Does your Rec sports team play to win?

[Anonymous]

Coached a ton of little kid rec soccer, and many many years of baseball from ages 9 to Summer Legion.

The coach playing time/position rules are really the same across the games and ages.

1. Play everyone roughly equal amounts.
2. Put kids in positions where they can be safe, and, hopefully, reasonably successful.
3. Try and win only after you satisfy 1 and 2.

You can’t put a kid a first base who cannot catch the ball well. You need goalies who are willing to try and get in front of a shot.

The big difference between rec and club sports is that club sports practice much more frequently. Frankly, with baseball rec teams really do not practice at all once games start. With soccer rec teams typically practice once a week. With club sports you are going to practice 2-3 times a week.

Rec sports. other than summer sports (baseball, softball, swim, etc) basically end once kids hit middle school. Kids are doing other stuff then.

If you think playing time issues are different for club sports you are wrong. Every kid plays - you are paying for that. “But my kid is better”. Are you paying more than the other kid? No. Then shut it. At the highest levels of youth sports it is even more important to play everyone. The top soccer clubs compete for players by advertising how many kids on their teams are playing pro or playing in college. You don't get players unless you play everyone.

On an individual basis - the big thing to learn as a teen is to have fun competing as hard and as well as you can. You can’t control total team effort, but you can control your own effort. If you work hard and do your best, then you can have fun just by competing.

[Anonymous]

I like the way our coach does it. He rotates to give all kids who are trying and interested in being there a fair amount of playing time, even if they are not talented at the sport. For kids where it is clear that they are not into being there, they get less playing time.

[Anonymous]

If you think playing time issues are different for club sports you are wrong. Every kid plays - you are paying for that. “But my kid is better”. Are you paying more than the other kid? No. Then shut it. At the highest levels of youth sports it is even more important to play everyone. The top soccer clubs compete for players by advertising how many kids on their teams are playing pro or playing in college. You don't get players unless you play everyone

I don't know about other club sports, but for travel soccer, that is not how it works. You need to earn your playing time in every game, otherwise you are played for a short time and on the bench for the rest. For MLS Next it is even worse - if you are one of the bottom players, you are not rostered for the game, and don't dress for it. The top teams have more kids than they need interested in joining them, it is not a concern about getting players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If you think playing time issues are different for club sports you are wrong. Every kid plays - you are paying for that. “But my kid is better”. Are you paying more than the other kid? No. Then shut it. At the highest levels of youth sports it is even more important to play everyone. The top soccer clubs compete for players by advertising how many kids on their teams are playing pro or playing in college. You don't get players unless you play everyone

I don't know about other club sports, but for travel soccer, that is not how it works. You need to earn your playing time in every game, otherwise you are played for a short time and on the bench for the rest. For MLS Next it is even worse - if you are one of the bottom players, you are not rostered for the game, and don't dress for it. The top teams have more kids than they need interested in joining them, it is not a concern about getting players.

No just soccer. Ive seen parents take kids to out of state tournaments knowing that they will only even dress if another player is injured and can't play subsequent games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If you think playing time issues are different for club sports you are wrong. Every kid plays - you are paying for that. “But my kid is better”. Are you paying more than the other kid? No. Then shut it. At the highest levels of youth sports it is even more important to play everyone. The top soccer clubs compete for players by advertising how many kids on their teams are playing pro or playing in college. You don't get players unless you play everyone

I don't know about other club sports, but for travel soccer, that is not how it works. You need to earn your playing time in every game, otherwise you are played for a short time and on the bench for the rest. For MLS Next it is even worse - if you are one of the bottom players, you are not rostered for the game, and don't dress for it. The top teams have more kids than they need interested in joining them, it is not a concern about getting players.

