Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If PAC is keeping all their teams intact, they are really not serving the needs of their players at all. There may be a kid or two that should play up, but certainly not entire teams in that club. I would guess that it has more to do with the numbers at PAC and wanting to keep the parents happy so they don't jump ship.

A lot of PAC parents are realistic. I wouldn't see a lot of parents fleeing because their 2007-birthdate kids won't play U11 next year. Actually, I could see the opposite -- taking those kids elsewhere so they don't get overrun.

Every parent is "realistic" until you tell them their kid will either be on a lower team or that they will see a very reduced playing role or both. All parents will act in their kids perceived best interest and that may include encouraging other parents to act against their own kids self interest. These parents will use "friendships, nostalgia and 'team chemistry'" as reasons to stay together.

Playing an entire team up only entrenches the starting kids roles and can make it more difficult for the younger kids on the team that quite probably should have played at age to develop properly at their own rate. It could also stifle the development of the so called starters as well, as they are only challenged in games, but not pushed or challenged in practice as they otherwise would have been.

PAC really is different. At least a lot of us are. I'd frankly be just fine if my kid wasn't a "starter" or if his team dropped to ODSL. (Though, actually, ODSL has now collected a few teams that could be in a high NCSL division but, either through bureaucracy or just the sheer joy of obliterating other clubs' fourth and fifth teams, stay in ODSL.)

A lot of these kids were overlooked in their "home" clubs and came to PAC because they just love to play. A lot of House leagues, sadly, aren't full of kids who love to play.

I've seen the thinly veiled knife fights in other clubs. That's not PAC.

That sounds nice and I won't disagree with you as that is your impression, but the process is very personal and at times very subjective. But in general, all the people are happy if the stars are aligned, but that can get upset very easily.

The fact that PAC parents are here tells me that there is anxiety over how teams will be composed next year. If, it didn't really matter to you, or to parents, as you claim none of you would be here "worrying" about it.

I really hope things work out for your team and your kid, but the bigger picture and human nature tells me that overall your club or club parents are no different than at many other places.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Once travel soccer became a business--things went in the shitter. It became about clubs and organizations making $. ... I think this is why the developmental leagues which have parent coaches and just a travel once a week are so much more successful. You have parents that care about kids. Plus, let's face it, in this area many of the parents are former college soccer players themselves.

+1. The burgeoning soccer industrial complex is ruining U.S. youth soccer and, until we realize that bureaucracy and $$$ is not what makes players great, we will continue to lag behind the rest of the world. In fact, it tends to be the opposite that makes players great.

Nope, you're dead wrong...it's exactly money and the bureaucracy that makes players great.
In any big soccer country in the world, kids are identified at early ages and affiliated with professional teams, and get top quality coaching all through their growth. And that takes money to do, that US soccer doesn't have yet. It's getting better, as MLS teams are starting to fund academies, but the infrastructure isn't even close to the rest of the world yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If PAC is keeping all their teams intact, they are really not serving the needs of their players at all. There may be a kid or two that should play up, but certainly not entire teams in that club. I would guess that it has more to do with the numbers at PAC and wanting to keep the parents happy so they don't jump ship.

A lot of PAC parents are realistic. I wouldn't see a lot of parents fleeing because their 2007-birthdate kids won't play U11 next year. Actually, I could see the opposite -- taking those kids elsewhere so they don't get overrun.

Every parent is "realistic" until you tell them their kid will either be on a lower team or that they will see a very reduced playing role or both. All parents will act in their kids perceived best interest and that may include encouraging other parents to act against their own kids self interest. These parents will use "friendships, nostalgia and 'team chemistry'" as reasons to stay together.

Playing an entire team up only entrenches the starting kids roles and can make it more difficult for the younger kids on the team that quite probably should have played at age to develop properly at their own rate. It could also stifle the development of the so called starters as well, as they are only challenged in games, but not pushed or challenged in practice as they otherwise would have been.

PAC really is different. At least a lot of us are. I'd frankly be just fine if my kid wasn't a "starter" or if his team dropped to ODSL. (Though, actually, ODSL has now collected a few teams that could be in a high NCSL division but, either through bureaucracy or just the sheer joy of obliterating other clubs' fourth and fifth teams, stay in ODSL.)

A lot of these kids were overlooked in their "home" clubs and came to PAC because they just love to play. A lot of House leagues, sadly, aren't full of kids who love to play.

