Over-rostered team dynamics — what to expect?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At U-littles everyone should have about the same playing time

Why? To keep customers happy? My kid is wrapping up a U11 season on Pre-ECNL and we have to ensure players get equal playing time. Even players who play 4 different sports and never put in any work on soccer are getting equal playing time with kids who are grinding and outperforming them by miles. For what purpose? They should develop the players who want to be developed and let the others ride the bench more.

Equal playing time is why rec ball was created.

Most clubs have a "competitive team" by around u15 or u16. Generally kids should get equal playing time up until then.

Again...why? And what club are you at that competitive starts at u15 and up????

Because every kid is developing differently and by 15 everyone is HS aged so theoretically able to play against adults. Boys are different but the best in the world debut at 15 so not completely off. Before u15 or u16 is better arugment because its recruitment time. Best players should be on the field being showcased period. It’s mutually beneficial to both club and top players. Equal playing time is for Jeff Cup and WAGS. Prior to u15 we shouldn't even be keeping score if we care about developing soccer players.

Not every player on u15 and u16 is looking to play soccer in college. Some joined the team because they like to play soccer with other players at their same level.

Yup you're the problem. Go be a star for the HS team then, leave club soccer for the nutjobs that live and breath it

[Anonymous]

It's humorous listening to parents complain about "over-rostered" teams. You are the ones that created the situation by forcing your way onto the top teams. Clubs are just responding by trying to give other pushy parents what they want.

Over rostering isn't the real issue. It's either the player that has to sit out that week. Remember you wanted to play on the top team. Or its the player that sees someone new as a threat to their position on the team. Either way over rostering is a way to blame clubs for a situation parents enabled + created.

[Anonymous]

Kids try out and are offered a spot on the A team.
Thats not parents being pushy. They aren't told there are 22 players and your dc is 21z

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DD’s club team next season will have 21-23 players on the roster but only 18 will be able to dress for games. Those not dressing for a given game may be able to play with the B team that weekend.

Is this typical? What kind of team dynamics can we expect under such a system?

If the same kids are left out each week my guess is they’ll eventually leave the club.

If kids are trying to compete for the 18 game day slots week to week, I guess it might make for a better team — but not much team camaraderie, if your friend is also your enemy.

Different amounts of playing time due to differences in ability/contribution on the field is one thing. But to be competing just to get to go to the games seems potentially destabilizing to team morale.

If you’ve experienced this kind of system already, how is this likely to shake out?

Experience here with a U13 team that had 21 players on the roster. It's not a good place to be. It's no fun being told not to even bother coming to games; it's also no fun to travel 3+ hours for an out-of-state away game and get 5 minutes of playing time. I don't think much "development" happens in an environment like that -- only the development of the club bank account from parents willing to shell out $3K to ride the bench or play B-team level soccer.

There really is no reason why a youth team with kids that age needs so many rostered players. It's a money-grab.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's humorous listening to parents complain about "over-rostered" teams. You are the ones that created the situation by forcing your way onto the top teams. Clubs are just responding by trying to give other pushy parents what they want.

Over rostering isn't the real issue. It's either the player that has to sit out that week. Remember you wanted to play on the top team. Or its the player that sees someone new as a threat to their position on the team. Either way over rostering is a way to blame clubs for a situation parents enabled + created.

Good point but the coach/club bears zero responsibility? Would it kill someone to tell these parents “Just being up front, I can squeeze her in but her playing time will be limited”. No, it wouldn’t and it would be good business practice. Playing coy and being opaque is not.

[Anonymous]

Reguarding the OPs question...

A team carrying 22 is like a weekly tryout for your kid. Most top 50 ranked teams (nationwide) over u13 will be like this. If your kid is cream of the crop they'll do well in this type of environment. If they're not you'll quickly know about it when your kid rides pine or isn't asked to suit up that week.

The one thing I like about this type of environment is that parent cliques generally hold no power over the team. All the nonsense like birthday parties, or dumb parent planned activities dont happen because people are only there to play.

It is fun watching new parents get humbled if their kid isn't a superstar out of the gate or they were a big fish in a small pond previously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's humorous listening to parents complain about "over-rostered" teams. You are the ones that created the situation by forcing your way onto the top teams. Clubs are just responding by trying to give other pushy parents what they want.

Over rostering isn't the real issue. It's either the player that has to sit out that week. Remember you wanted to play on the top team. Or its the player that sees someone new as a threat to their position on the team. Either way over rostering is a way to blame clubs for a situation parents enabled + created.

Good point but the coach/club bears zero responsibility? Would it kill someone to tell these parents “Just being up front, I can squeeze her in but her playing time will be limited”. No, it wouldn’t and it would be good business practice. Playing coy and being opaque is not.

