Forum Index
»
Soccer
LMVSC town hall
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
you must not have been on the additional zoom meetings. several age groups for girls were asking if there was going to be enough players. they acknowledged there would not be a 2002 team, but also worries about 2003, 2004 as well. there already wasn't a 2006 team, and the 2007 and 2008 teams pulled out of ccl. it was addressed previously the idea of merging: 2002/2003 and some 2004 (2003 team) some 2005 with 2004 (2004 team) white 2005 with rest of 2005 (2005 team) still have problems for 2006-2008 but at least the older teams would work out. dc and i are not aware of the younger age groups though. |
Anonymous
I think I've seen every club advertise tryouts. A few of my kid's teammates haven't attended because parents are still concerned due to virus even though they have committed. I'm sure some were on vacation. I don't think that explains all that may be missing but I assume some. |
Anonymous
again i cannot speak for the entire club. but feel free to look around. a few covid concerns and vacations does not explain the worries. look at above comment, we are talking about several age groups. how are the 2007 and 2008 age groups supposed to academy train when there is only one team per age group? consider that again for the 2006 girls. i'm not saying some kids are not there due to coivd/vacations, i am saying that it is beginning to look like another season of missing many players. we stuck around this past season and i could see the result, progression was hindered. |
Anonymous
No I get it. I think progression was also hindered by the no Spring season. It would have been an opportunity to retain some of the players on the way out. I think for the teams that only have enough for 1 team then the academy concept won't be applicable and they'll train as an individual team as usual. For those age groups that don't have teams it's almost impossible to create a team from no where. |
Anonymous
and this i think is the general worry. to be quite fair, this is why i didn't understand moving to the academy system in the first place. it honestly feels like it's easier for the coaching staff (player development and parent logistics be damned) |
Anonymous
|
Theoretically the solo teams are supposed to be paired with a comparable team to do their “academy” style training.
Who knows what will really happen, but that’s what they said during the second town hall. |
Anonymous
which sounds like merging teams |
Anonymous
Sorry but parent logistics shouldn't be their priority besides communicating well in advance. As for player development I think it's better as it puts more responsibility on the player to perform and the coach to teach and evaluate. No more excuses from coach that he doesn't know who little johnny is. |
Anonymous
if i had an optimism bias i would agree. but 14 players won't challenge each other too much, you need more players. the academy is only as good as its parts put together. a lot of our red players left; you're not going to make new red out of white being challenged by blue. i love the theory, it's really good. but it's not what the player pool needs right now. it's very clear this decision was made without much input or review. |
Anonymous
So let's say the top teams are now made up of former white and blue players, you think team isolation is what they need? If anything they may need the academy format more. Multiple coaches to work with and get feedback. They see what little Johnny and Brian are doing and work harder to do better. They see an opportunity. In this system coaches can evaluate which players are performing better at a specific point in time during the season, not just in mid-May. I feel bad for those whose groups are uncertain as I wish they were like the one where my child plays as it looks that will have at least 2 teams. I'm not an "academy" advocate but I can see where this may make sense for the current situation of the club. |
Anonymous
|
“academy” style training = Cub does not have enough Coaches or Players
I have seen local clubs use this "Academy" to cover its situation for lack of Coaches or lack of Players |
Anonymous
+1 here If they really think the academy is the way to go, why didn't they do it this year? "Isolating" is not the correct word, btw. More like "focus on improving". I do not have any faith in this new situation. |
Anonymous
Constantly floating up and down is a good way to alienate and eventually loose players. Way back in U9, my kid made a club's B team and was fine with it like his team mates, but the coach had him constantly playing with the A team. He wasn't part of the A team, but stopped being part of the B team either. At the end of the season, he got the A team offer, but by we had such a miserable time with the uncertainty all season that we jumped clubs. It was bad enough going up constantly, now imagine you accept an A team offer but are told you're playing with the B team week in and week out |
Anonymous
I also didn't quite understand the logic in this promise. LC said there would be a core of 6-7 players but that's it, there would be movement. Might be difficult to find the best players in roles or a team when there's that much fluidity. Again, it's a great idea. Maybe don't force it on the whole club? Because there are plenty of teams on the girls side this does not cater to. |
Anonymous
| I think players 8-12 or so will end up miserable and be gone the next season. Having to constantly prove yourself and not being able to ever relax isn't what most kids sign up for, especially knowing a couple of bad practices could cost them a spot on their team |