Paying your kids to score goals

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are two issues here.

One is that rewards destroy internal motivation. Sometimes, rewards can make sense if you have a kid who needs to do something, or stop doing something, and isn't internally motivated. But a kid who isn't internally motivated to play a specific sport, shouldn't be playing it. They should keep looking until they find what they are motivated to do.

The other is that over focusing on goals, rather than on perseverance, teamwork, soccer IQ (or lacrosse IQ, or hockey IQ, or whatever IQ) isn't going to lead to the kid improving as a player. It's a stupid thing to reward because even if we accept that being a good player is the goal, it won't lead to the kid being a better player.

Tell your boss you no longer wish to be paid because rewards destroy your internal motivation.

I go to work in order to be paid. If your kid is going to soccer in order to be paid, not because they love soccer, then they shouldn't be playing soccer. The point of kid soccer is to have fun, and to develop an interest that will carry into adulthood. If they have to be paid to be there neither of those things are happening. On the other hand, the reason I go to work is to get paid, which is a perfectly fine reason for working.

Why can’t they go to soccer to be paid? Why is the point of soccer just to have fun? Why can’t it be making money for college?

If the goal is to earn money for college, then paying them to work against their best interest by focusing on individual stats and not on playing with strategy and helping their team win is not going to help achieve this goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are two issues here.

One is that rewards destroy internal motivation. Sometimes, rewards can make sense if you have a kid who needs to do something, or stop doing something, and isn't internally motivated. But a kid who isn't internally motivated to play a specific sport, shouldn't be playing it. They should keep looking until they find what they are motivated to do.

The other is that over focusing on goals, rather than on perseverance, teamwork, soccer IQ (or lacrosse IQ, or hockey IQ, or whatever IQ) isn't going to lead to the kid improving as a player. It's a stupid thing to reward because even if we accept that being a good player is the goal, it won't lead to the kid being a better player.

Tell your boss you no longer wish to be paid because rewards destroy your internal motivation.

I go to work in order to be paid. If your kid is going to soccer in order to be paid, not because they love soccer, then they shouldn't be playing soccer. The point of kid soccer is to have fun, and to develop an interest that will carry into adulthood. If they have to be paid to be there neither of those things are happening. On the other hand, the reason I go to work is to get paid, which is a perfectly fine reason for working.

Why can’t they go to soccer to be paid? Why is the point of soccer just to have fun? Why can’t it be making money for college?

If the goal is to earn money for college, then paying them to work against their best interest by focusing on individual stats and not on playing with strategy and helping their team win is not going to help achieve this goal.

Either way they make money, what difference does it make?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think there are two issues here.

One is that rewards destroy internal motivation. Sometimes, rewards can make sense if you have a kid who needs to do something, or stop doing something, and isn't internally motivated. But a kid who isn't internally motivated to play a specific sport, shouldn't be playing it. They should keep looking until they find what they are motivated to do.

The other is that over focusing on goals, rather than on perseverance, teamwork, soccer IQ (or lacrosse IQ, or hockey IQ, or whatever IQ) isn't going to lead to the kid improving as a player. It's a stupid thing to reward because even if we accept that being a good player is the goal, it won't lead to the kid being a better player.

I have an athlete and 100% agree. She plays because She wants to.
We do pay for grades because she’s not academic, has ADHD and it helps motivate her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think you’re an idiot for worrying about how others raise their kids.

+1

[Anonymous]

In general using money as motivation for anything other than actual paid work will have the opposite of what is probably the desire of most families.

Some people want a child to be motivated to do their best in a sport (or music or academics, etc) because of intrinsic competitiveness, love of the sport, and a desire to do well for the team. If you praise your kid for effort and team work and celebrate success, this should develop naturally. It also helps you see earlier when a kid doesn't enjoy the sport and should be doing something more fulfilling where they might develop a true passion and skill.

If individual financial gain becomes the child's motivation, you are developing a personality that is narcissistic in the capitalist sense. The kid will take the shot themselves instead of passing the ball, and may decide the money is worth cheating or hurting someone on the field. Kids make bad choices sometimes. Some people do want kids to become that kind of adult, to be motivated by scholarships or pro sports salaries, or to be a finance "bro" willing to cut corners and screw other people for personal financial gain. Not saying all people in finance are like that, obviously, but the ones paid for goals as little kids probably are at higher risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you’re an idiot for worrying about how others raise their kids.

+1

Tgis should clear it up for you op , they are nasty short sighted people.

