Discovery Player, Part Time Player, Dual Rostered Player, Academy Player, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Knowing that bottom 5 players of an A team and top 5 players of a B team are likely interchangeable, what’s the better option? I think playing time and not sitting the bench are really important to development.

I agree with this. And also for fun purposes. I’d rather play than sit on the bench and watch.

I think it makes sense in theory, but if the A team and the B team are playing in different leagues with different levels of player and different speeds of play, then that top B team player is never getting the experience they need to actually succeed on the A team... So more play which may build confidence and of course gives touches on the ball, but not fully beneficial if your goal is to be on the A team....

The thing is speed of play is something you can adjust to pretty quickly. If you are not getting in games or getting little playing time for a year or two your confidence suffers.

It is hard for a kid to sit the bench.

I think some are just hoping some thing will click with their kid and then he/ she will be able to catch up with their teammates. We prefer our kids to play even on the lower level team than sitting on the sideline with the top team. It develops nothing. Can't really brag about it if your kid only get sub in 5 mins each half.

I really don't understand why parents, especially with kids on the younger side, agree to sign them for that

I do! Parents love bragging that their kid is on top team. It’s like having the latest iPhone or cleats. Kid gets frustrated though but expectant maybe next year is his year.... Next year is here and he never gets quality play time or worse he gets cut.

does that parent attend games. I would think that the kind of parent who brags about their kid's soccer team would be embarrassed when that kid doesn't play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Knowing that bottom 5 players of an A team and top 5 players of a B team are likely interchangeable, what’s the better option? I think playing time and not sitting the bench are really important to development.

I agree with this. And also for fun purposes. I’d rather play than sit on the bench and watch.

I think it makes sense in theory, but if the A team and the B team are playing in different leagues with different levels of player and different speeds of play, then that top B team player is never getting the experience they need to actually succeed on the A team... So more play which may build confidence and of course gives touches on the ball, but not fully beneficial if your goal is to be on the A team....

The thing is speed of play is something you can adjust to pretty quickly. If you are not getting in games or getting little playing time for a year or two your confidence suffers.

It is hard for a kid to sit the bench.

I really don't understand why parents, especially with kids on the younger side, agree to sign them for that

I do! Parents love bragging that their kid is on top team. It’s like having the latest iPhone or cleats. Kid gets frustrated though but expectant maybe next year is his year.... Next year is here and he never gets quality play time or worse he gets cut.

does that parent attend games. I would think that the kind of parent who brags about their kid's soccer team would be embarrassed when that kid doesn't play.

Parents should try to watch a practice or two during the season. It is eye opening to see the coach work with 4-6 players and ignore everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Knowing that bottom 5 players of an A team and top 5 players of a B team are likely interchangeable, what’s the better option? I think playing time and not sitting the bench are really important to development.

I agree with this. And also for fun purposes. I’d rather play than sit on the bench and watch.

I think it makes sense in theory, but if the A team and the B team are playing in different leagues with different levels of player and different speeds of play, then that top B team player is never getting the experience they need to actually succeed on the A team... So more play which may build confidence and of course gives touches on the ball, but not fully beneficial if your goal is to be on the A team....

The thing is speed of play is something you can adjust to pretty quickly. If you are not getting in games or getting little playing time for a year or two your confidence suffers.

It is hard for a kid to sit the bench.

I really don't understand why parents, especially with kids on the younger side, agree to sign them for that

I do! Parents love bragging that their kid is on top team. It’s like having the latest iPhone or cleats. Kid gets frustrated though but expectant maybe next year is his year.... Next year is here and he never gets quality play time or worse he gets cut.

does that parent attend games. I would think that the kind of parent who brags about their kid's soccer team would be embarrassed when that kid doesn't play.

Parents should try to watch a practice or two during the season. It is eye opening to see the coach work with 4-6 players and ignore everyone else.

Didn't the coach on the recent “don’t AMA” thread tell the parents they shouldn’t be watching the practices?