I've seen the thinly veiled knife fights in other clubs. That's not PAC.

That sounds nice and I won't disagree with you as that is your impression, but the process is very personal and at times very subjective. But in general, all the people are happy if the stars are aligned, but that can get upset very easily.

The fact that PAC parents are here tells me that there is anxiety over how teams will be composed next year. If, it didn't really matter to you, or to parents, as you claim none of you would be here "worrying" about it.

I really hope things work out for your team and your kid, but the bigger picture and human nature tells me that overall your club or club parents are no different than at many other places.

No one -- parent or kid -- likes to see blowout after blowout. That's how it's been at U9, so we don't want to see those teams kept together and moved up to U11. (The U9 teams aren't tiered, anyway, so when they get sorted into divisions in spring 2017, they'd have to break up.) That's really the main motive in all of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If PAC is keeping all their teams intact, they are really not serving the needs of their players at all. There may be a kid or two that should play up, but certainly not entire teams in that club. I would guess that it has more to do with the numbers at PAC and wanting to keep the parents happy so they don't jump ship.

A lot of PAC parents are realistic. I wouldn't see a lot of parents fleeing because their 2007-birthdate kids won't play U11 next year. Actually, I could see the opposite -- taking those kids elsewhere so they don't get overrun.

Every parent is "realistic" until you tell them their kid will either be on a lower team or that they will see a very reduced playing role or both. All parents will act in their kids perceived best interest and that may include encouraging other parents to act against their own kids self interest. These parents will use "friendships, nostalgia and 'team chemistry'" as reasons to stay together.

Playing an entire team up only entrenches the starting kids roles and can make it more difficult for the younger kids on the team that quite probably should have played at age to develop properly at their own rate. It could also stifle the development of the so called starters as well, as they are only challenged in games, but not pushed or challenged in practice as they otherwise would have been.

PAC really is different. At least a lot of us are. I'd frankly be just fine if my kid wasn't a "starter" or if his team dropped to ODSL. (Though, actually, ODSL has now collected a few teams that could be in a high NCSL division but, either through bureaucracy or just the sheer joy of obliterating other clubs' fourth and fifth teams, stay in ODSL.)

A lot of these kids were overlooked in their "home" clubs and came to PAC because they just love to play. A lot of House leagues, sadly, aren't full of kids who love to play.

I've seen the thinly veiled knife fights in other clubs. That's not PAC.

That sounds nice and I won't disagree with you as that is your impression, but the process is very personal and at times very subjective. But in general, all the people are happy if the stars are aligned, but that can get upset very easily.

The fact that PAC parents are here tells me that there is anxiety over how teams will be composed next year. If, it didn't really matter to you, or to parents, as you claim none of you would be here "worrying" about it.

I really hope things work out for your team and your kid, but the bigger picture and human nature tells me that overall your club or club parents are no different than at many other places.

No one -- parent or kid -- likes to see blowout after blowout. That's how it's been at U9, so we don't want to see those teams kept together and moved up to U11. (The U9 teams aren't tiered, anyway, so when they get sorted into divisions in spring 2017, they'd have to break up.) That's really the main motive in all of this.

This kind of touches upon what I was driving at. It sounds like you have a 07 and want to make the best developmental decision, as you may have a choice. However, the parents of the 06's on your team do not have a choice. Some of them may be proponents of, as I've said, "keeping the band together". For some 07's, playing up may make sense, but the 06 parents are really more concerned with maintaining the status quo regardless whether it makes sense for every kid or not. It sounds to me like you will make the decision that is best for you and that is the best outlook you can have.

We have a kid currently playing up and we will be open minded to what the coach and club recommend for next year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If PAC is keeping all their teams intact, they are really not serving the needs of their players at all. There may be a kid or two that should play up, but certainly not entire teams in that club. I would guess that it has more to do with the numbers at PAC and wanting to keep the parents happy so they don't jump ship.

A lot of PAC parents are realistic. I wouldn't see a lot of parents fleeing because their 2007-birthdate kids won't play U11 next year. Actually, I could see the opposite -- taking those kids elsewhere so they don't get overrun.

Every parent is "realistic" until you tell them their kid will either be on a lower team or that they will see a very reduced playing role or both. All parents will act in their kids perceived best interest and that may include encouraging other parents to act against their own kids self interest. These parents will use "friendships, nostalgia and 'team chemistry'" as reasons to stay together.

