Reasonable to expect coaches to break ball-hogging/Star syndrome?

[Anonymous]

I don't disagree that Thomas Rongen lacks intelligence (Messi, Subotic) and integrity (Subotic,, Gonzalez). However, he was hired as the chief scout for USMNT by Bruce Arena and USMNT. If they hired him as the top scout, one can only imagine the quality of the lower level scouts/talent ID staff. Even if they have 10 full time scouts, it is totally inadequate for a country of 350 million people.

I seems that you agree that the current system is broken and needs to be aligned with the world standards. There is no real pressure and incentives for MLS franchises to prioritize youth development under the current system. DCU's academy is pay to play, which says it all about how serious the ownership is about attracting and developing young players.

Yohannes may not be the best example (he was not a regular starter at DCU before he moved to Europe so we can only speculate what could have happened if he did not move out of the country). However, there are plenty of others who either did not get enough attention from the current system or were rejected as not being good enough, e.g., Neven Subotic (dropped from youth national team because he was not good enough), Efrain Alvarez (joined Mexico after he was dropped from youth national team), Jonathan Gonzalez (you must know his story since you've mentioned him).

[Anonymous]

Par for the course for this forum, you open a thread with a given topic expecting to read about the subject title, and you end up reading long monologues trashing US soccer.

Dead horse firmly beaten. Have you and your friend ever given thought to the fact people simply tune it out after a little while?

You aren't changing anything from within this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Par for the course for this forum, you open a thread with a given topic expecting to read about the subject title, and you end up reading long monologues trashing US soccer.

Dead horse firmly beaten. Have you and your friend ever given thought to the fact people simply tune it out after a little while?

You aren't changing anything from within this forum.

Neither is your complaining about certain posts on this forum. It is called the freedom of speech, baby! Tune it out if you don't like the exchange of ideas.

[Anonymous]

Get back on topic PLEASE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Get back on topic PLEASE.

The OP described a U9 team on which kids were already pigeonholed into certain positions. The OPs perspective was that this was because of a legacy of bias - three former rec coaches had favored their kids by letting them play the offensive positions, while making some else play defense. Even after the team had a new coach, it seemed to OP like this pattern continued. The OPs question was whether the parents should speak to the new coach about this.

One of the first couple of responses was yes, the OP should address this with the coach, and if nothing changed shouldtry to find a new team next year, one on which the coach rotates players through different positions.

Pretty much covers it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Only a player can make the ultimate decision to stop being a hog. Then again, there’s certain players that have a skill set which lends itself to being allowed to put the team on their backs. We need more creativity, not less. The ability to beat someone 1v1 is invaluable.

There’s a player on our team that her parents give her $10 each time she scores a goal. Hence, she’s a complete ball hog and wouldn’t pass even when her teammates are wide open to score. So some ball hoggers are created and not born.

And some are created through bad coaching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get back on topic PLEASE.

The OP described a U9 team on which kids were already pigeonholed into certain positions. The OPs perspective was that this was because of a legacy of bias - three former rec coaches had favored their kids by letting them play the offensive positions, while making some else play defense. Even after the team had a new coach, it seemed to OP like this pattern continued. The OPs question was whether the parents should speak to the new coach about this.

One of the first couple of responses was yes, the OP should address this with the coach, and if nothing changed shouldtry to find a new team next year, one on which the coach rotates players through different positions.

Pretty much covers it.

A U9 player is pigeonholed into certain positions all the way into September? Crazy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you realize that USSF has only 1 full time scout for all age groups? The scouting is virtually non-existent. The call ups are not based on meaningful scouting and evaluation, but are designed to send one message to US based players: you must play for DA to be considered and even then, you are a long shot unless you play for MLS DA. Take a look at the announcements from USSF, they emphasize how many players come from DAs. As for the results, the talent gap should be too large, if the players were properly identified. A team with 4 youth national team players should be crushing teams, which do not have players of similar caliber. However, VDA scored 4 goals against this "uber talented" DCU team and beat it. Bethesda, which also did not get any call ups, held them to 1 goal.

There's a lot of truth to that. Making the YNT isn't really an indication that you are the best of the best, though to be sure, it does mean you are more than the basic, average elite player. There is at least basic fundamental skills, such as passing accuracy with both feet.

[Anonymous]

If you get into a recognizable foreign club's academy, you are going to be on a USYNT radar / list. A player with the exact same talent who is based in the US playing somewhere is just another player to them.

[Anonymous]

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Only a player can make the ultimate decision to stop being a hog. Then again, there’s certain players that have a skill set which lends itself to being allowed to put the team on their backs. We need more creativity, not less. The ability to beat someone 1v1 is invaluable.[/quote]

There’s a player on our team that her parents give her $10 each time she scores a goal. Hence, she’s a complete ball hog and wouldn’t pass even when her teammates are wide open to score. So some ball hoggers are created and not born. [/quote]

Is this bad at a young age? $10 sounds like she needs a union rep to get more parity with the boys’.

what about a scheme that was $15 for an assist? would that be better?

what makes paying for goals inherently bad? to be honest, isnt that how it works in everything else now?

its about individual development, or is it not?

[Anonymous]

If a parent has to use money to motivate a player, that player is motivated/passionate about money not soccer.

The best players on our team are self-motivated and I can tell they love the sport.

Please show your DC the soccer movie, “Alex and me”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get back on topic PLEASE.

The OP described a U9 team on which kids were already pigeonholed into certain positions. The OPs perspective was that this was because of a legacy of bias - three former rec coaches had favored their kids by letting them play the offensive positions, while making some else play defense. Even after the team had a new coach, it seemed to OP like this pattern continued. The OPs question was whether the parents should speak to the new coach about this.

One of the first couple of responses was yes, the OP should address this with the coach, and if nothing changed shouldtry to find a new team next year, one on which the coach rotates players through different positions.

Pretty much covers it.

A U9 player is pigeonholed into certain positions all the way into September? Crazy.

It is funny how so many forums about youth sports jump from topics like 9 year old playing time to US top tier professional track soccer (or lack there of).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a parent has to use money to motivate a player, that player is motivated/passionate about money not soccer.

The best players on our team are self-motivated and I can tell they love the sport.

Please show your DC the soccer movie, “Alex and me”.

You understand that "Alex and me" is a movie and not a documentary right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get back on topic PLEASE.

The OP described a U9 team on which kids were already pigeonholed into certain positions. The OPs perspective was that this was because of a legacy of bias - three former rec coaches had favored their kids by letting them play the offensive positions, while making some else play defense. Even after the team had a new coach, it seemed to OP like this pattern continued. The OPs question was whether the parents should speak to the new coach about this.

One of the first couple of responses was yes, the OP should address this with the coach, and if nothing changed shouldtry to find a new team next year, one on which the coach rotates players through different positions.

Pretty much covers it.

A U9 player is pigeonholed into certain positions all the way into September? Crazy.

It is funny how so many forums about youth sports jump from topics like 9 year old playing time to US top tier professional track soccer (or lack there of).

And that a parent believes that after the first three travel games that a 8/9 year old kid has ever played that they believe their player is pigeonholed into a position already. Good lord

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a parent has to use money to motivate a player, that player is motivated/passionate about money not soccer.

The best players on our team are self-motivated and I can tell they love the sport.

Please show your DC the soccer movie, “Alex and me”.

That’s not true, rewards motivate behavior, not passion. I want my kid to behave different, i provide a goal with a commensurate reward.

The best players on the team might TOTALLY NOT be self motivated. Some of the worst players could love the sport. Correlation is not causation.