Roster size survey

[Anonymous]

Now that U11-12 games will be 9 v 9, how many kids are clubs putting on these teams next year?

[Anonymous]

I believe I read on the CCL rules at one point that the recommended roster size was 14 at that age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now that U11-12 games will be 9 v 9, how many kids are clubs putting on these teams next year?

14 is the max but 12-13 is ideal.

[Anonymous]

When did it become 9v9, is that new this year? We have 11 on our U11 team.

[Anonymous]

We currently have 12 on the team for next year, I'm hoping they add one or two more over the summer.

[Anonymous]

we have 13

[Anonymous]

We have 11 for 9v9, will maybe add 1 for 12 max.

[Anonymous]

Two kids on the bench is awesome

[Anonymous]

We never max out rosters. You would want 2-3 on the bench and have the ability to play a few kids up from the lower teams to evaluate potential adds moving forward. With that being said, I've seen other teams max out rosters and they are able to keep fresh legs on the field. I don't agree with that method and would probably change clubs if that were to happen, because at the younger ages you want kids on the field, not the bench as much as possible. The extra 2 players on the field makes the ball move really fast since it's a crowded field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Two kids on the bench is awesome

I also like small rosters.

Kids want to play the whole game. They get in better shape that way.

I don't care if we are gassed. It's ultimately better for them.

I see these big clubs that have an entire shift change and cringe. The kids also never really get into their momentum before they are all pulled out.

We check player availability so we can always call a kid from another team for game if we will be low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two kids on the bench is awesome

I also like small rosters.

Kids want to play the whole game. They get in better shape that way.

I don't care if we are gassed. It's ultimately better for them.

I see these big clubs that have an entire shift change and cringe. The kids also never really get into their momentum before they are all pulled out.

We check player availability so we can always call a kid from another team for game if we will be low.

Stoddert now has 16

[Anonymous]

Our U12 roster has 13. Perfect size in my opinion...no more...I'd be OK with 12 too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two kids on the bench is awesome

I also like small rosters.

Kids want to play the whole game. They get in better shape that way.

I don't care if we are gassed. It's ultimately better for them.

I see these big clubs that have an entire shift change and cringe. The kids also never really get into their momentum before they are all pulled out.

We check player availability so we can always call a kid from another team for game if we will be low.

Stoddert now has 16

That is way too big. How is a kid ever going to get effective touches on the ball.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Stoddert now has 16

That is way too big. How is a kid ever going to get effective touches on the ball.

+1. That's horrible, and would be a reason not to stay with Stoddert (from a former Stoddert parent). It was bad before when it was 14 for 8v8, which basically meant that people played at most 1/2, or less if others played more. (In my DD's scenario it tended to mean three defenders + GK played nearly full game, leaving the other 4 positions spread across 10 players.)

The only excuse for 16 players on a 9v9 team is if there are injuries. But you can't count on those. IMO, 4 subs (13 on roster) is the most a team should need, to give everyone the opportunity to play a good portion of each game

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Stoddert now has 16

That is way too big. How is a kid ever going to get effective touches on the ball.

+1. That's horrible, and would be a reason not to stay with Stoddert (from a former Stoddert parent). It was bad before when it was 14 for 8v8, which basically meant that people played at most 1/2, or less if others played more. (In my DD's scenario it tended to mean three defenders + GK played nearly full game, leaving the other 4 positions spread across 10 players.)

The only excuse for 16 players on a 9v9 team is if there are injuries. But you can't count on those. IMO, 4 subs (13 on roster) is the most a team should need, to give everyone the opportunity to play a good portion of each game

At U12 I personally prefer 13/14 but would be ok with 15 if the last player would benefit from being on a team with better players. I think the training is actually more important than the game and it's where they are going to improve the most. Ideally there would be the opportunity to guest play on other teams. At U11 12/13 would be ideal. I would think that most clubs would prefer to keep talented players vs seeing them go. If it's just to bring more $ then it's different.