Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss Part II

[Anonymous]

I don't hold anything against players for seeking more opportunities to play, and you do bring up a very good point, the team could have rostered them and just saved them for the Sunday games or they had other commitments. More than anything I was reflecting upon the coaches who would bring a player of that caliber to a bracket in which most of the teams are in Division 6-4 of NCSL. Like you said, obviously that team did something right to get to the final, they were a very good team to begin with, which is why bringing the player seemed madly unnecessary. Maybe he used to play there and was just guesting for his own team, again, I don't blame the player, but that you'd think it is a nothingburger is questionable.

[Anonymous]

Was just guesting for his old* team

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've also seen a game where the center ref's son was playing for one of the teams, no bias there at all. Then after the game the ref was shaking hands with the coach and joking around, and drove 3 of the players home.

Come on man, this isn't FIFA, it's youth soccer. The youth players need rides, if a ref is also a parent of one the kids on the team, then most likely he knows a few of the players and if he was going to be at the fields anyways, maybe offered them a ride.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still curious to hear from BRYC boys (U11-U12) parents who opted to remain with BRYC to do only tournaments and training. Has it been good? Are you paying the same as before? What will you do if your son doesn't make the ECNL team at U13? Is there a BRYC backup or will you be forced to find a new club then?

I think BRYC Elite Academy currently has three U13 boys' teams. The second one is in D4 of NCSL, and the third, which I think used to be an ODSL team, is in D8.

Ah, OK. So if the player doesn't make the top ECNL team, he can still do NCSL. That's good (and not how they first explained it!). Thanks!

Yep, my kid is at BRYC Elite in the girls program, same - the 2nd+ teams are playing in different leagues, only the top team plays in ECNL. We're loving the littles (U11> schedule - a tournament every month, one-two weekends per month there's a friendly scrimmage, and one-two weekends off per month (practice, no games). You can really see the improvement in strategy and play from game to game within the tournament and then from tournament to tournament because of the consolidated game time - 4 games in two days instead of 4 games in 4 weeks.

So it's nice that you found an academy setting, and are willing to pay for it. I would say don't ruin it for the people who really care about where their money is going to. If the team isn't paying the league fees for each team, why are they still charging the same? A parent who has enough discretionary income to throw it at youth soccer clubs wouldn't care, but parents do need to demand that clubs provide the service they are charging for. I am a bit salty about this issue, it just seems that soccer club administrators and coaches have this swagger when it comes to prices, as if how dare we question that the coach isn't putting enough effort in training, not paying attention at games, or if tournaments are canceled then why aren't the parents getting a refund if the tournament would provide the club with a partial refund for credit for the following year.

What you describe is what an academy is, more training than anything else, and a setting to showcase what the players have learned, what they need to still work on, essentially a benchmark on the team. I'm glad you're enjoying the environment, it truly does work, I just think the club has found a way of charging the same for less.

Are the tournaments included in the team fees? Because tournaments cost $50 to $75 per player. If they're doing one a month, that's $450-600 right there.

Most will usually do 4 per year, and for most clubs the fee is included. The major costs will be field use for practice, but league and referee fees are a portion of the cost for clubs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, you as a parent wouldn't take the risk, which is very commendable and shows you have character. However, people being paid huge money will look the other way, as the only on earth who stands to get in trouble is the player, not them. It's easy to say "I had no idea he was on the DA team, I feel lied to," and absolve yourself. Furthermore, a lot of parents are deluded when it comes to regulations and their kid's potential. Their entitlement is more important than what's actually best for their player. Pay-for-play is holding our country back from reaching its potential in soccer.

+1 if you watched the U-17 World Cup recently, it was obvious that other countries are doing something different - and their approach is developing players
who are truly elite and breath taking to watch. They play the beautiful game. US players can't hold a candle to them.
Pay to play & parents who throws money at developing kids who are uncreative and mediocre is a reason the US can't compete on an international level. It will catch up with the girls side eventually too.

Not sure how you can watch Andrew Carleton and Josh Sargent and arrive at that conclusion, but whatever floats your boat.

Both are players with good potential, and with Josh Sargent agreeing to join the German club Werder Bremen, I think these players are a little hungrier than the last batch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still curious to hear from BRYC boys (U11-U12) parents who opted to remain with BRYC to do only tournaments and training. Has it been good? Are you paying the same as before? What will you do if your son doesn't make the ECNL team at U13? Is there a BRYC backup or will you be forced to find a new club then?

