Talk to me about travel soccer like im stupid

[Anonymous]

The lower teams at the big clubs are basically expensive rec teams. They take everyone who tries out, and just make more teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it common for a club to have two teams per age group? For example, two teams in U10 girls? Can anyone speak to the dynamics about this?

Also, if the club only has 1 or 2 teams per age group, this is considered a small club…. And growth a development might be limited if are serious about soccer. We are stuck in a small club now, our eyes are open to how bigger vs small clubs operate. We are crushed by the bigger clubs regularly. We are run over at all tournaments also. With more kids, it allows the club to pay for better coaching staff and run better clinics and eventually develop higher level teams in higher leagues that the small clubs won’t even compete in. (There may be exceptions.) I’m starting to develop the opinion that small clubs are like glorified Rec programs.

Your reasoning and analysis is off somewhat.
Several of the small clubs in the DMV have exceptional coaches who rather have developmental impact in quality versus quantity.

The bigger clubs are selecting their top team, top two teams, from a much bigger pool of players. Then have 3 or 4 weak teams in said age group.
Give almost any U10, U11 or U12 coach 13 early bloomers for 7v7 and 9v9 and they're going to 'win' games. Doesn't mean the coaching is good.

People spend so much time and effort focused on the aesthetics of name-brand clubs and leagues early on, they always miss the fact that youth soccer is about individual development.
Your kid being on a big name fancy club may float parents ego, but no scout or coach of a true high level team cares.

MLS Next teams in the DMV are filled with kids developed at 'small clubs', then the big clubs reap the benefits.
So saying small clubs are glorified Rec makes you look like a fool.

[Anonymous]

The lower teams at the big clubs are basically expensive rec teams. They take everyone who tries out, and just make more teams.

Soccer was not our Dee Dee’s number one sport over the last few years. She did a rack for many years and ask this year if she could move to travel.

On the whole it has been really good for her as she did not have a lot of skill development on rack and has really advanced significantly.

Overall, the level of play is not much different from good rec teams. In addition, it is $2000 more per year.

I can’t believe how many people have two or more kids playing travel soccer for this much money!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Travel parent here. Your son has to really want to do it. It will be a family activity and you will have to manage your schedule around games. Please only sign up if you can make all the practices, games and tournaments. You are looking at a minimum of three team practices a week and a game or two over the weekend. If your son plays goalie there is an additional practice for his position. I don’t want to scare you. My son loves it. We were very up front with him and said that it’s your only after school activity and that he will miss friends birthdays (not all of them but the ones that conflict with games)

Don’t forget the cost for top teams at the club. Our club is $4,600 per year which includes a mandatory sleep away camp in August. This does not include travel costs to out of state tournaments.

[Anonymous]

NP here. Is travel soccer the same as club soccer? Excuse my ignorance!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Is travel soccer the same as club soccer? Excuse my ignorance!

It can mean that but clubs will have competitive (travel) and rec teams.

I’m in a western state and nobody here calls it travel soccer even though we have to cover large distances. They call it competitive, or club. All of our away games are at least an hour drive, sometimes up to 6 hours just for our state league games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Is travel soccer the same as club soccer? Excuse my ignorance!

It’s really regional. From op’s post what I thought they mean by ‘travel soccer’ is club soccer.

In our area (Boston), travel soccer only refers to a town rec team that travels to other towns. This is usually for kids in elementary school where most kids just play other teams in the same town, but in 4th grade the top team is the ‘travel team’ and will play other towns. By 5th grade (the 10/11 year olds) everyone is traveling to other towns.

Club soccer is private, $$, soccer with paid coaches, filmed games and year round training.

[SocAnon]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it common for a club to have two teams per age group? For example, two teams in U10 girls? Can anyone speak to the dynamics about this?

Also, if the club only has 1 or 2 teams per age group, this is considered a small club…. And growth a development might be limited if are serious about soccer. We are stuck in a small club now, our eyes are open to how bigger vs small clubs operate. We are crushed by the bigger clubs regularly. We are run over at all tournaments also. With more kids, it allows the club to pay for better coaching staff and run better clinics and eventually develop higher level teams in higher leagues that the small clubs won’t even compete in. (There may be exceptions.) I’m starting to develop the opinion that small clubs are like glorified Rec programs.

