Recruitment clubs/teams

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m fascinated by the recent state that some teams bring in either a team wholesale or a significant number of new players versus developing successful homegrown”. I didnt realize how pervasive moving teams over was. I’d be intereted to hear which clubs/teams are consistently practicing this concept.

Is it more pervasive at the boys side vs the girls?

Is the question easier to answer if its limited to club/teams that DON’T bring significant amounts of new blood in at the u13 and older age. Is there a different philosophy based on the league vs the club or the coach?

There's nothing recent about it. This has been a part of the DMV soccer scene for as long as I can remember. It isn't usually initiated by the new club. Mostly it happens when a coach and core group of parents are unhappy with the state of affairs at their current club and go looking for greener pastures.

The intro should have read statement, not state. I was referring to the ASA statement posts about BSC i saw in another thread.

I’m talking about large movement, lets say 6 - 11 of the starting 11

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well here is a question...why wouldn't a club want to work with the best players? So parents are complaining that they aren't developing players...well is your kid busting his ass outside of training? Soccer starts at home. So if your kid isn't developing, first look at his/her work ethic outside of practice. Start there. There is no loyalty to any of this and why should there be? if you are looking to be the best you can be, you need to work with good coaches, good players, in a supportive club. Sometimes that just doesn't happen and clubs must recruit not only players but coaches.

This is how I look at it too, after years of youth soccer experience. One of my kids is a very talented player, and was recruited (along with a couple of other kids) by a big club that had a very good coach for the top team. Some of the parents of kids moved to the B team were extremely disgruntled, but the recruitment ended up being good for everyone--the kids who moved over got to play at a higher level, the top team got better, and the kids moved down thrived with more playing time and leadership opportunities. The serious ones on the B team moved back up a few years later. It doesn't always work out so well, but competitive soccer is supposed to be a pyramid, with the better kids moving up. And contrary to popular wisdom around here, the kids moved up are not always the big early developers. There are lots of coaches who are good evaluators of talent if you spend time looking and paying attention.

My other kid has a few very good soccer attributes, and a few weaknesses that are obvious to us, and we think the B team is the perfect place for him now. Every other kid on the B team also has some very obvious (to experienced soccer people) reasons for being on the B team instead of the highly competitive A team, and it's sort of surprising how few of the parents understand why their kid is at they level they are for now, or why some of the kids were moved up or down at the end of the season.

Not at age 8-12. It should be Academy style. Fluid movement at any point in time during the year. Not locked into a team for 10 months. Those are prime INDIVIDUAL development years. US is team-centric in the younger ages where every else in the world is player-centric in the early development years.

Nobody should give a shit about the team those years. Only the individual and the trainers.

But- we, as a nation, are big on thinking little kid team wins means something. Kids suffer. Smart parents make smart players by realizing this when their kid is young. They are the recruited ones way down the road.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well here is a question...why wouldn't a club want to work with the best players? So parents are complaining that they aren't developing players...well is your kid busting his ass outside of training? Soccer starts at home. So if your kid isn't developing, first look at his/her work ethic outside of practice. Start there. There is no loyalty to any of this and why should there be? if you are looking to be the best you can be, you need to work with good coaches, good players, in a supportive club. Sometimes that just doesn't happen and clubs must recruit not only players but coaches.

Is there guidance from the club/coach regarding outside training?

Does the coach recommend or discourage working with outside trainers, ODP etc or is the coach supportive?

Does the coach provide consistent feedback both for short term and long term in regards to the players needs?

Does the coach develop a plan for the player based on their needs?

Does the coach assign homework for the team?

A good coach and a good club would work with the players to guide them as much as possible.

Not every parent is blessed with knowledge, experience, personal connections or even the money to know what help their kids need, where they should go, who is being honest and how to pay for it all.

So a club that actually develops players and cultivates a atmosphere that is encouraging and supportive of their players will do any or all of the above things regardless of whether it benefits the club financially or not. I have seen coaches actively discourage outside work and training and these are the same coaches who will take a outside kid who presumably has done all those other things. These are simply lazy coaches who simply rely upon recruiting to eventually get the necessary talent and then they or the club brags about how the develop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I personally feel it's the desire to win now versus develop. I've seen it time and time again, you can have amazing footskills and good soccer IQ, but if you can out sprint the defender you are not on the first team. So they recruit early developed athletes.

My son was on the younger side of the age group change and had to skip a year. Slower and smaller than others so he was moved to the 2nd team even though he had some of the best technical skills on the team. We changed clubs and he worked his way back up to the 1st team and has now caught up physically. Old club has been trying to bring him back, but no thanks.