[Anonymous]

Not sure why this bothers you, it wouldn’t even be on my radar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are two issues here.

One is that rewards destroy internal motivation. Sometimes, rewards can make sense if you have a kid who needs to do something, or stop doing something, and isn't internally motivated. But a kid who isn't internally motivated to play a specific sport, shouldn't be playing it. They should keep looking until they find what they are motivated to do.

The other is that over focusing on goals, rather than on perseverance, teamwork, soccer IQ (or lacrosse IQ, or hockey IQ, or whatever IQ) isn't going to lead to the kid improving as a player. It's a stupid thing to reward because even if we accept that being a good player is the goal, it won't lead to the kid being a better player.

Tell your boss you no longer wish to be paid because rewards destroy your internal motivation.

I go to work in order to be paid. If your kid is going to soccer in order to be paid, not because they love soccer, then they shouldn't be playing soccer. The point of kid soccer is to have fun, and to develop an interest that will carry into adulthood. If they have to be paid to be there neither of those things are happening. On the other hand, the reason I go to work is to get paid, which is a perfectly fine reason for working.

Why can’t they go to soccer to be paid? Why is the point of soccer just to have fun? Why can’t it be making money for college?

If the goal is to earn money for college, then paying them to work against their best interest by focusing on individual stats and not on playing with strategy and helping their team win is not going to help achieve this goal.

Either way they make money, what difference does it make?

A kid who has been paid for goals and thus rewarded for a
playing like a ball hog and not learning how to pass or play with strategy isn’t going to make money playing soccer in college.

If for some reason you are going to choose not to put your extra money in a 529 and instead to invest that money in paying your kid to do things that have a slight chance of helping them get money for soccer in college, then at least pay your kid for things that will increase their skill, like practicing extra or helping their team win the game. I still will think you made an odd choice but it’s better than paying for goals.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are two issues here.

One is that rewards destroy internal motivation. Sometimes, rewards can make sense if you have a kid who needs to do something, or stop doing something, and isn't internally motivated. But a kid who isn't internally motivated to play a specific sport, shouldn't be playing it. They should keep looking until they find what they are motivated to do.

The other is that over focusing on goals, rather than on perseverance, teamwork, soccer IQ (or lacrosse IQ, or hockey IQ, or whatever IQ) isn't going to lead to the kid improving as a player. It's a stupid thing to reward because even if we accept that being a good player is the goal, it won't lead to the kid being a better player.

Tell your boss you no longer wish to be paid because rewards destroy your internal motivation.

I go to work in order to be paid. If your kid is going to soccer in order to be paid, not because they love soccer, then they shouldn't be playing soccer. The point of kid soccer is to have fun, and to develop an interest that will carry into adulthood. If they have to be paid to be there neither of those things are happening. On the other hand, the reason I go to work is to get paid, which is a perfectly fine reason for working.

Why can’t they go to soccer to be paid? Why is the point of soccer just to have fun? Why can’t it be making money for college?

If the goal is to earn money for college, then paying them to work against their best interest by focusing on individual stats and not on playing with strategy and helping their team win is not going to help achieve this goal.

Either way they make money, what difference does it make?

A parent paying their child doesn't increase the amount of money available to the family for college or anything else.

[Anonymous]

The thing about this is that it can actively interfere with coaching and could get your kid in trouble on the team. Soccer isn't just your kid trying to score goals themselves. They should be assessing if they're in a better position to assist or defend. By telling their kid their goals matter more than team goals they're setting them up to be a crappy team mate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why this bothers you, it wouldn’t even be on my radar.

+1 This is such a minor thing to criticize someone over or be annoyed about. Unless it’s abuse, I don’t care how others parent. I don’t have to agree with their choices. In my house, chores aren’t tied to allowance. My kids get an allowance to learn about money, and chores are just part of living here and keeping our home in order. I don’t usually bring it up, but when it has come up in conversations about how much people are paying their kids for chores, I’ve felt the judgment because my kid isn’t paid for chores. To each their own. I don’t care what others think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are two issues here.

One is that rewards destroy internal motivation. Sometimes, rewards can make sense if you have a kid who needs to do something, or stop doing something, and isn't internally motivated. But a kid who isn't internally motivated to play a specific sport, shouldn't be playing it. They should keep looking until they find what they are motivated to do.

The other is that over focusing on goals, rather than on perseverance, teamwork, soccer IQ (or lacrosse IQ, or hockey IQ, or whatever IQ) isn't going to lead to the kid improving as a player. It's a stupid thing to reward because even if we accept that being a good player is the goal, it won't lead to the kid being a better player.