Your reasoning and analysis is off somewhat.
Several of the small clubs in the DMV have exceptional coaches who rather have developmental impact in quality versus quantity.

The bigger clubs are selecting their top team, top two teams, from a much bigger pool of players. Then have 3 or 4 weak teams in said age group.
Give almost any U10, U11 or U12 coach 13 early bloomers for 7v7 and 9v9 and they're going to 'win' games. Doesn't mean the coaching is good.

People spend so much time and effort focused on the aesthetics of name-brand clubs and leagues early on, they always miss the fact that youth soccer is about individual development.
Your kid being on a big name fancy club may float parents ego, but no scout or coach of a true high level team cares.

MLS Next teams in the DMV are filled with kids developed at 'small clubs', then the big clubs reap the benefits.
So saying small clubs are glorified Rec makes you look like a fool.

I like the thoughts on this, can you name 1 or 2 small clubs that seems to produce quality talent. Again, from a Club perspective, not just the 1 off coach who would excel at any club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it common for a club to have two teams per age group? For example, two teams in U10 girls? Can anyone speak to the dynamics about this?

Also, if the club only has 1 or 2 teams per age group, this is considered a small club…. And growth a development might be limited if are serious about soccer. We are stuck in a small club now, our eyes are open to how bigger vs small clubs operate. We are crushed by the bigger clubs regularly. We are run over at all tournaments also. With more kids, it allows the club to pay for better coaching staff and run better clinics and eventually develop higher level teams in higher leagues that the small clubs won’t even compete in. (There may be exceptions.) I’m starting to develop the opinion that small clubs are like glorified Rec programs.

It's not uncommon to see some really dominant teams at small clubs, especially at the young ages. What usually happens though is at U13 all the really talented players leave those teams and join ECNL/MLS Next teams so they can eventually get recruited for college. I think it's pretty obvious that at least 75% of success in youth soccer is natural talent and/or early physical development, not coaching or club resources. My kids have played against top teams and played against a clubs 4th team at a big club and the difference in level is massive, despite both teams having paid coaches and following the same development approach that the club is emphasizing. If the the way the club operates mattered that much all of the teams would perform at a decent level, but that's far from the case.

[Anonymous]

SocAnon wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it common for a club to have two teams per age group? For example, two teams in U10 girls? Can anyone speak to the dynamics about this?

Also, if the club only has 1 or 2 teams per age group, this is considered a small club…. And growth a development might be limited if are serious about soccer. We are stuck in a small club now, our eyes are open to how bigger vs small clubs operate. We are crushed by the bigger clubs regularly. We are run over at all tournaments also. With more kids, it allows the club to pay for better coaching staff and run better clinics and eventually develop higher level teams in higher leagues that the small clubs won’t even compete in. (There may be exceptions.) I’m starting to develop the opinion that small clubs are like glorified Rec programs.

Your reasoning and analysis is off somewhat.
Several of the small clubs in the DMV have exceptional coaches who rather have developmental impact in quality versus quantity.

The bigger clubs are selecting their top team, top two teams, from a much bigger pool of players. Then have 3 or 4 weak teams in said age group.
Give almost any U10, U11 or U12 coach 13 early bloomers for 7v7 and 9v9 and they're going to 'win' games. Doesn't mean the coaching is good.

People spend so much time and effort focused on the aesthetics of name-brand clubs and leagues early on, they always miss the fact that youth soccer is about individual development.
Your kid being on a big name fancy club may float parents ego, but no scout or coach of a true high level team cares.

MLS Next teams in the DMV are filled with kids developed at 'small clubs', then the big clubs reap the benefits.
So saying small clubs are glorified Rec makes you look like a fool.

I like the thoughts on this, can you name 1 or 2 small clubs that seems to produce quality talent. Again, from a Club perspective, not just the 1 off coach who would excel at any club.

