Reasonable to expect coaches to break ball-hogging/Star syndrome?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not saying kids shouldn't have opportunities to play different positions, I'm only saying that if you're going to raise it with the coach, make sure it's because it's what the kid wants rather than what the parents want. OP told us what the parents hoped for, but not the kids.

Also, it's good not to make assumptions about why something is being done without having it explained to you first. Don't assume the coach is deliberately shutting out other players in favor of these three if it's going to come out in the conversation that coach asked kids at practice what they wanted to play and your kid asked to play defense, because then you lose a lot of credibility even if you're otherwise right that that coach should be switching things up more.

I'm saying a kid in U9 or U10 doesn't really know what he wants or what he should want. Parents have a right to insist that, for the kids' development, they are given opportunities to play at all positions. It is better for the kids' development, period, regardless of whether a kid wants to play one position all the time. Think about it this way -- say a 9yo is a "natural striker" and wants to play only striker. Should that kid not be required to play other positions? It's not more acceptable just because a kid wants to play a less sought-after position like defender. All kids at that age should be rotating through all positions, period.

I guess that depends on what your priorities are. Are our kids playing for enjoyment of the game, or are they playing to maximize their talent and performance even if it comes at the expense of their enjoyment of the game? A U9 or U10 kid often knows exactly what they want, it just doesn't always square with what the kid's parent wants them to want.

Soccer is a team sport. If rotating position will kill your kids' enjoyment of the game, soccer might not be for him/her.

[Anonymous]

Even my U15 on a top team gets rotated. They are happy to get playtime, and is usually put in their top position, but get moved around playing in defense and mid-fielder as needed in some games. That is what they mean by "team player". Heck we have had to have field players sub in for the goalie on several occasions when injuries occur.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not saying kids shouldn't have opportunities to play different positions, I'm only saying that if you're going to raise it with the coach, make sure it's because it's what the kid wants rather than what the parents want. OP told us what the parents hoped for, but not the kids.

Also, it's good not to make assumptions about why something is being done without having it explained to you first. Don't assume the coach is deliberately shutting out other players in favor of these three if it's going to come out in the conversation that coach asked kids at practice what they wanted to play and your kid asked to play defense, because then you lose a lot of credibility even if you're otherwise right that that coach should be switching things up more.

I'm saying a kid in U9 or U10 doesn't really know what he wants or what he should want. Parents have a right to insist that, for the kids' development, they are given opportunities to play at all positions. It is better for the kids' development, period, regardless of whether a kid wants to play one position all the time. Think about it this way -- say a 9yo is a "natural striker" and wants to play only striker. Should that kid not be required to play other positions? It's not more acceptable just because a kid wants to play a less sought-after position like defender. All kids at that age should be rotating through all positions, period.

I guess that depends on what your priorities are. Are our kids playing for enjoyment of the game, or are they playing to maximize their talent and performance even if it comes at the expense of their enjoyment of the game? A U9 or U10 kid often knows exactly what they want, it just doesn't always square with what the kid's parent wants them to want.

Soccer is a team sport. If rotating position will kill your kids' enjoyment of the game, soccer might not be for him/her.

Oh, please. I'm not talking about refusing to let kids try out positions they are interested in playing, of course a coach should make that happen at that age. I'm talking about a kid who prefers playing a position for which there's less demand being allowed to stay there most of the time if it's not preventing other kids from getting desired experience. After all, that's where my comment started -- make sure that what you are pushing for is something your kid wants rather than something that will cause your kid to enjoy the sport less. Some parents get too caught up in their own egos and ideas of where they think their kid should play and wanting their kid to be the best out there that they push and push until they kill a kid's love for the game. At this age, encouraging love of the sport should be at least as much of a focus as player development so that your kid isn't the one who's burned out at 15 but feels like they can't quit because they'll be letting mom and dad down if they do.