Tell your boss you no longer wish to be paid because rewards destroy your internal motivation.

I go to work in order to be paid. If your kid is going to soccer in order to be paid, not because they love soccer, then they shouldn't be playing soccer. The point of kid soccer is to have fun, and to develop an interest that will carry into adulthood. If they have to be paid to be there neither of those things are happening. On the other hand, the reason I go to work is to get paid, which is a perfectly fine reason for working.

Why can’t they go to soccer to be paid? Why is the point of soccer just to have fun? Why can’t it be making money for college?

If the goal is to earn money for college, then paying them to work against their best interest by focusing on individual stats and not on playing with strategy and helping their team win is not going to help achieve this goal.

Either way they make money, what difference does it make?

A kid who has been paid for goals and thus rewarded for a
playing like a ball hog and not learning how to pass or play with strategy isn’t going to make money playing soccer in college.

If for some reason you are going to choose not to put your extra money in a 529 and instead to invest that money in paying your kid to do things that have a slight chance of helping them get money for soccer in college, then at least pay your kid for things that will increase their skill, like practicing extra or helping their team win the game. I still will think you made an odd choice but it’s better than paying for goals.

This is a good point. If you are a striker, your job for the team is to score goals. I don't care if a parent is paying their kid to score, but to prevent a ball hog situation, the parents should also pay for assists. It's a thought...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think there are two issues here.

One is that rewards destroy internal motivation. Sometimes, rewards can make sense if you have a kid who needs to do something, or stop doing something, and isn't internally motivated. But a kid who isn't internally motivated to play a specific sport, shouldn't be playing it. They should keep looking until they find what they are motivated to do.

The other is that over focusing on goals, rather than on perseverance, teamwork, soccer IQ (or lacrosse IQ, or hockey IQ, or whatever IQ) isn't going to lead to the kid improving as a player. It's a stupid thing to reward because even if we accept that being a good player is the goal, it won't lead to the kid being a better player.

Tell your boss you no longer wish to be paid because rewards destroy your internal motivation.

I go to work in order to be paid. If your kid is going to soccer in order to be paid, not because they love soccer, then they shouldn't be playing soccer. The point of kid soccer is to have fun, and to develop an interest that will carry into adulthood. If they have to be paid to be there neither of those things are happening. On the other hand, the reason I go to work is to get paid, which is a perfectly fine reason for working.

Why can’t they go to soccer to be paid? Why is the point of soccer just to have fun? Why can’t it be making money for college?

If the goal is to earn money for college, then paying them to work against their best interest by focusing on individual stats and not on playing with strategy and helping their team win is not going to help achieve this goal.

Either way they make money, what difference does it make?

A kid who has been paid for goals and thus rewarded for a
playing like a ball hog and not learning how to pass or play with strategy isn’t going to make money playing soccer in college.

If for some reason you are going to choose not to put your extra money in a 529 and instead to invest that money in paying your kid to do things that have a slight chance of helping them get money for soccer in college, then at least pay your kid for things that will increase their skill, like practicing extra or helping their team win the game. I still will think you made an odd choice but it’s better than paying for goals.

This is a good point. If you are a striker, your job for the team is to score goals. I don't care if a parent is paying their kid to score, but to prevent a ball hog situation, the parents should also pay for assists. It's a thought...

I am the PP you quoted, also the one who posted about intrinsic motivation.

I don’t care if you pay your kid to play. I wouldn’t do it, but that’s up to you, and there might be factors I don’t know about where it makes sense to do so.

But if you are going to pay your kid to play, then pay them in a way that incentives doing things that develop their skills and benefit the team. Paying per goal isn’t doing that.

[Anonymous]

I would have had a knee-jerk reaction against this, except that I once heard Abby Wambach (one of the leading scorers of all time, male or female) say that her dad paid her for goals as a kid. And that while it should be wrong, he knew what would motivate her.

So, not my thing, but I dunno.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We know a family that would get their young elementary kid ice cream if the kid scored a goal. Witnessed many meltdowns when the kid didn’t score as a result. Also witnessed times that the kid didn’t pass the ball to an open teammate and instead tried to score (unsuccessfully) due to the ice cream reward. I concluded that rewards for goals were a terrible idea based on this.

Oh wow I think I know this family! At least I hope there’s only one of them. I couldn’t believe they didn’t realize how terribly it was backfiring.