Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

Will teams use club pass to move kids around to be more/less competitive in some of these instances?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the consensus on what a coach should do when they are up by 5-6 goals? and it continues to get worse? I've seen...you have to make X passes before you can shoot. That often just embarrasses the other team. Play back to the GK every time...that is OK I guess. Has to use weak foot to shoot...well sometimes that contradicts good decision making. I've seen players removed from the field. Not a fan. All the kids work hard and they should be as much playing time as possible. I've seen players added to the losing team. I'm OK with that but might violate tournament rules. One touch finishes. etc. The problem is that the losing team knows they are being dominated regardless if it's 6-0 and the winning team is passing it around or if it's 10-0 and everyone is working hard. I struggle with what I think is best. Maybe the ref should just end the game but again, the kids deserve the game time. Anyway....what it the consensus? Also, sometimes it's not always about the coach. The coach can restrict but the kids not always listen.

The first thing you do is move kids into different positions. This is when the keeper gets to play striker and forwards get to defend,, etc..

The second thing is have kids use their weak foot.

The third is to play down a man. Not as important at younger ages but when you get older kids need to learn to play as if someone has been red carded.

The fourth thing is to stop cheering goals, parents and players alike.

The third one is kind of humiliating.

The third is only for older teams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing is some teams are just weak especially at the younger ages. They don't/didn't train enough. They aren't serious. They aren't organized. They run into a well trained, serious, organized, well coached team and you could move the players where ever you want, you can have them use their weak foot (most kids on my son's team can use both feet), you can ask them to pass it around (which is what most of the better teams do anyway), and the weak team is still going to get crushed. On the other hand, sometimes leagues just schedule games where one team is over matched. In NCSL, I'm seeing games between Reston's 1st team and Loudoun's 4th team. Calverton's 1st team against Mclean's 4th team. Plenty of examples of 1st teams against clubs' 3rd teams. Anyway...I think kids just need to be warned that they could get thumped today and that's it's OK and to learn from it.

Ditto. The matchups (in these NCSL pre-ranked divisions) are set up for these kinds of blowouts. And it sucks --- But we are warning our kids/parents in advance of potential blowouts (against us) and at least let them get prepared to console kids. We are preparing to use it as a learning lesson. It's just going to be to one of those messed-up seasons until we land in proper divisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Will teams use club pass to move kids around to be more/less competitive in some of these instances?

Sometimes. And I know at least one TD who is scrambling to change up an NCSL schedule that has his club's C team facing Murderer's Row while his A team barely has a challenge.

U9 and U10 are surely too young for official promotion/relegation -- I get why they don't even publish scores at those ages -- but you'd think NCSL could still do something about this. Maybe have one "elite" division for A teams from big clubs? The difference between a B and C team generally isn't that big, but the difference between A and C is often a chasm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the consensus on what a coach should do when they are up by 5-6 goals? and it continues to get worse? I've seen...you have to make X passes before you can shoot. That often just embarrasses the other team. Play back to the GK every time...that is OK I guess. Has to use weak foot to shoot...well sometimes that contradicts good decision making. I've seen players removed from the field. Not a fan. All the kids work hard and they should be as much playing time as possible. I've seen players added to the losing team. I'm OK with that but might violate tournament rules. One touch finishes. etc. The problem is that the losing team knows they are being dominated regardless if it's 6-0 and the winning team is passing it around or if it's 10-0 and everyone is working hard. I struggle with what I think is best. Maybe the ref should just end the game but again, the kids deserve the game time. Anyway....what it the consensus? Also, sometimes it's not always about the coach. The coach can restrict but the kids not always listen.

The first thing you do is move kids into different positions. This is when the keeper gets to play striker and forwards get to defend,, etc..

The second thing is have kids use their weak foot.

The third is to play down a man. Not as important at younger ages but when you get older kids need to learn to play as if someone has been red carded.

The fourth thing is to stop cheering goals, parents and players alike.

The third one is kind of humiliating.

The third is only for older teams.

Especially humiliating when they are older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will teams use club pass to move kids around to be more/less competitive in some of these instances?

Sometimes. And I know at least one TD who is scrambling to change up an NCSL schedule that has his club's C team facing Murderer's Row while his A team barely has a challenge.

U9 and U10 are surely too young for official promotion/relegation -- I get why they don't even publish scores at those ages -- but you'd think NCSL could still do something about this. Maybe have one "elite" division for A teams from big clubs? The difference between a B and C team generally isn't that big, but the difference between A and C is often a chasm.

Yep, this season is going to suck for a lot of U11s. Lots of blow outs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will teams use club pass to move kids around to be more/less competitive in some of these instances?

Sometimes. And I know at least one TD who is scrambling to change up an NCSL schedule that has his club's C team facing Murderer's Row while his A team barely has a challenge.

U9 and U10 are surely too young for official promotion/relegation -- I get why they don't even publish scores at those ages -- but you'd think NCSL could still do something about this. Maybe have one "elite" division for A teams from big clubs? The difference between a B and C team generally isn't that big, but the difference between A and C is often a chasm.

You can't layer a Club Based Model on a Team Based Promotion Relegation model. They are incompatible philosophies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will teams use club pass to move kids around to be more/less competitive in some of these instances?

Sometimes. And I know at least one TD who is scrambling to change up an NCSL schedule that has his club's C team facing Murderer's Row while his A team barely has a challenge.