[Anonymous]

This kind of thing is why I think it's dumb we push kids this young into travel at all. They're not just too young to specialize in a position, they're too young to specialize so heavily in a particular sport, period. Kids who are eight and nine years old, whose bodies and abilities are still changing so quickly, should still be allowed to explore different sports without fear of being locked out of the progression in one because they took one season off to try a different one.

[Anonymous]

RantingSoccerDad wrote:One thing to watch for -- we've developed a tendency in this country to harp on "ball hogging" to the extent that many players lack the ability to take on a defender 1v1.

That caveat aside, all the PPs who talked about rotating players are absolutely correct. They're not even developing their own kids properly. Everyone needs to know how to play defense.

IME, some parents don't have an accurate perception of how much time their child spends on any given position, or how much playing time they get in any position. They always spend too much time in the parent's less-favored position and not enough time in the parent's more-favored position, and never get as much playing time as they should. OP is not necessarily the most reliable narrator here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This kind of thing is why I think it's dumb we push kids this young into travel at all. They're not just too young to specialize in a position, they're too young to specialize so heavily in a particular sport, period. Kids who are eight and nine years old, whose bodies and abilities are still changing so quickly, should still be allowed to explore different sports without fear of being locked out of the progression in one because they took one season off to try a different one.

And none of that happens at the younger ages if kids change their minds about a preferred sport.

A kid can play travel soccer and change to a different sport without losing "progression". There is a level of sport for every kid and playing travel soccer from 8-10 years old will not ruin a child's chances to play or excel at another sport.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of thing is why I think it's dumb we push kids this young into travel at all. They're not just too young to specialize in a position, they're too young to specialize so heavily in a particular sport, period. Kids who are eight and nine years old, whose bodies and abilities are still changing so quickly, should still be allowed to explore different sports without fear of being locked out of the progression in one because they took one season off to try a different one.

And none of that happens at the younger ages if kids change their minds about a preferred sport.

A kid can play travel soccer and change to a different sport without losing "progression". There is a level of sport for every kid and playing travel soccer from 8-10 years old will not ruin a child's chances to play or excel at another sport.

Travel soccer is a year-long commitment in many leagues, and asking an eight-year-old to commit to a full year of a sport the previous spring is a bit much. If they feel like they want a break after the fall season to try baseball in the spring, there's a lot of pressure not to. And if they do quit mid-year, it gets held against the kid the next year if they want to come back, which cascades into following years as well when the kid is placed on a lesser team and then has to fight against the presumption that he belongs there. And don't even bother with the kid who doesn't play travel at all in elementary school, he's done for the competitive teams come middle school and might as well not even bother. Clubs have to reward the people who have been paying all along or there won't be incentive for the next group of families to start paying young as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This kind of thing is why I think it's dumb we push kids this young into travel at all. They're not just too young to specialize in a position, they're too young to specialize so heavily in a particular sport, period. Kids who are eight and nine years old, whose bodies and abilities are still changing so quickly, should still be allowed to explore different sports without fear of being locked out of the progression in one because they took one season off to try a different one.

And none of that happens at the younger ages if kids change their minds about a preferred sport.

A kid can play travel soccer and change to a different sport without losing "progression". There is a level of sport for every kid and playing travel soccer from 8-10 years old will not ruin a child's chances to play or excel at another sport.

Travel soccer is a year-long commitment in many leagues, and asking an eight-year-old to commit to a full year of a sport the previous spring is a bit much. If they feel like they want a break after the fall season to try baseball in the spring, there's a lot of pressure not to. And if they do quit mid-year, it gets held against the kid the next year if they want to come back, which cascades into following years as well when the kid is placed on a lesser team and then has to fight against the presumption that he belongs there. And don't even bother with the kid who doesn't play travel at all in elementary school, he's done for the competitive teams come middle school and might as well not even bother. Clubs have to reward the people who have been paying all along or there won't be incentive for the next group of families to start paying young as well.

oh please, I know of lots of kids who played many different sports AND travel soccer. Pick a sport and it is year round anymore. If you want to play multiple sports through elementary school and early middle school then choose the rec alternative of the sport.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not saying kids shouldn't have opportunities to play different positions, I'm only saying that if you're going to raise it with the coach, make sure it's because it's what the kid wants rather than what the parents want. OP told us what the parents hoped for, but not the kids.

