think. Also, one coach's gold is the next coach's trash. Different coaches are looking for different things. And there's no shortage of coaches in club soccer who wouldn't know talent if it hit them in the face. Bottom line...if you have some talent, dedication, and love the game, there's usually a right scenario for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

90% of development occurs outside game minutes because that’s when the real work is put in

[Anonymous]

Yes, this but depending on the age.

Anonymous wrote:Money grab by clubs with too many teams - might as well play Rec if you are the 4th/5th or more team. Was better when clubs could only have 2 teams per age group

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

THIS. And for players committed to play in college, game time is key to be ready. The idea that practice is enough is ridiculous and coaches know that. It's a moneygrab.

How you gonna be a college commit and you can't get in the 18 from a 23 local club roster?
Worse you can't start on a local team?

How you going to make a college roster competing against regional, national and international players?

A valid point for most but the DC area and some other metropolitan areas are unique in this regard. Don't know the situation of other clubs, but Bethesda has quite a few second team players who are not only rostered but get significant minutes at major colleges - Johns Hopkins and Princeton are two for sure. Look at the basketball scene in this area as well. Alot of kids who play in the Catholic League are sixth men who are not good enough to start on their high school team but are good enough to start on a D1 college team. It happens. And more frequently than you'd think. Also, one coach's gold is the next coach's trash. Different coaches are looking for different things. And there's no shortage of coaches in club soccer who wouldn't know talent if it hit them in the face. Bottom line...if you have some talent, dedication, and love the game, there's usually a right scenario for everyone.

Just carefully reviewed both the Princeton and Johns Hopkins rosters
You get multiple Pinocchios for the claims of Bethesda 2nd team players

You are hereby fined $1,725 per incident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

THIS. And for players committed to play in college, game time is key to be ready. The idea that practice is enough is ridiculous and coaches know that. It's a moneygrab.

How you gonna be a college commit and you can't get in the 18 from a 23 local club roster?
Worse you can't start on a local team?

How you going to make a college roster competing against regional, national and international players?

That would be a good point if it were a 23 player roster. Except it's a 33+ player roster.

This must be an auction.
The roster size exaggerations keep climbing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

THIS. And for players committed to play in college, game time is key to be ready. The idea that practice is enough is ridiculous and coaches know that. It's a moneygrab.

How you gonna be a college commit and you can't get in the 18 from a 23 local club roster?
Worse you can't start on a local team?

How you going to make a college roster competing against regional, national and international players?

A valid point for most but the DC area and some other metropolitan areas are unique in this regard. Don't know the situation of other clubs, but Bethesda has quite a few second team players who are not only rostered but get significant minutes at major colleges - Johns Hopkins and Princeton are two for sure. Look at the basketball scene in this area as well. Alot of kids who play in the Catholic League are sixth men who are not good enough to start on their high school team but are good enough to start on a D1 college team. It happens. And more frequently than you'd think. Also, one coach's gold is the next coach's trash. Different coaches are looking for different things. And there's no shortage of coaches in club soccer who wouldn't know talent if it hit them in the face. Bottom line...if you have some talent, dedication, and love the game, there's usually a right scenario for everyone.

Just carefully reviewed both the Princeton and Johns Hopkins rosters
You get multiple Pinocchios for the claims of Bethesda 2nd team players

You are hereby fined $1,725 per incident

Were you looking at boys or girls? Talking boys, but I understand you Girl Dads always think it's about you.
https://goprincetontigers.com/sports/mens-soccer/roster/bardia-hormozi/22289
https://hopkinssports.com/sports/mens-soccer/roster/francis-meyer/17518

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the way it works at the big clubs. Even with teams that aren’t that good.

The coaches are making good money, the clubs also provide different coaching directors etc. the only way to make budget for all that is with more players.

You don’t have to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

But yes the only way to get better is to play significant minutes in the games. Consider doublecarding with a lower level team to get those minutes in. This is the way it is.

The only way to get better is not significant minutes in games, it's putting in the extra work outside practice and going hard at practice. How many times does your kid touch the ball if they play the full game, 10? 15? 20 times? Now how many times do they touch the ball in practice? 100? 120? game time doesn't equal development, it's a chance to put what you learned at practice into play against an opponent.

All the kids on team are getting those touches in practice. Only some of the players are getting significant game time on top of the practice time. Which players do you think are getting better development? There are situations that happen only in games when you are playing another opponent on a full field, pressure, tactics, decisions that need to be made that aren't easy to simulate in practice. Of course some player development happens in games. Not just in games, but games are very important for development.

THIS. And for players committed to play in college, game time is key to be ready. The idea that practice is enough is ridiculous and coaches know that. It's a moneygrab.

How you gonna be a college commit and you can't get in the 18 from a 23 local club roster?
Worse you can't start on a local team?

How you going to make a college roster competing against regional, national and international players?

A valid point for most but the DC area and some other metropolitan areas are unique in this regard. Don't know the situation of other clubs, but Bethesda has quite a few second team players who are not only rostered but get significant minutes at major colleges - Johns Hopkins and Princeton are two for sure. Look at the basketball scene in this area as well. Alot of kids who play in the Catholic League are sixth men who are not good enough to start on their high school team but are good enough to start on a D1 college team. It happens. And more frequently than you'd think. Also, one coach's gold is the next coach's trash. Different coaches are looking for different things. And there's no shortage of coaches in club soccer who wouldn't know talent if it hit them in the face. Bottom line...if you have some talent, dedication, and love the game, there's usually a right scenario for everyone.

Just carefully reviewed both the Princeton and Johns Hopkins rosters
You get multiple Pinocchios for the claims of Bethesda 2nd team players

You are hereby fined $1,725 per incident

Were you looking at boys or girls? Talking boys, but I understand you Girl Dads always think it's about you.
https://goprincetontigers.com/sports/mens-soccer/roster/bardia-hormozi/22289
https://hopkinssports.com/sports/mens-soccer/roster/francis-meyer/17518

"Played on team that reached 2021 MLS Next quarterfinals"
"Montgomery County player of the year"

How's that 2nd team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone complains about roster size in their journey to get to college soccer.

How many players are on college rosters?

Well now its apparently 28...