Forum Index
»
Sports General Discussion
Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Yes, the email said PAC would keep the teams together unless a majority of the kids belonged to the younger age group. This is the case with at least one of the U9 teams. I imagine the two U9 teams will turn into one U10 (07) and one U11 (06)--which of course is what is supposed to happen. It seemed to me that most of the emphasis in that email was on the current U11 team being allowed to stay together. I do wonder what will happen with U10. |
Anonymous
That would make sense. The U9s have a couple of U8s right now, though I don't know their birth years. I understand keeping some of the older teams together. The U9s are already an odd split -- they're not tiered. I figured they would tier them in future years -- as it turns out, splitting into U11 and U10 does the same thing. |
Anonymous
| The Arlington U-15 G won sate cup. It is hard to imagine the club splitting up that team. Probably the whole team will move up. |
Anonymous
Many people say that it's best for the kid's development to play his/her age group unless they are a top player in the older age group as well. People on this thread agreed with that a few pages back. If they are right, it doesn't matter if the U15G won the state cup, what's best for each individual player is to play their age. I would think that a club like Arlington would do what is best for each individual player even if it means busting up state championship teams. |
Anonymous
Good luck with that. I find Arlington does what is best for certain parents. Our age group is a nightmare. It's the furthest thing from individual player development out there. The lower teams get zero challenge. They blow out their leagues, tournaments and they aren't allowed to scrimmage the two upper teams. In two years, 1/2 the kids in the age group have never even been in a scrimmage with the other half. They have been scrimmaging the same 12 kids for two years, no variety, no challenge. They are brining in a bunch of players from an outside club and don't even test or play them against the entire group. |
Anonymous
Maybe they only look good because they are playing the 3rd and 4th teams from other clubs as well or even smaller/weaker clubs lower level teams. Big difference. |
Anonymous
No. When they play these kids in games outside of Travel in other leagues they blow them away. Many of the kids are playing elsewhere for the challenge--camps, leagues off-season for the challenge--in a more competitive environment. That justification is stupid. Good clubs intermix the kids at ages 8, 9, and 10. Clubs that are about the $ and parent approval don't. |
Anonymous
It evens out. Two D team kids made the Academy team over many of the kids that were A team from 8-11. |
Anonymous
|
I coach older kids on a top local team. It is true that most of my players were not on the top team at the young ages.
I attribute this to many factors: 1) Physical development over time 2) Burn out--too much structure and stress early (pressure from Coach and parents) 3) Kids on top teams in the young ages tend to be over-coached and not allowed to develop organically as players 4) Players should be allow to make their own decisions--which will mean mistakes are allowed to happen 5) Kids on top team young- rest on laurels as they age 6) Practice. Kids that practice and play on their own will outpace those that don't. 7) Innate drive, passion and competitiveness; something that can't be taught Of course, a few of my kids were standouts young and remained that way. However, the vast majority were not or were just not recognized at the younger ages. Advice--play for fun while young. Don't go for a coach that 'over-coaches, over-directs and focuses solely on a passing game and winning at 9-10. Too much structure is not good for developing players. The best players developed their own soccer 'brain' and decision-making. They developed flair. I am not a fan of ranking at the young ages. Kids should be continually challenged. I think we are moving in the wrong direction, personally. Academies at the younger ages are not great, IMO. Look what happened to the Dutch as they became overly-bureaucratic in their soccer program. Lastly, I do think that when the clubs get too big, the kids get lost in the system. They can't focus on the kids and provide the best environment. A lot of the reason they can't mix kids is because they are all slotted into field time slots and not even in the same place. |
Anonymous
Best post in this thread. Thanks. |
Anonymous
Some good information. When you say you don't think academies at the younger ages are not great, do you mean the DA at u12/13 ? Or do you mean what some clubs are doing at u7-u10 with pooling of kids and calling that an academy ? thanks. |
Anonymous
Wow, this sounds just like our experience with Arlington. There's very little movement between the teams and the only kids who move up are the ones with loudmouth parents. And when the A team needs new players they always bring in kids from other teams - they never move up a B team player, even though they're better than the ones brought in from the outside. |
Anonymous
| Why move someone who is already paying up from a lower team when you can make thousands off bringing new people in? |
Anonymous
Yep. It's all about the $. Imagine your fate being set at 8 years old. F@ck them. To the pp--it's not just the B team. There are a few C & a couple D players that are light years above the duds they are bringing in. |
Anonymous
Move clubs like the rest. Or just complain? It's not going to change. More kids more money and no one in the organization loses. |