U9 and U10 are surely too young for official promotion/relegation -- I get why they don't even publish scores at those ages -- but you'd think NCSL could still do something about this. Maybe have one "elite" division for A teams from big clubs? The difference between a B and C team generally isn't that big, but the difference between A and C is often a chasm.

You can't layer a Club Based Model on a Team Based Promotion Relegation model. They are incompatible philosophies.

Why is that?

[Anonymous]

excellent interview of hermann hummels regarding youth development:

http://www.spox.com/de/sport/fussball/bundesliga/1608/Artikel/hermann-hummels-interview-teil-1.html

hummels worked in football for 40 years, at bayern for 20 years and is mats hummels' father.

[Anonymous]

If it were up to me, i would ban parents from matches and training.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the consensus on what a coach should do when they are up by 5-6 goals? and it continues to get worse? I've seen...you have to make X passes before you can shoot. That often just embarrasses the other team. Play back to the GK every time...that is OK I guess. Has to use weak foot to shoot...well sometimes that contradicts good decision making. I've seen players removed from the field. Not a fan. All the kids work hard and they should be as much playing time as possible. I've seen players added to the losing team. I'm OK with that but might violate tournament rules. One touch finishes. etc. The problem is that the losing team knows they are being dominated regardless if it's 6-0 and the winning team is passing it around or if it's 10-0 and everyone is working hard. I struggle with what I think is best. Maybe the ref should just end the game but again, the kids deserve the game time. Anyway....what it the consensus? Also, sometimes it's not always about the coach. The coach can restrict but the kids not always listen.

The first thing you do is move kids into different positions. This is when the keeper gets to play striker and forwards get to defend,, etc..

The second thing is have kids use their weak foot.

The third is to play down a man. Not as important at younger ages but when you get older kids need to learn to play as if someone has been red carded.

The fourth thing is to stop cheering goals, parents and players alike.

Im not a fan of playing a man down. A well drilled dominant team a man or two down just gets compact and is hard to break down and doesn't get hit on the counter nearly as much which is where many youth goals come from (from poorer teams).

1. different positions definitely
2. weak foot only
3. 2-3 touch max limit.
4. no balls in the air - play everything on the deck.

those are the restrictions i have put on my squads sometime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will teams use club pass to move kids around to be more/less competitive in some of these instances?

Sometimes. And I know at least one TD who is scrambling to change up an NCSL schedule that has his club's C team facing Murderer's Row while his A team barely has a challenge.

U9 and U10 are surely too young for official promotion/relegation -- I get why they don't even publish scores at those ages -- but you'd think NCSL could still do something about this. Maybe have one "elite" division for A teams from big clubs? The difference between a B and C team generally isn't that big, but the difference between A and C is often a chasm.

You can't layer a Club Based Model on a Team Based Promotion Relegation model. They are incompatible philosophies.

Why is that?

Because one model is intended to allow clubs to do what is best for the players development as opposed to the "team".

When you introduce promotion and relegation for a team coaches and clubs make decisions based on outcome of the team and not the players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the consensus on what a coach should do when they are up by 5-6 goals? and it continues to get worse? I've seen...you have to make X passes before you can shoot. That often just embarrasses the other team. Play back to the GK every time...that is OK I guess. Has to use weak foot to shoot...well sometimes that contradicts good decision making. I've seen players removed from the field. Not a fan. All the kids work hard and they should be as much playing time as possible. I've seen players added to the losing team. I'm OK with that but might violate tournament rules. One touch finishes. etc. The problem is that the losing team knows they are being dominated regardless if it's 6-0 and the winning team is passing it around or if it's 10-0 and everyone is working hard. I struggle with what I think is best. Maybe the ref should just end the game but again, the kids deserve the game time. Anyway....what it the consensus? Also, sometimes it's not always about the coach. The coach can restrict but the kids not always listen.

The first thing you do is move kids into different positions. This is when the keeper gets to play striker and forwards get to defend,, etc..

The second thing is have kids use their weak foot.

The third is to play down a man. Not as important at younger ages but when you get older kids need to learn to play as if someone has been red carded.

The fourth thing is to stop cheering goals, parents and players alike.

Im not a fan of playing a man down. A well drilled dominant team a man or two down just gets compact and is hard to break down and doesn't get hit on the counter nearly as much which is where many youth goals come from (from poorer teams).

1. different positions definitely
2. weak foot only
3. 2-3 touch max limit.
4. no balls in the air - play everything on the deck.

those are the restrictions i have put on my squads sometime.

OMG, playing a man down is rare and only for older age groups when cards getting handed out is a real possibility. Whether you like it or not, at some point teams will play a man down. It is not a big deal for ten friggin minutes of their lives to experience it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If it were up to me, i would ban parents from matches and training.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will teams use club pass to move kids around to be more/less competitive in some of these instances?

Sometimes. And I know at least one TD who is scrambling to change up an NCSL schedule that has his club's C team facing Murderer's Row while his A team barely has a challenge.

U9 and U10 are surely too young for official promotion/relegation -- I get why they don't even publish scores at those ages -- but you'd think NCSL could still do something about this. Maybe have one "elite" division for A teams from big clubs? The difference between a B and C team generally isn't that big, but the difference between A and C is often a chasm.

You can't layer a Club Based Model on a Team Based Promotion Relegation model. They are incompatible philosophies.

Why is that?

Because one model is intended to allow clubs to do what is best for the players development as opposed to the "team".

When you introduce promotion and relegation for a team coaches and clubs make decisions based on outcome of the team and not the players.

Isn't it better for the players to face an appropriate level of competition?