We are at an MLSNext club and came from a small club (one team per age group). Unfortunately, it’s a small world at this level and I prefer to stay anonymous but it’s a small MD club. There are at least a couple of kids who leave the small club every year to go to MLSNext clubs.

I wouldn’t say that small club is generally good at developing all kids. I think they’re good at identifying kids that are talented and making sure they do develop and get the best opportunities such as playing up or rostering on more than 1 team or playing different positions. The ones that do move though are the kind of kid who is doing a lot on their own too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it common for a club to have two teams per age group? For example, two teams in U10 girls? Can anyone speak to the dynamics about this?

Also, if the club only has 1 or 2 teams per age group, this is considered a small club…. And growth a development might be limited if are serious about soccer. We are stuck in a small club now, our eyes are open to how bigger vs small clubs operate. We are crushed by the bigger clubs regularly. We are run over at all tournaments also. With more kids, it allows the club to pay for better coaching staff and run better clinics and eventually develop higher level teams in higher leagues that the small clubs won’t even compete in. (There may be exceptions.) I’m starting to develop the opinion that small clubs are like glorified Rec programs.

It's not uncommon to see some really dominant teams at small clubs, especially at the young ages. What usually happens though is at U13 all the really talented players leave those teams and join ECNL/MLS Next teams so they can eventually get recruited for college. I think it's pretty obvious that at least 75% of success in youth soccer is natural talent and/or early physical development, not coaching or club resources. My kids have played against top teams and played against a clubs 4th team at a big club and the difference in level is massive, despite both teams having paid coaches and following the same development approach that the club is emphasizing. If the the way the club operates mattered that much all of the teams would perform at a decent level, but that's far from the case.

That statement about Natural Talent and Physical Development being the key over Coaching is Utter Madness and you will not find a top academy or youth club anywhere in the world that would agree with such a statement.
It's All about Coaching, Environment, Discipline and Consistency in quality training.
How does Natural Talent and Physicality give you top level Technical Skills, Soccer IQ and Decision Making skills?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it common for a club to have two teams per age group? For example, two teams in U10 girls? Can anyone speak to the dynamics about this?

Also, if the club only has 1 or 2 teams per age group, this is considered a small club…. And growth a development might be limited if are serious about soccer. We are stuck in a small club now, our eyes are open to how bigger vs small clubs operate. We are crushed by the bigger clubs regularly. We are run over at all tournaments also. With more kids, it allows the club to pay for better coaching staff and run better clinics and eventually develop higher level teams in higher leagues that the small clubs won’t even compete in. (There may be exceptions.) I’m starting to develop the opinion that small clubs are like glorified Rec programs.

It's not uncommon to see some really dominant teams at small clubs, especially at the young ages. What usually happens though is at U13 all the really talented players leave those teams and join ECNL/MLS Next teams so they can eventually get recruited for college. I think it's pretty obvious that at least 75% of success in youth soccer is natural talent and/or early physical development, not coaching or club resources. My kids have played against top teams and played against a clubs 4th team at a big club and the difference in level is massive, despite both teams having paid coaches and following the same development approach that the club is emphasizing. If the the way the club operates mattered that much all of the teams would perform at a decent level, but that's far from the case.

That statement about Natural Talent and Physical Development being the key over Coaching is Utter Madness and you will not find a top academy or youth club anywhere in the world that would agree with such a statement.
It's All about Coaching, Environment, Discipline and Consistency in quality training.
How does Natural Talent and Physicality give you top level Technical Skills, Soccer IQ and Decision Making skills?

Those with natural talent will learn these things faster and reach a higher ceiling provided they have adequate exposure to training and competitive matches. Quality coaching and training are the finer details that separate really good players from great players. The results speak for themselves in that the depth of talent at each big club in each age group is pretty weak because player recruitment matters more than coaching.

[Anonymous]

Add or Remove a good/real goalkeeper to/from most U9 to U12 teams and their Win/Loss ratio dramatically changes.

Several decently coached teams playing well with good development philosophies will lose games because the goal is (basically) wide open.
A complete illusion in the quality of the 'team'.