In what world does telling a parent that their kid can be on the team but they won't be playing that much = a likely to pay in full customer?

Not saying certain things will = a paid in full customer.

See how it works? Coaches play as many game as parents do getting players on teams and getting parents to pay in full. Maybe you're new to all this but generally parents with kids on high level over rostered teams know what theyre getting into.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's humorous listening to parents complain about "over-rostered" teams. You are the ones that created the situation by forcing your way onto the top teams. Clubs are just responding by trying to give other pushy parents what they want.

Over rostering isn't the real issue. It's either the player that has to sit out that week. Remember you wanted to play on the top team. Or its the player that sees someone new as a threat to their position on the team. Either way over rostering is a way to blame clubs for a situation parents enabled + created.

Good point but the coach/club bears zero responsibility? Would it kill someone to tell these parents “Just being up front, I can squeeze her in but her playing time will be limited”. No, it wouldn’t and it would be good business practice. Playing coy and being opaque is not.

In what world does telling a parent that their kid can be on the team but they won't be playing that much = a likely to pay in full customer?

Not saying certain things will = a paid in full customer.

See how it works? Coaches play as many game as parents do getting players on teams and getting parents to pay in full. Maybe you're new to all this but generally parents with kids on high level over rostered teams know what theyre getting into.

Being transparent before snatching someone’s cash is fine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's humorous listening to parents complain about "over-rostered" teams. You are the ones that created the situation by forcing your way onto the top teams. Clubs are just responding by trying to give other pushy parents what they want.

Over rostering isn't the real issue. It's either the player that has to sit out that week. Remember you wanted to play on the top team. Or its the player that sees someone new as a threat to their position on the team. Either way over rostering is a way to blame clubs for a situation parents enabled + created.

Good point but the coach/club bears zero responsibility? Would it kill someone to tell these parents “Just being up front, I can squeeze her in but her playing time will be limited”. No, it wouldn’t and it would be good business practice. Playing coy and being opaque is not.

In what world does telling a parent that their kid can be on the team but they won't be playing that much = a likely to pay in full customer?

Not saying certain things will = a paid in full customer.

See how it works? Coaches play as many game as parents do getting players on teams and getting parents to pay in full. Maybe you're new to all this but generally parents with kids on high level over rostered teams know what theyre getting into.

Being transparent before snatching someone’s cash is fine

Then why do bad guys wear ski masks?

Sorry things aren't working out for your kid. But you likely knew what you were getting into. A coach being transparent or glossing over the truth has no bearing on your kids ability to perform on the field.

[Anonymous]

Can I ask what team this is? We just accepted a spot and there were rumors the roster was going to increase. My son got multiple offers and we will just move him to another team if some kids aren't going to play and there is that much competition. Playing only part of the game is different than only some kids dressing for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can I ask what team this is? We just accepted a spot and there were rumors the roster was going to increase. My son got multiple offers and we will just move him to another team if some kids aren't going to play and there is that much competition. Playing only part of the game is different than only some kids dressing for it.

Hahaha such BS.

Your ego won't let him play on any other team than the one that wins. If this wasn't true you'd just have him play on the B team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can I ask what team this is? We just accepted a spot and there were rumors the roster was going to increase. My son got multiple offers and we will just move him to another team if some kids aren't going to play and there is that much competition. Playing only part of the game is different than only some kids dressing for it.

I would start a different thread asking specifically about that club-age group and their typiccal roster size.
Someone here will know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can I ask what team this is? We just accepted a spot and there were rumors the roster was going to increase. My son got multiple offers and we will just move him to another team if some kids aren't going to play and there is that much competition. Playing only part of the game is different than only some kids dressing for it.

Hahaha such BS.

Your ego won't let him play on any other team than the one that wins. If this wasn't true you'd just have him play on the B team.

Sounds like a dumb comment from a dumb coach or club admin trying to justifying ripping people off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can I ask what team this is? We just accepted a spot and there were rumors the roster was going to increase. My son got multiple offers and we will just move him to another team if some kids aren't going to play and there is that much competition. Playing only part of the game is different than only some kids dressing for it.

Hahaha such BS.

Your ego won't let him play on any other team than the one that wins. If this wasn't true you'd just have him play on the B team.

Sounds like a dumb comment from a dumb coach or club admin trying to justifying ripping people off.

Nobody is ripping anyone off. Parents are lined up to get their kid on a top team that wins. This is why over rostering occurs.

You just dont like what it takes to play in this type of environment. Guess what? It doesn't matter because other parents want this type of environment and flock to it.

[Anonymous]

Not sure if we want it? More like accepted it as the path best traveled for the outcomes you are looking for.