Also, it's good not to make assumptions about why something is being done without having it explained to you first. Don't assume the coach is deliberately shutting out other players in favor of these three if it's going to come out in the conversation that coach asked kids at practice what they wanted to play and your kid asked to play defense, because then you lose a lot of credibility even if you're otherwise right that that coach should be switching things up more.

I'm saying a kid in U9 or U10 doesn't really know what he wants or what he should want. Parents have a right to insist that, for the kids' development, they are given opportunities to play at all positions. It is better for the kids' development, period, regardless of whether a kid wants to play one position all the time. Think about it this way -- say a 9yo is a "natural striker" and wants to play only striker. Should that kid not be required to play other positions? It's not more acceptable just because a kid wants to play a less sought-after position like defender. All kids at that age should be rotating through all positions, period.

I guess that depends on what your priorities are. Are our kids playing for enjoyment of the game, or are they playing to maximize their talent and performance even if it comes at the expense of their enjoyment of the game? A U9 or U10 kid often knows exactly what they want, it just doesn't always square with what the kid's parent wants them to want.

Soccer is a team sport. If rotating position will kill your kids' enjoyment of the game, soccer might not be for him/her.

Oh, please. I'm not talking about refusing to let kids try out positions they are interested in playing, of course a coach should make that happen at that age. I'm talking about a kid who prefers playing a position for which there's less demand being allowed to stay there most of the time if it's not preventing other kids from getting desired experience. After all, that's where my comment started -- make sure that what you are pushing for is something your kid wants rather than something that will cause your kid to enjoy the sport less. Some parents get too caught up in their own egos and ideas of where they think their kid should play and wanting their kid to be the best out there that they push and push until they kill a kid's love for the game. At this age, encouraging love of the sport should be at least as much of a focus as player development so that your kid isn't the one who's burned out at 15 but feels like they can't quit because they'll be letting mom and dad down if they do.

PP, I don't know how old your kids are, but I can't believe you don't understand that kids don't know everything, or that getting experience all over the field makes all players better. It's really not about the parent's ego or what the parent wants; it's about giving the kid what he needs to become the best possible player and also about figuring out the kids' strengths and interests (which are not frozen at age 9). And I really agree with the other PP that if a kid is going to get burned out by having to play positions from time to time that may be outside his comfort zone (not because of parental pressure, but because it is good for his development), that kid isn't really long for soccer anyway.

I am totally on board with not trying to kill your kid's love for the game. My No. 1 goal with travel soccer has been to not have my kid quit by age 13. I have not pressured him to try out for different, more competitive teams in more "elite" leagues because I know he loves his coach and teammates and that is the most important thing for him. But at ages 9, 10, 11, it should not kill a kid's love for the game if he has to rotate positions. If it does, either the kid doesn't really like soccer, or there's something else going on (like a bad team atmosphere).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not saying kids shouldn't have opportunities to play different positions, I'm only saying that if you're going to raise it with the coach, make sure it's because it's what the kid wants rather than what the parents want. OP told us what the parents hoped for, but not the kids.

Also, it's good not to make assumptions about why something is being done without having it explained to you first. Don't assume the coach is deliberately shutting out other players in favor of these three if it's going to come out in the conversation that coach asked kids at practice what they wanted to play and your kid asked to play defense, because then you lose a lot of credibility even if you're otherwise right that that coach should be switching things up more.

I'm saying a kid in U9 or U10 doesn't really know what he wants or what he should want. Parents have a right to insist that, for the kids' development, they are given opportunities to play at all positions. It is better for the kids' development, period, regardless of whether a kid wants to play one position all the time. Think about it this way -- say a 9yo is a "natural striker" and wants to play only striker. Should that kid not be required to play other positions? It's not more acceptable just because a kid wants to play a less sought-after position like defender. All kids at that age should be rotating through all positions, period.