I think BRYC Elite Academy currently has three U13 boys' teams. The second one is in D4 of NCSL, and the third, which I think used to be an ODSL team, is in D8.

Ah, OK. So if the player doesn't make the top ECNL team, he can still do NCSL. That's good (and not how they first explained it!). Thanks!

Yep, my kid is at BRYC Elite in the girls program, same - the 2nd+ teams are playing in different leagues, only the top team plays in ECNL. We're loving the littles (U11> schedule - a tournament every month, one-two weekends per month there's a friendly scrimmage, and one-two weekends off per month (practice, no games). You can really see the improvement in strategy and play from game to game within the tournament and then from tournament to tournament because of the consolidated game time - 4 games in two days instead of 4 games in 4 weeks.

So it's nice that you found an academy setting, and are willing to pay for it. I would say don't ruin it for the people who really care about where their money is going to. If the team isn't paying the league fees for each team, why are they still charging the same? A parent who has enough discretionary income to throw it at youth soccer clubs wouldn't care, but parents do need to demand that clubs provide the service they are charging for. I am a bit salty about this issue, it just seems that soccer club administrators and coaches have this swagger when it comes to prices, as if how dare we question that the coach isn't putting enough effort in training, not paying attention at games, or if tournaments are canceled then why aren't the parents getting a refund if the tournament would provide the club with a partial refund for credit for the following year.

What you describe is what an academy is, more training than anything else, and a setting to showcase what the players have learned, what they need to still work on, essentially a benchmark on the team. I'm glad you're enjoying the environment, it truly does work, I just think the club has found a way of charging the same for less.

Are the tournaments included in the team fees? Because tournaments cost $50 to $75 per player. If they're doing one a month, that's $450-600 right there.

Most will usually do 4 per year, and for most clubs the fee is included. The major costs will be field use for practice, but league and referee fees are a portion of the cost for clubs.

I understand that, but the PP said BRYC littles are doing a tournament a month.

[Anonymous]

So the ref couldn't have been like "oh, I'm going to be officiating a game that my kid is playing in. Maybe I should recuse myself, or ask to be the AR."? C'mon man, I know it isn't FIFA, but how is that not a conflict of interest? He was officiating a game in which his own kid is playing in for a team who he gives money to, and to some degree, expects good results out of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've seen a team bring guests from FCV in NPL to a final for the lowest bracket at a tournament. When we told the field monitors that certain players had not been on that team when both teams played each other earlier in the tournament, the FM said something to the effect of "whatever, you can't prove it anyways" -_-

The player would need to be on the roster which is provided ahead of the tournament. All the finals we've been in the refs use the roster/cards to validate the teams

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't hold anything against players for seeking more opportunities to play, and you do bring up a very good point, the team could have rostered them and just saved them for the Sunday games or they had other commitments. More than anything I was reflecting upon the coaches who would bring a player of that caliber to a bracket in which most of the teams are in Division 6-4 of NCSL. Like you said, obviously that team did something right to get to the final, they were a very good team to begin with, which is why bringing the player seemed madly unnecessary. Maybe he used to play there and was just guesting for his own team, again, I don't blame the player, but that you'd think it is a nothingburger is questionable.

How is is it even remotely questionable? So a team brought some guest players, who cares. Your team could. And by the looks of it they did not lean on the kids for the tournament.

Perhaps the kids wanted to play with some friends. Most guest opportunities are as a result of some social connection to the host club. Some clubs will use guest opportunities to try and bring a player in but many use them simply for depth and ask kids who somebody on the team knows is available. Rarely is it so sinister as you make it out to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am still curious to hear from BRYC boys (U11-U12) parents who opted to remain with BRYC to do only tournaments and training. Has it been good? Are you paying the same as before? What will you do if your son doesn't make the ECNL team at U13? Is there a BRYC backup or will you be forced to find a new club then?

I think BRYC Elite Academy currently has three U13 boys' teams. The second one is in D4 of NCSL, and the third, which I think used to be an ODSL team, is in D8.

Ah, OK. So if the player doesn't make the top ECNL team, he can still do NCSL. That's good (and not how they first explained it!). Thanks!

Yep, my kid is at BRYC Elite in the girls program, same - the 2nd+ teams are playing in different leagues, only the top team plays in ECNL. We're loving the littles (U11> schedule - a tournament every month, one-two weekends per month there's a friendly scrimmage, and one-two weekends off per month (practice, no games). You can really see the improvement in strategy and play from game to game within the tournament and then from tournament to tournament because of the consolidated game time - 4 games in two days instead of 4 games in 4 weeks.