+1

Same story for my kids too.

While I agree in general with 11:44 and 12:02, PP above illustrates where I think that view breaks down. I don't think clubs that say they are focused on development should bump down talented, hard workers - particularly at the younger ages - for the sole reason that a shiny new toy came along. What does it say about a club's development process when it bumps down a talented kid who has been on the club for a couple of years in favor of a "new" kid who may or may not have the same talent but just happens to be at a different stage in terms of physical development. The physical part will even out soon enough, if it doesn't then perhaps that is when things should be shifted. The win now mentality misses the forest for the trees.

My kids were playmakers at a Club that only tracked the kids that stuck their big toe put to put my kid’s perfectly placed ball in the net. Controlled the entire midfield and built the attack. Unassuming/unnoticed to those that don’t have a grasp of Futbol. TD/staff never watched games. Coach was big on kick and run—even though it was a “development” cub. That is what they notice at the scrimmage only tryouts—bigger kids whose touch/dribbling nowhere close and no soccer IQ. You have to know when to leave. If it’s not your style of play and first touch isn’t recognized, move on no matter how “prestigious” you think it is your kid is on 1st/2nd team out of 6. They will get nothing out of it except frustration.

These people talking competitive this and that aren’t talking about soccer qualities. To them that means an early developed or oldest in the age group player who can use physicality to an advantage. The physicality which will no longer be an advantage when everyone hits puberty. We left and kids were put up an age group (one 2 age groups). TD said my kids rise to the level of play. They never got that opportunity prior and playing with kids with similar soccer IQ makes them shine even more. They play better with kids that know where to move with and without the ball and have quick/clean first touch. And, they get the recognition and attention from trainers. They work harder because they are somewhere that now recognizes and makes changes accordingly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well here is a question...why wouldn't a club want to work with the best players? So parents are complaining that they aren't developing players...well is your kid busting his ass outside of training? Soccer starts at home. So if your kid isn't developing, first look at his/her work ethic outside of practice. Start there. There is no loyalty to any of this and why should there be? if you are looking to be the best you can be, you need to work with good coaches, good players, in a supportive club. Sometimes that just doesn't happen and clubs must recruit not only players but coaches.

This is how I look at it too, after years of youth soccer experience. One of my kids is a very talented player, and was recruited (along with a couple of other kids) by a big club that had a very good coach for the top team. Some of the parents of kids moved to the B team were extremely disgruntled, but the recruitment ended up being good for everyone--the kids who moved over got to play at a higher level, the top team got better, and the kids moved down thrived with more playing time and leadership opportunities. The serious ones on the B team moved back up a few years later. It doesn't always work out so well, but competitive soccer is supposed to be a pyramid, with the better kids moving up. And contrary to popular wisdom around here, the kids moved up are not always the big early developers. There are lots of coaches who are good evaluators of talent if you spend time looking and paying attention.

My other kid has a few very good soccer attributes, and a few weaknesses that are obvious to us, and we think the B team is the perfect place for him now. Every other kid on the B team also has some very obvious (to experienced soccer people) reasons for being on the B team instead of the highly competitive A team, and it's sort of surprising how few of the parents understand why their kid is at they level they are for now, or why some of the kids were moved up or down at the end of the season.

Not at age 8-12. It should be Academy style. Fluid movement at any point in time during the year. Not locked into a team for 10 months. Those are prime INDIVIDUAL development years. US is team-centric in the younger ages where every else in the world is player-centric in the early development years.

Nobody should give a shit about the team those years. Only the individual and the trainers.

But- we, as a nation, are big on thinking little kid team wins means something. Kids suffer. Smart parents make smart players by realizing this when their kid is young. They are the recruited ones way down the road.

There is not only a single pathway for developing good players. The academy style you mention can work well if all the elements are in place, including experienced, knowledgeable coaches and educated, soccer-savvy parents. It can be a waste of time for everyone without those things. You have very good players being developed around the country on teams that just have an A team training together for 10 months (there may only be enough players for one team). It all comes down to whether you have talented coaches who are good teachers and kids who have the ability and commitment to dedicate themselves to learning and working.

There is also nothing inherently wrong with coaches who want their teams to win, even at younger ages. People often seem to assume that a coach caring about winning means he will seek to win at any cost, including switching to long ball or otherwise sacrificing good soccer if they are behind, sitting half the team, screaming at kids and refs. That's not at all the case for many coaches who care about competition but love the game.