Also, 4 strong players with some role players can win medals and trophies. The 'team' isn't necessarily strong or coaching great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it common for a club to have two teams per age group? For example, two teams in U10 girls? Can anyone speak to the dynamics about this?

Also, if the club only has 1 or 2 teams per age group, this is considered a small club…. And growth a development might be limited if are serious about soccer. We are stuck in a small club now, our eyes are open to how bigger vs small clubs operate. We are crushed by the bigger clubs regularly. We are run over at all tournaments also. With more kids, it allows the club to pay for better coaching staff and run better clinics and eventually develop higher level teams in higher leagues that the small clubs won’t even compete in. (There may be exceptions.) I’m starting to develop the opinion that small clubs are like glorified Rec programs.

It's not uncommon to see some really dominant teams at small clubs, especially at the young ages. What usually happens though is at U13 all the really talented players leave those teams and join ECNL/MLS Next teams so they can eventually get recruited for college. I think it's pretty obvious that at least 75% of success in youth soccer is natural talent and/or early physical development, not coaching or club resources. My kids have played against top teams and played against a clubs 4th team at a big club and the difference in level is massive, despite both teams having paid coaches and following the same development approach that the club is emphasizing. If the the way the club operates mattered that much all of the teams would perform at a decent level, but that's far from the case.

That statement about Natural Talent and Physical Development being the key over Coaching is Utter Madness and you will not find a top academy or youth club anywhere in the world that would agree with such a statement.
It's All about Coaching, Environment, Discipline and Consistency in quality training.
How does Natural Talent and Physicality give you top level Technical Skills, Soccer IQ and Decision Making skills?

Those with natural talent will learn these things faster and reach a higher ceiling provided they have adequate exposure to training and competitive matches. Quality coaching and training are the finer details that separate really good players from great players. The results speak for themselves in that the depth of talent at each big club in each age group is pretty weak because player recruitment matters more than coaching.

Quality teams indeed begins with talent resources.
However, there is a Big Difference between recruiting kids who have received proper high level youth development before you and just Managing them.
Versus getting raw talent and having to Develop/Teach/Coach them.

Many big clubs are bragging about their U13's, U14's and U15's made up of kids Developed elsewhere till recently.

[Anonymous]

SocAnon wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it common for a club to have two teams per age group? For example, two teams in U10 girls? Can anyone speak to the dynamics about this?

Also, if the club only has 1 or 2 teams per age group, this is considered a small club…. And growth a development might be limited if are serious about soccer. We are stuck in a small club now, our eyes are open to how bigger vs small clubs operate. We are crushed by the bigger clubs regularly. We are run over at all tournaments also. With more kids, it allows the club to pay for better coaching staff and run better clinics and eventually develop higher level teams in higher leagues that the small clubs won’t even compete in. (There may be exceptions.) I’m starting to develop the opinion that small clubs are like glorified Rec programs.

Your reasoning and analysis is off somewhat.
Several of the small clubs in the DMV have exceptional coaches who rather have developmental impact in quality versus quantity.

The bigger clubs are selecting their top team, top two teams, from a much bigger pool of players. Then have 3 or 4 weak teams in said age group.
Give almost any U10, U11 or U12 coach 13 early bloomers for 7v7 and 9v9 and they're going to 'win' games. Doesn't mean the coaching is good.

People spend so much time and effort focused on the aesthetics of name-brand clubs and leagues early on, they always miss the fact that youth soccer is about individual development.
Your kid being on a big name fancy club may float parents ego, but no scout or coach of a true high level team cares.

MLS Next teams in the DMV are filled with kids developed at 'small clubs', then the big clubs reap the benefits.
So saying small clubs are glorified Rec makes you look like a fool.

I like the thoughts on this, can you name 1 or 2 small clubs that seems to produce quality talent. Again, from a Club perspective, not just the 1 off coach who would excel at any club.

I would say it varies by age group but on the MD/DC side, particularly with covid in the mix, (and coaching does matter), but I would flag a couple age groups at Touch Kings, two at Takoma Park Friend, a couple at Cerritos, one at City Sporting, one young and one older at Washington Capital United. I don't have experience on the girls side.