Playing an entire team up only entrenches the starting kids roles and can make it more difficult for the younger kids on the team that quite probably should have played at age to develop properly at their own rate. It could also stifle the development of the so called starters as well, as they are only challenged in games, but not pushed or challenged in practice as they otherwise would have been.

PAC really is different. At least a lot of us are. I'd frankly be just fine if my kid wasn't a "starter" or if his team dropped to ODSL. (Though, actually, ODSL has now collected a few teams that could be in a high NCSL division but, either through bureaucracy or just the sheer joy of obliterating other clubs' fourth and fifth teams, stay in ODSL.)

A lot of these kids were overlooked in their "home" clubs and came to PAC because they just love to play. A lot of House leagues, sadly, aren't full of kids who love to play.

I've seen the thinly veiled knife fights in other clubs. That's not PAC.

That sounds nice and I won't disagree with you as that is your impression, but the process is very personal and at times very subjective. But in general, all the people are happy if the stars are aligned, but that can get upset very easily.

The fact that PAC parents are here tells me that there is anxiety over how teams will be composed next year. If, it didn't really matter to you, or to parents, as you claim none of you would be here "worrying" about it.

I really hope things work out for your team and your kid, but the bigger picture and human nature tells me that overall your club or club parents are no different than at many other places.

No one -- parent or kid -- likes to see blowout after blowout. That's how it's been at U9, so we don't want to see those teams kept together and moved up to U11. (The U9 teams aren't tiered, anyway, so when they get sorted into divisions in spring 2017, they'd have to break up.) That's really the main motive in all of this.

This kind of touches upon what I was driving at. It sounds like you have a 07 and want to make the best developmental decision, as you may have a choice. However, the parents of the 06's on your team do not have a choice. Some of them may be proponents of, as I've said, "keeping the band together". For some 07's, playing up may make sense, but the 06 parents are really more concerned with maintaining the status quo regardless whether it makes sense for every kid or not. It sounds to me like you will make the decision that is best for you and that is the best outlook you can have.

We have a kid currently playing up and we will be open minded to what the coach and club recommend for next year.

Nope. 06.

I'm still optimistic that something positive will shake out. PAC tends to get more kids at U10 and U11, so that'll change the complexion of things a bit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Once travel soccer became a business--things went in the shitter. It became about clubs and organizations making $. ... I think this is why the developmental leagues which have parent coaches and just a travel once a week are so much more successful. You have parents that care about kids. Plus, let's face it, in this area many of the parents are former college soccer players themselves.

+1. The burgeoning soccer industrial complex is ruining U.S. youth soccer and, until we realize that bureaucracy and $$$ is not what makes players great, we will continue to lag behind the rest of the world. In fact, it tends to be the opposite that makes players great.

Nope, you're dead wrong...it's exactly money and the bureaucracy that makes players great.
In any big soccer country in the world, kids are identified at early ages and affiliated with professional teams, and get top quality coaching all through their growth. And that takes money to do, that US soccer doesn't have yet. It's getting better, as MLS teams are starting to fund academies, but the infrastructure isn't even close to the rest of the world yet.

The coaches at the vast majority of travel clubs in this country aren't 'top quality'. Many don't have the ability to identify talent, and certainly not to develop it. If a Messi did show up at 8, they'd stick him on the D team if he even made the squad at all. But Messi given his poor background would never make it to a travel or academy tryout in this Country.

My former coach (Dutch National player) had 7 month long tryout back in the early 70s with 600 kids for two spots in the Netherlands. Here they look at a kid for 60 min. But they really don't. And most of the time, the coach is just some former HS soccer player or an "International' coach with credentials that can't be readily traced. ODP, Academy and must travel programs have pre-seeded tryout fields and won't look at any kid that didn't come with a prior 'seal of approval' from somebody else. Case in point- at 10/11 U-12- you only can attend an Academy tryout if you are invited. To be invited you have to have parents that pay $1200-3k year for travel because they select players on their A team rankings--which has been pointed out on this board many times --at 10 those are very dubious labels. I see better talent at the pick up patch down the street, but those kids aren't on US soccer's radar.

Most great players came with the skill and ability from street soccer and genetics, it certainly wasn't $ . $ is just FIFA exploiting them.