Yep it’s the top 2-3 players that make a difference everyone else is the rest of the team. The clubs are there to win. So they have starters and bench players. Rarely will the bench kids get in and when they do they play not to make mistakes. Though this does not mean the club team wins. Most are a game above or below 500.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you think playing time issues are different for club sports you are wrong. Every kid plays - you are paying for that. “But my kid is better”. Are you paying more than the other kid? No. Then shut it. At the highest levels of youth sports it is even more important to play everyone. The top soccer clubs compete for players by advertising how many kids on their teams are playing pro or playing in college. You don't get players unless you play everyone

I don't know about other club sports, but for travel soccer, that is not how it works. You need to earn your playing time in every game, otherwise you are played for a short time and on the bench for the rest. For MLS Next it is even worse - if you are one of the bottom players, you are not rostered for the game, and don't dress for it. The top teams have more kids than they need interested in joining them, it is not a concern about getting players.

Yep it’s the top 2-3 players that make a difference everyone else is the rest of the team. The clubs are there to win. So they have starters and bench players. Rarely will the bench kids get in and when they do they play not to make mistakes. Though this does not mean the club team wins. Most are a game above or below 500.

The MLS affiliated MLS Next clubs do not care about winning. They exist solely to feed talent into the parent club. In practice, it still means the end of the bench doesn't play, but playing time isn't based on skill or winning, it's based on potential.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you think playing time issues are different for club sports you are wrong. Every kid plays - you are paying for that. “But my kid is better”. Are you paying more than the other kid? No. Then shut it. At the highest levels of youth sports it is even more important to play everyone. The top soccer clubs compete for players by advertising how many kids on their teams are playing pro or playing in college. You don't get players unless you play everyone

I don't know about other club sports, but for travel soccer, that is not how it works. You need to earn your playing time in every game, otherwise you are played for a short time and on the bench for the rest. For MLS Next it is even worse - if you are one of the bottom players, you are not rostered for the game, and don't dress for it. The top teams have more kids than they need interested in joining them, it is not a concern about getting players.

Yep it’s the top 2-3 players that make a difference everyone else is the rest of the team. The clubs are there to win. So they have starters and bench players. Rarely will the bench kids get in and when they do they play not to make mistakes. Though this does not mean the club team wins. Most are a game above or below 500.

The MLS affiliated MLS Next clubs do not care about winning. They exist solely to feed talent into the parent club. In practice, it still means the end of the bench doesn't play, but playing time isn't based on skill or winning, it's based on potential.

And how is potential measured or seen?

[Anonymous]

but playing time isn't based on skill or winning, it's based on potential

What do you mean? Skill is part of potential, as is athleticism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i have coached 4 Rec sports - ages 4 to 14. I have always played to win, but will always play every kid who shows up to practice and games and tries their best. That is what Rec sports is about.

I also never allowed kids to focus on one position each and every game ( i.e send THAT kid tot he outfield). Much better that all kids have an opportunity to plan sports at a recreational level. Travel and high school teams should have a different philosophy.

I’m sure if you try you will find people who want to win every game, though those coaches will often play their DC first and foremost also IME.

Have you ever allowed kids to choose their one positions at the beginning of the game “just for fun”? Because Rec doesn’t have cuts, there are definitely kids who aren’t great at any position. You don’t put those kids in the outfield? What if your team is losing and is trying for a comeback?

NP here. Yes, of course rec is going to have kids who are playing for fun and aren't that good -- that's the point of rec. And they should be able to play as fully as anyone else -- go to a competitive team if you don't like that philosophy.

OP here. I guess that’s what will sadly have to do. I just don’t want to hear any more lamenting and handwringing from our league commissioner (as we have heard many many times) about why “so many kids leave for travel.” Like it’s some mystery. It’s not a mystery - this is why. I’m fine with the not-so-great kids being on the team and having a spot. But they shouldn’t be playing catcher or first base if they can’t throw or catch. It’s not fair to the other kids.

I agree with this. Does your team have willing catchers? Our team is lucky because we have a few who love catching but some teams have to force kids into it. Our coach is excellent at balance IMO (but my son often plays catcher or 1st base )

OP here. Yes we have 2 excellent catchers, 3 fairly good pitchers, and a couple strong in-fielders. (Some of these are the same kids.)

