What would you think if...

[Anonymous]

Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

[Anonymous]

My DD spent many years playing on DC Stoddert’s B team and they never would have sent the kids without a coach and without enough players.
They would have sent a coach from another team or just rescheduled a match.

How unprofessional and mean! I wouldn’t bring my kid back to that club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

My kids’ B team was very fun, well coached - DD learned great soccer skills and made lots of good friends for life. Who cares about the A team?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

Ummm...and you think it is better to string along 5 lower teams vs one B team? They don’t even know the kids names on the 6th team of a big club. Our big club had coaches coaching multiple teams and our B team was without a coach in the Finals of three tournaments because he chose to cia h his favored team instead. This problem is not unique to small clubs.

[Anonymous]

A lot of guys who coach soccer spent so much of their lives working on one particular skill -- soccer -- and didn't pick up a lot of other skills, like people skills.

[Anonymous]

This is a regular routine at BRYC for younger ages. Especially girls

[Anonymous]

So who coached the game? That’s crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

Ummm...and you think it is better to string along 5 lower teams vs one B team? They don’t even know the kids names on the 6th team of a big club. Our big club had coaches coaching multiple teams and our B team was without a coach in the Finals of three tournaments because he chose to cia h his favored team instead. This problem is not unique to small clubs.

Big club, little club, whatever...Either way there is really something very wrong with youth soccer development in this country...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

If the academy style was run as advertised, it would be a lot better.
My experience is that its a lie designed to suck people in with the promise of playing on better team if your child performs better, however, that rarely happens.

[Anonymous]

All parents agree that youth soccer demands rigor and loyalty.

For players worse than their child, rigor is essential and roster spots should be given on a strict merit basis so as to field the most competitive team.

For players better than their child, loyalty to the club is essential so that their team not collapse when they go off in search of better opportunities.

For their child, loyalty by the club is essential, so that they not lose their roster spot to more qualified players coming from outside the program. Also, a parent's loyalty is to their own child's best interest, so they can do whatever they think is best for their child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

If the academy style was run as advertised, it would be a lot better.
My experience is that its a lie designed to suck people in with the promise of playing on better team if your child performs better, however, that rarely happens.

The basic math of the academy style doesn't work. There have to be the same number of kids moving up as moving down. The premise is that everyone is above average.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

If the academy style was run as advertised, it would be a lot better.
My experience is that its a lie designed to suck people in with the promise of playing on better team if your child performs better, however, that rarely happens.

The basic math of the academy style doesn't work. There have to be the same number of kids moving up as moving down. The premise is that everyone is above average.

We didn’t choose academy style for the possibility of moving up. We just wanted the same quality coaching and training the A team got. Personally, I had no illusions about the (in)frequency kids get invited to play up with another team. Plus, I think scrimmaging with the ‘better’ player in small side games at practice is much more valuable than the (likely) few minutes a kid playing up in a game would get on the field. But our club changed practices and there is one academy style practice for the A teams, and one for everyone else. For that set up, I agree cons of academy our weight pros.

Not sure how you protect against something like we experienced. We asked all the questions, got all the commitments in writing. People are leaving my club in droves so it will catch up with them. The club won’t care about losing all the kids but will miss the $$ they provide because they won’t be able to enter their favored teams in a zillion tournaments like they did this year (paid for by kids they have made clear they don’t give a crap about).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

If the academy style was run as advertised, it would be a lot better.
My experience is that its a lie designed to suck people in with the promise of playing on better team if your child performs better, however, that rarely happens.

The basic math of the academy style doesn't work. There have to be the same number of kids moving up as moving down. The premise is that everyone is above average.

We didn’t choose academy style for the possibility of moving up. We just wanted the same quality coaching and training the A team got. Personally, I had no illusions about the (in)frequency kids get invited to play up with another team. Plus, I think scrimmaging with the ‘better’ player in small side games at practice is much more valuable than the (likely) few minutes a kid playing up in a game would get on the field. But our club changed practices and there is one academy style practice for the A teams, and one for everyone else. For that set up, I agree cons of academy our weight pros.

Not sure how you protect against something like we experienced. We asked all the questions, got all the commitments in writing. People are leaving my club in droves so it will catch up with them. The club won’t care about losing all the kids but will miss the $$ they provide because they won’t be able to enter their favored teams in a zillion tournaments like they did this year (paid for by kids they have made clear they don’t give a crap about).

Any idea of where to go for great coaching and a club that actually does give a crap about lower than A team kids? Does this even exist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of guys who coach soccer spent so much of their lives working on one particular skill -- soccer -- and didn't pick up a lot of other skills, like people skills.

Or any understanding of child development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Never have been a fan of the "academy style". I think "academy style" is marketing for small clubs that want to have multiple teams without losing your 'B' players. They know exactly who they plan on playing on A and B on day 1. However, they string the B families along by giving them hope of making the 'A' team at some point. Let me tell you, there maybe 1 kid from the 'B' team that shifts to 'A' because someone is sick or someone on 'A' is struggling. Concept sounds good but it sucks to be on 'B' end. Don't expect much movement.

If the academy style was run as advertised, it would be a lot better.
My experience is that its a lie designed to suck people in with the promise of playing on better team if your child performs better, however, that rarely happens.

The basic math of the academy style doesn't work. There have to be the same number of kids moving up as moving down. The premise is that everyone is above average.

You are right about the math part of it.
However, it would take an engaged coaching staff with the willingness to stand up to parents to make this work.