The Dutch system, once the greatest, has fallen apart specifically because of bureaucracy. The late, great Johann Cryuff lamented this fact in numerous interviews in recent years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Once travel soccer became a business--things went in the shitter. It became about clubs and organizations making $. ... I think this is why the developmental leagues which have parent coaches and just a travel once a week are so much more successful. You have parents that care about kids. Plus, let's face it, in this area many of the parents are former college soccer players themselves.

+1. The burgeoning soccer industrial complex is ruining U.S. youth soccer and, until we realize that bureaucracy and $$$ is not what makes players great, we will continue to lag behind the rest of the world. In fact, it tends to be the opposite that makes players great.

Nope, you're dead wrong...it's exactly money and the bureaucracy that makes players great.
In any big soccer country in the world, kids are identified at early ages and affiliated with professional teams, and get top quality coaching all through their growth. And that takes money to do, that US soccer doesn't have yet. It's getting better, as MLS teams are starting to fund academies, but the infrastructure isn't even close to the rest of the world yet.

The coaches at the vast majority of travel clubs in this country aren't 'top quality'. Many don't have the ability to identify talent, and certainly not to develop it. If a Messi did show up at 8, they'd stick him on the D team if he even made the squad at all. But Messi given his poor background would never make it to a travel or academy tryout in this Country.

My former coach (Dutch National player) had 7 month long tryout back in the early 70s with 600 kids for two spots in the Netherlands. Here they look at a kid for 60 min. But they really don't. And most of the time, the coach is just some former HS soccer player or an "International' coach with credentials that can't be readily traced. ODP, Academy and must travel programs have pre-seeded tryout fields and won't look at any kid that didn't come with a prior 'seal of approval' from somebody else. Case in point- at 10/11 U-12- you only can attend an Academy tryout if you are invited. To be invited you have to have parents that pay $1200-3k year for travel because they select players on their A team rankings--which has been pointed out on this board many times --at 10 those are very dubious labels. I see better talent at the pick up patch down the street, but those kids aren't on US soccer's radar.

Most great players came with the skill and ability from street soccer and genetics, it certainly wasn't $ . $ is just FIFA exploiting them.

The Dutch system, once the greatest, has fallen apart specifically because of bureaucracy. The late, great Johann Cryuff lamented this fact in numerous interviews in recent years.

Which is why building up our academy system to the point where tuition is free is so important. As is hiring better coaches and scouts. All of this requires money, which needs to come from the USSF and MLS.

[Anonymous]

it's crazy how much fellatio anyone that has an accent and wears soccer pants gets from parents and clubs. As if the person is automatically a soccer God hahha. Quite comical. Seems like a pretty good racket for any foreigner who is looking to make a few bucks

[Anonymous]

My kid is at PAC. There are other factors to consider to stay vex leave.

What other league is better and will accept my kid that has a better spot?? Yea there's A spots on some of the other same size leagues but the big ones are hard to break into. There's 50 kids all at roughly the same level of skill. At the tryouts the coaches might watch my kid for 5 total min during the 3 hrs of tryouts. It's not like he will make it to their A team. A bunch of clubs have even less competitive teams. I think PAC needs to break up the band but PAC seems to be stuck on keeping the band together.

If things fail horribly, there's always next year. To hedge bets I'll probably have my kid check out some other leagues but most likely there will not be a better option. My kid is not u9 FYI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Once travel soccer became a business--things went in the shitter. It became about clubs and organizations making $. ... I think this is why the developmental leagues which have parent coaches and just a travel once a week are so much more successful. You have parents that care about kids. Plus, let's face it, in this area many of the parents are former college soccer players themselves.

+1. The burgeoning soccer industrial complex is ruining U.S. youth soccer and, until we realize that bureaucracy and $$$ is not what makes players great, we will continue to lag behind the rest of the world. In fact, it tends to be the opposite that makes players great.

Nope, you're dead wrong...it's exactly money and the bureaucracy that makes players great.
In any big soccer country in the world, kids are identified at early ages and affiliated with professional teams, and get top quality coaching all through their growth. And that takes money to do, that US soccer doesn't have yet. It's getting better, as MLS teams are starting to fund academies, but the infrastructure isn't even close to the rest of the world yet.

The coaches at the vast majority of travel clubs in this country aren't 'top quality'. Many don't have the ability to identify talent, and certainly not to develop it. If a Messi did show up at 8, they'd stick him on the D team if he even made the squad at all. But Messi given his poor background would never make it to a travel or academy tryout in this Country.