I am scared of travel for lots of reasons - time, money, hassle, intensity/stress. My kid is willing to stay Rec, but she wants to play to win. She’s fine switching it out during blowouts (on either side) but if it’s a close game we should be putting forth a competitive lineup. Otherwise she doesn’t want to play.

You need to do travel. More boys play team sports and softball isn’t particularly popular as girls Sports go so it is just really hard to find a competitive rec softball league around here. There are some sort of low key travel programs that are less intense but still much better than rec. where do you live and how old is your DD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

but playing time isn't based on skill or winning, it's based on potential

What do you mean? Skill is part of potential, as is athleticism.

Not always. Some kids have a boatload of skill, but limited athleticism. Those kids may be great players and look really good in games. Other kids have a lot of athleticism, but they're still learning technical skill. The later group is going to be the focus of a team feeding a larger club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If you think playing time issues are different for club sports you are wrong. Every kid plays - you are paying for that. “But my kid is better”. Are you paying more than the other kid? No. Then shut it. At the highest levels of youth sports it is even more important to play everyone. The top soccer clubs compete for players by advertising how many kids on their teams are playing pro or playing in college. You don't get players unless you play everyone

I don't know about other club sports, but for travel soccer, that is not how it works. You need to earn your playing time in every game, otherwise you are played for a short time and on the bench for the rest. For MLS Next it is even worse - if you are one of the bottom players, you are not rostered for the game, and don't dress for it. The top teams have more kids than they need interested in joining them, it is not a concern about getting players.

Yep it’s the top 2-3 players that make a difference everyone else is the rest of the team. The clubs are there to win. So they have starters and bench players. Rarely will the bench kids get in and when they do they play not to make mistakes. Though this does not mean the club team wins. Most are a game above or below 500.

The MLS affiliated MLS Next clubs do not care about winning. They exist solely to feed talent into the parent club. In practice, it still means the end of the bench doesn't play, but playing time isn't based on skill or winning, it's based on potential.

And how is potential measured or seen?

The ability to play at a higher level. Every professional team, including MLS teams, has scouts paid to spot amateurs with potential to play at the next level

[Anonymous]

The later group is going to be the focus of a team feeding a larger club.

I don't know what you mean by the bolded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m a rec coach and we play to win but I also give equal playing time and as someone else said, rotate positions if we have a larger lead to give kids time to play a position they aren’t as good at. I have always said it’s actually a hard balance to strike as a coach because I’ve put someone in goal before and the other team basically scored 3 goals on them in 5 minutes, so that’s not good for the team as a whole, but I also want to make sure the kids get to try and play every position they are interested in. There are also some players who aren’t as interested in the game and asked to be subbed out when they get tired. My best players seem to have the most stamina and most interest in playing, so that also works out when you’re playing to win.

You sound like my DD's coach who is amazing. By middle school most kids have figured out what positions they prefer, and coaches have a sense of who is stronger at which position. The good coaches make that work, but are open to mixing it up if someone wants to try something new. In our experience, often you also end up short players because kids this age have multiple competing activities. My DD is not a good goalie, but always volunteers to serve in that role when the team's primary goalie is absent. The coach gives her a shot, because why not.

I can appreciate your frustration OP, but understand this is rec.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The later group is going to be the focus of a team feeding a larger club.

I don't know what you mean by the bolded.

MLS Next has two kinds of clubs. They have teams that are part of local clubs (i.e. Alexandria) and they have teams that are owned by MLS teams (i.e. DC United). The MLS owned team is focused on providing talent to the club's academy and eventually to the parent club or another team DC United can sell them to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The ability to play at a higher level. Every professional team, including MLS teams, has scouts paid to spot amateurs with potential to play at the next level

Every team however is full of kids who aren't going to make it. Maybe when they were recruited there was a hope but the reality is they just provide the backdrop for the tiny tiny handful of kids who will move up to the next level.

Rec is a conundrum. It is very hard to reliably make a team that is fun, fair, and balanced and then repeat that year after year.