How often do the ECNL level teams practice in a typical week?

Three. Same as other leagues.

DA practices four times per week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't hold anything against players for seeking more opportunities to play, and you do bring up a very good point, the team could have rostered them and just saved them for the Sunday games or they had other commitments. More than anything I was reflecting upon the coaches who would bring a player of that caliber to a bracket in which most of the teams are in Division 6-4 of NCSL. Like you said, obviously that team did something right to get to the final, they were a very good team to begin with, which is why bringing the player seemed madly unnecessary. Maybe he used to play there and was just guesting for his own team, again, I don't blame the player, but that you'd think it is a nothingburger is questionable.

How is is it even remotely questionable? So a team brought some guest players, who cares. Your team could. And by the looks of it they did not lean on the kids for the tournament.

Perhaps the kids wanted to play with some friends. Most guest opportunities are as a result of some social connection to the host club. Some clubs will use guest opportunities to try and bring a player in but many use them simply for depth and ask kids who somebody on the team knows is available. Rarely is it so sinister as you make it out to be.

I've been a team manager for many years for two different teams and every tournament my kids' teams have been in (at least from U11-U14), refs have checked player cards and rosters for the final game. Maybe some rinky dink tournament would allow non-rostered guest players, but any credible tournament would not. Also, many tournaments have a rule that a player can't guestplay for another team if the team with whom s/he is regularly rostered is playing in that tournament. So if the A and B teams of a club are both in a tournament, A team players can't guest for the B team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't hold anything against players for seeking more opportunities to play, and you do bring up a very good point, the team could have rostered them and just saved them for the Sunday games or they had other commitments. More than anything I was reflecting upon the coaches who would bring a player of that caliber to a bracket in which most of the teams are in Division 6-4 of NCSL. Like you said, obviously that team did something right to get to the final, they were a very good team to begin with, which is why bringing the player seemed madly unnecessary. Maybe he used to play there and was just guesting for his own team, again, I don't blame the player, but that you'd think it is a nothingburger is questionable.

How is is it even remotely questionable? So a team brought some guest players, who cares. Your team could. And by the looks of it they did not lean on the kids for the tournament.

Perhaps the kids wanted to play with some friends. Most guest opportunities are as a result of some social connection to the host club. Some clubs will use guest opportunities to try and bring a player in but many use them simply for depth and ask kids who somebody on the team knows is available. Rarely is it so sinister as you make it out to be.

I've been a team manager for many years for two different teams and every tournament my kids' teams have been in (at least from U11-U14), refs have checked player cards and rosters for the final game. Maybe some rinky dink tournament would allow non-rostered guest players, but any credible tournament would not. Also, many tournaments have a rule that a player can't guest play for another team if the team with whom s/he is regularly rostered is playing in that tournament. So if the A and B teams of a club are both in a tournament, A team players can't guest for the B team.

I never heard of this...I've been a coach and a team manager. However, our club moves players between the the A and B team all the time based on availability, how they are currently playing, etc. and we play in the same tournaments. This has NEVER been a problem and my son has probably played in maybe 16-17 tournaments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't hold anything against players for seeking more opportunities to play, and you do bring up a very good point, the team could have rostered them and just saved them for the Sunday games or they had other commitments. More than anything I was reflecting upon the coaches who would bring a player of that caliber to a bracket in which most of the teams are in Division 6-4 of NCSL. Like you said, obviously that team did something right to get to the final, they were a very good team to begin with, which is why bringing the player seemed madly unnecessary. Maybe he used to play there and was just guesting for his own team, again, I don't blame the player, but that you'd think it is a nothingburger is questionable.

How is is it even remotely questionable? So a team brought some guest players, who cares. Your team could. And by the looks of it they did not lean on the kids for the tournament.

Perhaps the kids wanted to play with some friends. Most guest opportunities are as a result of some social connection to the host club. Some clubs will use guest opportunities to try and bring a player in but many use them simply for depth and ask kids who somebody on the team knows is available. Rarely is it so sinister as you make it out to be.

I've been a team manager for many years for two different teams and every tournament my kids' teams have been in (at least from U11-U14), refs have checked player cards and rosters for the final game. Maybe some rinky dink tournament would allow non-rostered guest players, but any credible tournament would not. Also, many tournaments have a rule that a player can't guest play for another team if the team with whom s/he is regularly rostered is playing in that tournament. So if the A and B teams of a club are both in a tournament, A team players can't guest for the B team.