I guess that depends on what your priorities are. Are our kids playing for enjoyment of the game, or are they playing to maximize their talent and performance even if it comes at the expense of their enjoyment of the game? A U9 or U10 kid often knows exactly what they want, it just doesn't always square with what the kid's parent wants them to want.

Soccer is a team sport. If rotating position will kill your kids' enjoyment of the game, soccer might not be for him/her.

Oh, please. I'm not talking about refusing to let kids try out positions they are interested in playing, of course a coach should make that happen at that age. I'm talking about a kid who prefers playing a position for which there's less demand being allowed to stay there most of the time if it's not preventing other kids from getting desired experience. After all, that's where my comment started -- make sure that what you are pushing for is something your kid wants rather than something that will cause your kid to enjoy the sport less. Some parents get too caught up in their own egos and ideas of where they think their kid should play and wanting their kid to be the best out there that they push and push until they kill a kid's love for the game. At this age, encouraging love of the sport should be at least as much of a focus as player development so that your kid isn't the one who's burned out at 15 but feels like they can't quit because they'll be letting mom and dad down if they do.

PP, I don't know how old your kids are, but I can't believe you don't understand that kids don't know everything, or that getting experience all over the field makes all players better. It's really not about the parent's ego or what the parent wants; it's about giving the kid what he needs to become the best possible player and also about figuring out the kids' strengths and interests (which are not frozen at age 9). And I really agree with the other PP that if a kid is going to get burned out by having to play positions from time to time that may be outside his comfort zone (not because of parental pressure, but because it is good for his development), that kid isn't really long for soccer anyway.

I am totally on board with not trying to kill your kid's love for the game. My No. 1 goal with travel soccer has been to not have my kid quit by age 13. I have not pressured him to try out for different, more competitive teams in more "elite" leagues because I know he loves his coach and teammates and that is the most important thing for him. But at ages 9, 10, 11, it should not kill a kid's love for the game if he has to rotate positions. If it does, either the kid doesn't really like soccer, or there's something else going on (like a bad team atmosphere).

In ideal situation, coach do the job (rotating positions at younger age). Parents can just relax. However, if the coach is not doing the right way, parents have to step up. It is much easier to try different positions at younger age. If a player plays a particular position for too long at younger age, of coz he/she will get used to it and maybe become more reluctant to try other positions. Also he/she might pick up some habits that are not helpful at all for playing other positions. No one, including coach, parents or player, know what position he/she will end up play in future, so the best thing to do is to play multiple positions at younger age.

[Anonymous]

If we didn’t have crazy competitive soccer at too young an age, this would be far less of an issue.

[Anonymous]

U10 is way too young to play one positions. The kids should rotate. Ask the coach about it.

[Anonymous]

get over it, in other countries, kids are getting scouted at 6 years old. what you see here is nothing compared to that.

[Anonymous]

Is get over it was the answer to this and everything? The product/sevice I am being sold is different than what they are selling.

i keep hearing from coaches nothing matters until u16 but then they act like it matters at u9-u13, at least be honest and straightforward with the player and parent before you let them pay so they know exactly what they are buying into.

“Johnny racks/stacks high on the team. He’ll be playing most games if he keeps it up and and i’m only going to roster 10 kids max”

“Ralphie racks/stacks kind of low. Expect him often to be a sub with limited minutes unless something major changes. I am rostering 13.”

to both “thats my outlook, i’ll train them in the same program and both should do some outside work, before you pay the nonrefundable deposit and sign this 10 minth contract, are we clear about how training and games go?”

[Anonymous]

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:get over it, in other countries, kids are getting scouted at 6 years old. what you see here is nothing compared to that.

Where?

Exactly. In fact, most European countries are the first to say you can't tell what a player will turn into before 17-18 years old, and even then they still aren't matured.

Messi and the like of him are extremely rare exception.