Do mid season demotions ever happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Serious question. How do 2-3 players jeopardize the development of other players?

Every time these players touched the ball, it would get stolen. Their footwork/ball control wasn’t good enough to avoid pressure and they couldn’t pass, so building out from the back was non-existent. Building from the back is a fundamental foundation at the older/higher level. As far as the wingers and forwards, they get limited playing experience when the only time they’re getting the ball is from kick ball/long balls or stealing the ball.

Bingo. And that doesn’t even begin to talk about the wasted training sessions that aren’t making the other players better with no practical competition or botched/low intensity drills.

+1.

The bottom 1/3rd of my kids team this past year messed up drills by not paying attention when it was being explained, no urgency, lack of skill (ex. bad passes/first touch).

I would say this is 100% accurate. If you are in a competitive club that competes in MLS Next, GA/ GA Aspire or ECNL/RL and this is your player, don't be surprised if a demotion is coming at tryouts. It's unfortunate, but families and clubs want to win over developing players.

[Anonymous]

Such a stupid thread

If anyone should be demoted it's the coach for not developing the players

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Such a stupid thread

If anyone should be demoted it's the coach for not developing the players

100% agree with you.

The same parents that complain about the kids struggling on their team are the same parents that complain about development also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Such a stupid thread

If anyone should be demoted it's the coach for not developing the players

100% agree with you.

The same parents that complain about the kids struggling on their team are the same parents that complain about development also.

The majority of the class getting D's and F's with one A student

I say the teacher sux

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Such a stupid thread

If anyone should be demoted it's the coach for not developing the players

100% agree with you.

The same parents that complain about the kids struggling on their team are the same parents that complain about development also.

Is spelling ‘sux’ the way boomers spell it to seem cool?

The majority of the class getting D's and F's with one A student

I say the teacher sux

[Anonymous]

Are you just replying to yourself over and over? If the kids are this far behind their teammates, a coach can't fix that overnight. Now, why were they even selected in the first place if the coach had a role, I'd complain but most of the time those "2-3 kids" were given favors and it screws over the rest of the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you just replying to yourself over and over? If the kids are this far behind their teammates, a coach can't fix that overnight. Now, why were they even selected in the first place if the coach had a role, I'd complain but most of the time those "2-3 kids" were given favors and it screws over the rest of the kids.

I’m sorry your poor little Timmy has to deal with that. The nerve!

[Anonymous]

Usually the kids who are demoted at the end of the season wind up spending a lot of time on the bench during the season.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are you just replying to yourself over and over? If the kids are this far behind their teammates, a coach can't fix that overnight. Now, why were they even selected in the first place if the coach had a role, I'd complain but most of the time those "2-3 kids" were given favors and it screws over the rest of the kids.

How does 2 or 3 bad performing kids affect the other kids?

[Anonymous]

It’s generally not a coach problem, it’s a club problem. It’s what happens when directors want to placate parents who don’t realize their kid can’t hack it but insist and pay and buy their way into these situations.

As to the original post, a lot depends on what is “offered.” Some clubs simply “offer” the “Academy” which gives them much more room to move kids around. Others offer a specific team which means that team is set. There’s nothing a coach can do in that situation unless the player asks to move. You can guess which one causes more problems with players who don’t belong….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you just replying to yourself over and over? If the kids are this far behind their teammates, a coach can't fix that overnight. Now, why were they even selected in the first place if the coach had a role, I'd complain but most of the time those "2-3 kids" were given favors and it screws over the rest of the kids.

How does 2 or 3 bad performing kids affect the other kids?

Is this a real question? Take the best player between here and Richmond, put them up top and see what happens when those 2-3 kids can’t complete a pass but have to play, and as is usually the case get outsized playing time. It’s not rocket science.

I recall a game just like this where hands down the best player Id seen at that age group in NoVa (it was around 10-11) was pretty much useless in a 8-0 game against my kid despite being far and away the best player on the field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you just replying to yourself over and over? If the kids are this far behind their teammates, a coach can't fix that overnight. Now, why were they even selected in the first place if the coach had a role, I'd complain but most of the time those "2-3 kids" were given favors and it screws over the rest of the kids.

How does 2 or 3 bad performing kids affect the other kids?

Is this a real question? Take the best player between here and Richmond, put them up top and see what happens when those 2-3 kids can’t complete a pass but have to play, and as is usually the case get outsized playing time. It’s not rocket science.

I recall a game just like this where hands down the best player Id seen at that age group in NoVa (it was around 10-11) was pretty much useless in a 8-0 game against my kid despite being far and away the best player on the field.

What that poster is asking and what I’m now explaining is your equating wins/losses with development. That is why he asked how those 2-3 kids are having an impact on your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you just replying to yourself over and over? If the kids are this far behind their teammates, a coach can't fix that overnight. Now, why were they even selected in the first place if the coach had a role, I'd complain but most of the time those "2-3 kids" were given favors and it screws over the rest of the kids.

How does 2 or 3 bad performing kids affect the other kids?

Is this a real question? Take the best player between here and Richmond, put them up top and see what happens when those 2-3 kids can’t complete a pass but have to play, and as is usually the case get outsized playing time. It’s not rocket science.

I recall a game just like this where hands down the best player Id seen at that age group in NoVa (it was around 10-11) was pretty much useless in a 8-0 game against my kid despite being far and away the best player on the field.

If the kid was by your own admittance the best player on the field, then you're proving the point that their weaker teammates didn't impact their individual skillset and development

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you just replying to yourself over and over? If the kids are this far behind their teammates, a coach can't fix that overnight. Now, why were they even selected in the first place if the coach had a role, I'd complain but most of the time those "2-3 kids" were given favors and it screws over the rest of the kids.

How does 2 or 3 bad performing kids affect the other kids?

Is this a real question? Take the best player between here and Richmond, put them up top and see what happens when those 2-3 kids can’t complete a pass but have to play, and as is usually the case get outsized playing time. It’s not rocket science.

I recall a game just like this where hands down the best player Id seen at that age group in NoVa (it was around 10-11) was pretty much useless in a 8-0 game against my kid despite being far and away the best player on the field.

If the kid was by your own admittance the best player on the field, then you're proving the point that their weaker teammates didn't impact their individual skillset and development

You must be a parent of the 2-3 kids if your takeaway from that is thinking an individually talented player spending 20-30 games over a year having minimal impact in a team sport due to inferior teammates doesn’t hurt development.

FWIW, said player moved on shortly thereafter as most do in those situations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you just replying to yourself over and over? If the kids are this far behind their teammates, a coach can't fix that overnight. Now, why were they even selected in the first place if the coach had a role, I'd complain but most of the time those "2-3 kids" were given favors and it screws over the rest of the kids.

How does 2 or 3 bad performing kids affect the other kids?

Is this a real question? Take the best player between here and Richmond, put them up top and see what happens when those 2-3 kids can’t complete a pass but have to play, and as is usually the case get outsized playing time. It’s not rocket science.

I recall a game just like this where hands down the best player Id seen at that age group in NoVa (it was around 10-11) was pretty much useless in a 8-0 game against my kid despite being far and away the best player on the field.

If the kid was by your own admittance the best player on the field, then you're proving the point that their weaker teammates didn't impact their individual skillset and development

You must be a parent of the 2-3 kids if your takeaway from that is thinking an individually talented player spending 20-30 games over a year having minimal impact in a team sport due to inferior teammates doesn’t hurt development.

FWIW, said player moved on shortly thereafter as most do in those situations.

Every team has a best player and 4 or 5 strongest players
A year or two in that scenario doesn't take away individual skills from the best player who attained majority of his higher level skills outside team practice