I never heard of this...I've been a coach and a team manager. However, our club moves players between the the A and B team all the time based on availability, how they are currently playing, etc. and we play in the same tournaments. This has NEVER been a problem and my son has probably played in maybe 16-17 tournaments.

PP here. It came up for one of our teams with Discovery Cup. From their rules at http://www.discoverycup.com/Content/directors/upimg/dir26861/2017%20tournament%20rules.pdf U13 and older: Players may only guest play on one team, however, if their primary team is entered into the tournament they may not guest on another team entered into the tournament.

Battlefield has the same policy: "Guest players must be current USYS/USSF or national equivalent players whose team for which they are registered is not participating in the Battlefield."

Maybe those are the only two.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, you as a parent wouldn't take the risk, which is very commendable and shows you have character. However, people being paid huge money will look the other way, as the only on earth who stands to get in trouble is the player, not them. It's easy to say "I had no idea he was on the DA team, I feel lied to," and absolve yourself. Furthermore, a lot of parents are deluded when it comes to regulations and their kid's potential. Their entitlement is more important than what's actually best for their player. Pay-for-play is holding our country back from reaching its potential in soccer.

+1 if you watched the U-17 World Cup recently, it was obvious that other countries are doing something different - and their approach is developing players
who are truly elite and breath taking to watch. They play the beautiful game. US players can't hold a candle to them.
Pay to play & parents who throws money at developing kids who are uncreative and mediocre is a reason the US can't compete on an international level. It will catch up with the girls side eventually too.

Not sure how you can watch Andrew Carleton and Josh Sargent and arrive at that conclusion, but whatever floats your boat.

Agree, and not sure how someone could watch Erik Palmer Brown, Tyler Adams, and Justen Glad in the U20 World Cup and be so dismissive either. But I think a lot of people who like to make these comments don't actually follow the youth game or pay attention to what's going on in the current US youth landscape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't hold anything against players for seeking more opportunities to play, and you do bring up a very good point, the team could have rostered them and just saved them for the Sunday games or they had other commitments. More than anything I was reflecting upon the coaches who would bring a player of that caliber to a bracket in which most of the teams are in Division 6-4 of NCSL. Like you said, obviously that team did something right to get to the final, they were a very good team to begin with, which is why bringing the player seemed madly unnecessary. Maybe he used to play there and was just guesting for his own team, again, I don't blame the player, but that you'd think it is a nothingburger is questionable.

How is is it even remotely questionable? So a team brought some guest players, who cares. Your team could. And by the looks of it they did not lean on the kids for the tournament.

Perhaps the kids wanted to play with some friends. Most guest opportunities are as a result of some social connection to the host club. Some clubs will use guest opportunities to try and bring a player in but many use them simply for depth and ask kids who somebody on the team knows is available. Rarely is it so sinister as you make it out to be.

I've been a team manager for many years for two different teams and every tournament my kids' teams have been in (at least from U11-U14), refs have checked player cards and rosters for the final game. Maybe some rinky dink tournament would allow non-rostered guest players, but any credible tournament would not. Also, many tournaments have a rule that a player can't guest play for another team if the team with whom s/he is regularly rostered is playing in that tournament. So if the A and B teams of a club are both in a tournament, A team players can't guest for the B team.

I never heard of this...I've been a coach and a team manager. However, our club moves players between the the A and B team all the time based on availability, how they are currently playing, etc. and we play in the same tournaments. This has NEVER been a problem and my son has probably played in maybe 16-17 tournaments.

PP here. It came up for one of our teams with Discovery Cup. From their rules at http://www.discoverycup.com/Content/directors/upimg/dir26861/2017%20tournament%20rules.pdf U13 and older: Players may only guest play on one team, however, if their primary team is entered into the tournament they may not guest on another team entered into the tournament.

Battlefield has the same policy: "Guest players must be current USYS/USSF or national equivalent players whose team for which they are registered is not participating in the Battlefield."

Maybe those are the only two.

Remember the big kerfuffle over the girl who supposedly wasn't allowed to play on a girls team because she "looked like a boy"? This was actually at the heart of it. Her club had a rep for tossing players around between teams in the same tournament, and THAT was the big issue in that case. (Still, someone said she looked like a boy in the context of the whole discussion, and that wasn't good.)