Over-rostered team dynamics — what to expect?

[Anonymous]

Normal starting in high school. Ironically it can be worse to be a sub maybe towards the back end of the 18 than not dress. The kids that don't dress might find another opportunity to play like on the second team, be a sub a year up, or play a year up on the second team etc. But being one of the last subs and getting 10 mins after all the travel is worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We will be in a situation with an over large roster, already are the B team, and preferential minutes to the starting 11 (75%).

My DS reaction so far to the future challenge has been good, he's training and preparing himself all summer to win a starting spot. If he doesn't get one immediately though it will be a real test of fortitude to see how long he can motivate and keep pushing.

May I ask if you think the starting 11 deserve their spots? Was your DS able to earn some playing time?

It's a new club and all new team but we know going in that it will be like this but don't haven't seen yet how they pick the 11.

Like a PP states, I'd rather be not dress than dress and play 10 minutes 4 hours away from home. However if by Christmas it's clear he's never starting, we'll move on.

[Anonymous]

It will likely not go well. Either kids will never play or the coach will try to balance playing time equally which will result in the whole team being pissed off.

[Anonymous]

This is totally normal for a competitive team once you hit about U-14/U-15. My player has consistently had 20-21 on a team where you can only roster 18. Showing up to practice matters because you are earning a roster spot each week. Often times there were at least 1-2 people injured so usually there was only 1-2 who were left un-rostered and generally it was the same 4-5 kids--so they cycled through. Those players played up with the older age group B team or with the same age B team during those weekends but practiced with the team. 8th grade seems about right for this to start to prepare for having 23-25 person rosters in HS. If your kid can't handle it than maybe competitive soccer isn't for them. Once you get to U-15 even if you get rostered you might only play 5-10 in a league game if you are at the bottom of the roster. That's just reality.

[Anonymous]

As other PPs said usually same 4-5 non-rostered so unfortunate for families who paid same $ and hard for 13-14 yos -doesn’t work out well at that young age (HS age is different, more injuries, unavailability, etc). My kid played high club level through HS and only about 2 kids from her club team played in college - in my view it’s all about club making $.

[Anonymous]

it is a bit like the Hunger Games every week.

There is a core group of 10 who always are rostered and then the next 8 are kind of an ongoing mystery. It is stressful. the 7 on the bench don't get a lot of playing time and I have even seen them travel and get no playing time. The option to play with the second team is also weird- the second team doesn't want them there.

[Anonymous]

At U-littles everyone should have about the same playing time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, what age group? As you head into high school, this is typical not just for internal competition, but also because injuries start to multiply as bodies become bigger and stronger. DD's team has a 22 person roster and except for playoffs, I can't recall a recent game where anyone didn't dress involuntarily.

These are 2012 girls, most of whom will be in eighth grade in the fall.

From the responses I gather that this kind of system is common. I hear what folks are saying about injuries depleting the number of players who are physically able to be available for games. That's depressing in its own right, though no doubt reality.

The person who asked about the size of the B team raises a good point. I don't know how big the B team roster is. It would be frustrating for those players as well, if top team players who don't dress come and take away playing time for them.

We will just have to prepare DD for a more internally competitive environment.

--OP

I have a 2012 DD. 16 kids on roster.
Team you never hear about on here though. At least she gets playing time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At U-littles everyone should have about the same playing time

Why? To keep customers happy? My kid is wrapping up a U11 season on Pre-ECNL and we have to ensure players get equal playing time. Even players who play 4 different sports and never put in any work on soccer are getting equal playing time with kids who are grinding and outperforming them by miles. For what purpose? They should develop the players who want to be developed and let the others ride the bench more.

Equal playing time is why rec ball was created.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At U-littles everyone should have about the same playing time

Why? To keep customers happy? My kid is wrapping up a U11 season on Pre-ECNL and we have to ensure players get equal playing time. Even players who play 4 different sports and never put in any work on soccer are getting equal playing time with kids who are grinding and outperforming them by miles. For what purpose? They should develop the players who want to be developed and let the others ride the bench more.

Equal playing time is why rec ball was created.

Most clubs have a "competitive team" by around u15 or u16. Generally kids should get equal playing time up until then.

[Anonymous]

Our club was very transparent with kids who will fall into this category- however, they do not play down. They are essentially practice players (and believe it or not some families still grab for that ribbon rather than dropping their kid down a level. We’re on an RL team and lots of opponents are wearing the NL badge, so I’d guess it’s common. We’ve never had a guest on our field who was playing down. Occasionally we’ll have one playing up to check out next year’s possibilities.

I’d leave a club if my kid was getting benched so a NL kid could take their minutes on the field.

[Anonymous]

Thats unusual for an RL team...usually all the kids play at least some time

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Our club was very transparent with kids who will fall into this category- however, they do not play down. They are essentially practice players (and believe it or not some families still grab for that ribbon rather than dropping their kid down a level. We’re on an RL team and lots of opponents are wearing the NL badge, so I’d guess it’s common. We’ve never had a guest on our field who was playing down. Occasionally we’ll have one playing up to check out next year’s possibilities.

I’d leave a club if my kid was getting benched so a NL kid could take their minutes on the field.

Should say also a 2012 team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At U-littles everyone should have about the same playing time

Why? To keep customers happy? My kid is wrapping up a U11 season on Pre-ECNL and we have to ensure players get equal playing time. Even players who play 4 different sports and never put in any work on soccer are getting equal playing time with kids who are grinding and outperforming them by miles. For what purpose? They should develop the players who want to be developed and let the others ride the bench more.

Equal playing time is why rec ball was created.

Most clubs have a "competitive team" by around u15 or u16. Generally kids should get equal playing time up until then.

Clubs have a "competitive team" well before that my friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, what age group? As you head into high school, this is typical not just for internal competition, but also because injuries start to multiply as bodies become bigger and stronger. DD's team has a 22 person roster and except for playoffs, I can't recall a recent game where anyone didn't dress involuntarily.

These are 2012 girls, most of whom will be in eighth grade in the fall.

From the responses I gather that this kind of system is common. I hear what folks are saying about injuries depleting the number of players who are physically able to be available for games. That's depressing in its own right, though no doubt reality.

The person who asked about the size of the B team raises a good point. I don't know how big the B team roster is. It would be frustrating for those players as well, if top team players who don't dress come and take away playing time for them.

We will just have to prepare DD for a more internally competitive environment.

--OP

Or you can just let them figure it out and grow in the process no matter the outcome

That's fine and dandy if we parents didn't spend LOTS OF MONEY for this youth activity for our teenagers. High school sports and my child watches from the bench? Fine.

Spending upwards of $10K and knowing the top 2-3 players who play full game minutes don't have to pay club fees, while being told my child doesn't go to a game? Why?