How much playing time did your U13 (now U14) player get last year if you had a large roster?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was implied that if you kid didn’t get much playing time but played on an ECNL or MLS Next team, you’d be ok with it? Can someone share why they’d be ok with that and not move to a team where the kid would play? Is it just because you feel the training is worth the cost?

It depends on the club and the recruiting track record.

In general, you should take playing time with a lateral move if your hope is to get recruited. If the current club has a plan and a track record for getting bench players recruited then it is fine to stay with the club.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For all the parents who look at rosters and think they know who should play where and how much. I suggest to go get your coaching license and your own team and then you take on the task of figuring it out. Every situation doesn't work out for every player. If you must move on then move on. Way too many kids are placed on too high of a level in turn holding back the development of the better players. A reality check is needed for many parents who have kids that dont get much playing time. You cant develop every kid to be average. There will always be the worst kid on every team. In reality no matter how hard a player works not all can be middle of the pack average kids. Some just are not good enough and your kid might not be good enough.

OMG just stop. You need a reality check.The highest level of travel soccer in this area is not elite soccer. This is school boy/girl soccer. The better players will be fine playing against the players you think are subpar. Why? Because at this level a better player is just a better athlete. Clubs try to “develop” players to u15/u16 because after that age the kids have one or two years left at the clubs. The rosters are set, the teams expectation are what they are and there is no development. There is no reason to “develop” after that age for the club. The few who are going to college or rarer still professional soccer are set. The rest are done.

So what is development if the goal is to peak at u15/u16? It is selection of the best athletes. What is development after u15/u16? It is speed of play, soccer iq and what is expected of a professional player(fitness, work ethic, consistency, etc). You only really get this at some MLS development academies or oversea not playing travel soccer. Yet some how the better players still make it to college or the pros playing with subpar teammates.

[Anonymous]

The only level of soccer here you can call "elite" is DC United's academy. And they are miles beyond other MLS academies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only level of soccer here you can call "elite" is DC United's academy. And they are miles beyond other MLS academies.

PP here

*behind (sorry, autocorrect)

[Anonymous]

Agree no elite per say. There are far too many subpar players who keep the average players back in development.

[Anonymous]

Watch the Antione Griezeman (sp?) documentary on Netflix if your kid needs to be inspired to stick with it despite lack of playing time. He was overlooked for years as a kid in France because of his small size and lack of speed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I disagree. If you are paying a club to develop your player, they should be getting playing time. If my player was not getting at least 50% playing time, I would talk to the coach, then the age group director, then the technical director.

I agree with this poster. You are paying for development. Unless your child is on an ECNL team or MLSNext they should get a good amount of playing time.

Or even if they are on such a team. The bench players on such a team certainly merit development. And the better ECNL and MLSNext teams make sure all players get a good amount of playing time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only level of soccer here you can call "elite" is DC United's academy. And they are miles beyond other MLS academies.

Not sure what counts as elite but DC United is not miles ahead of others. Locally they do get a good percentage of the best players, but Arlington and Baltimore's rosters are not massively less talented - and there are plenty of players at those clubs who get offers from DC United and choose not to take them. And the game results tend to back that up - DC United does not dominate either of those clubs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I disagree. If you are paying a club to develop your player, they should be getting playing time. If my player was not getting at least 50% playing time, I would talk to the coach, then the age group director, then the technical director.

I agree with this poster. You are paying for development. Unless your child is on an ECNL team or MLSNext they should get a good amount of playing time.

Or even if they are on such a team. The bench players on such a team certainly merit development. And the better ECNL and MLSNext teams make sure all players get a good amount of playing time.

Games are not the place for development. Practices are. Additional trainings, etc.

[Anonymous]

By that logic, why would clubs have pre-season tournaments/games? Isn’t that for development, helping teams to gel especially with new players, assess old players who have worked hard over the summer, develop new formations, etc? I guess it depends on your definition of “development.”

[Anonymous]

At first team at big club. Our roster is 15 for U14 boys. Thrilled.

We left a Club at U13 that was up to 18-19 players by end of Spring. My kid still played 2/3s of game at center mid, but could see some kids getting very little time. Lots of dissatisfaction which bled into everything because of it on sidelines.

I’d rather be short a player and kids play whole game then have 8 sitting full time on the bench.

Kids get better the more game time they have. A good player should be game fit for 90 min—but because travel soccer is now such a $$$ business, most clubs pack rosters way too big and few get the 90 min.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I disagree. If you are paying a club to develop your player, they should be getting playing time. If my player was not getting at least 50% playing time, I would talk to the coach, then the age group director, then the technical director.

I agree with this poster. You are paying for development. Unless your child is on an ECNL team or MLSNext they should get a good amount of playing time.

Or even if they are on such a team. The bench players on such a team certainly merit development. And the better ECNL and MLSNext teams make sure all players get a good amount of playing time.

Games are not the place for development. Practices are. Additional trainings, etc.

That’s BS that travel clubs spout for $$$.

Game time under pressure matters greatly. It’s why in FIFA some players choose to develop in places where they will actually play 17/18 year olds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only level of soccer here you can call "elite" is DC United's academy. And they are miles beyond other MLS academies.

Not sure what counts as elite but DC United is not miles ahead of others. Locally they do get a good percentage of the best players, but Arlington and Baltimore's rosters are not massively less talented - and there are plenty of players at those clubs who get offers from DC United and choose not to take them. And the game results tend to back that up - DC United does not dominate either of those clubs.

Substitute Bethesda for Arlington and maybe you have a point. I think it’s time you move on from the obsession with trying to project Arlington as being in the same neighborhood as Armour and DCU. Whatever parity may exist for a couple of teams does not exist for others and Arlington is not getting talent now heading to MLSNext and other clubs at younger ages. The coaches are fine and I hope they continue to improve. But they need to fix what they do at earlier ages if they want a better rep, and they are in the wrong league for later ages, though they might feel like the belle of that ball, at least around NoVa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Talk to the coach. More kids = more money = lesss play time.

Coaches are paid by the team, not the player.

[Anonymous]

Everybody gets equal time in practice to prove you should get time in games. you compete to compete not that hard of a concept.