My former coach (Dutch National player) had 7 month long tryout back in the early 70s with 600 kids for two spots in the Netherlands. Here they look at a kid for 60 min. But they really don't. And most of the time, the coach is just some former HS soccer player or an "International' coach with credentials that can't be readily traced. ODP, Academy and must travel programs have pre-seeded tryout fields and won't look at any kid that didn't come with a prior 'seal of approval' from somebody else. Case in point- at 10/11 U-12- you only can attend an Academy tryout if you are invited. To be invited you have to have parents that pay $1200-3k year for travel because they select players on their A team rankings--which has been pointed out on this board many times --at 10 those are very dubious labels. I see better talent at the pick up patch down the street, but those kids aren't on US soccer's radar.

Most great players came with the skill and ability from street soccer and genetics, it certainly wasn't $ . $ is just FIFA exploiting them.

The Dutch system, once the greatest, has fallen apart specifically because of bureaucracy. The late, great Johann Cryuff lamented this fact in numerous interviews in recent years.

That said, Germany's revamp was top-down bureaucracy at its pinnacle, and it worked quite well.

But it has some freedom within the system. Kids may play "rec" soccer with their buddies (even at U10 or U11) but also go to a local center periodically to get top-notch training.

[Anonymous]

Soccer culture, free/low cost training with true professional clubs, recognized hierarchy and avenues for the best players, few competing sports, and potential for life changing money.

How many of the above apply to soccer in this country?

The problem with this country is that it is a pay to play model in a country where other sports pay better, the primary sports are coach/team centric (as opposed to player centric), access to really good coaching is sporadic, and there are so many competing egos that the avenue for a quality player isn't clear - each coach sees a good player as a meal ticket, not a player that should be pushed somewhere better.

There is also the college soccer vs professional youth teams environment, but by that point the gap is already so large. Plus life in America is pretty damn good and soccer is a big middle/upper class sport where the kids have options and education is a priority - sport is a secondary.

[Anonymous]

The US National team and MLS is lower than sub par what do we expect from youth organizations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Development academy? Ask around about DA ZZZzzzzZZzzzz........

This post sounds like something a crazed parent that thinks his kid is much better than he is would say.

The crazy parents that move kids around in packs by recruiting packs of players from one team to another, often mid-season, should be sanctioned. And if anyone knows these parents, they should be called out by name on here. Why would anyone want a family on their team that has already shown they are willing to break up a team midseason by recruiting their own team's players to move to another club.

On the boys side, I know some guy named Hasam that was part of LMVSC has done this multiple times and another dad has broken up multiple teams named Munsur.

On the girls side, FCV "poaches" by having parents and coaches speaking to 9 and 10 year old girls without their parents around looking for mid-season moves...big no-no in my book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Development academy? Ask around about DA ZZZzzzzZZzzzz........

This post sounds like something a crazed parent that thinks his kid is much better than he is would say.

The crazy parents that move kids around in packs by recruiting packs of players from one team to another, often mid-season, should be sanctioned. And if anyone knows these parents, they should be called out by name on here. Why would anyone want a family on their team that has already shown they are willing to break up a team midseason by recruiting their own team's players to move to another club.

On the boys side, I know some guy named Hasam that was part of LMVSC has done this multiple times and another dad has broken up multiple teams named Munsur.

On the girls side, FCV "poaches" by having parents and coaches speaking to 9 and 10 year old girls without their parents around looking for mid-season moves...big no-no in my book.

Man - crazy parents are everywhere just stay clear of them - far, far away. The bigger issue are the clubs charging $2000-$3000 a year for awful training and no development. Unless you get lucky and get one of the rare, few coaches that work hard and are actually interested in developing your child, you're throwing money away. And please don't tell me about "A" or "B" licensed coaches - thats a joke. As a PP said, a ton of these top licensed coaches, moved up the licensing ladder by playing "professionally" for a month somewhere and still in their late 20s or early 30s. These are the coaches that couldn't be bothered actually putting together a training plan for each session. After all, they have an A license.

[Anonymous]

Shifting gears for a second. Can anyone tell me how State Cup teams are selected? In some brackets, clubs have multiple teams in the same age group. Also, how can a Maryland team (Bethesda South) be in the State Cup in VIRGINIA? I don't care about affiliation with a Virginia club, it smells funny to me.