Spring 2017 soccer club tryouts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does Arlington Soccer post tryout results online? So instead of a caring phone call from a coach role model, young boys and girls find out online that their coach moved them down 1 or 2 teams, and then the family just goes the whole summer with no courtesy call from the coach and starts up in the Fall with the new team/coach??? Wondering how it works from those who have already been through this. I know players moving up get LOTS of contact and feedback pre-tryouts about their potential movement, but do the Arlington coaches really blow off the players moved down and never even five the player feedback or explanation?

Or maybe it is just the bad coaches? Or maybe feedback is only for the players and families that bother to follow up and ask for an explamation , although I imagine most aren't apt to bother doing that for obvious reasons. TIA.

They used to call but people complained about it. A LOT. Because they always started with the Red team and worked down. Phone calls take a lot longer than online postings, and coaches have real jobs (some), families (some), and they are often coaching in the evenings and weekends. So, they would start to call, and maybe get through 6 phone calls at a time - given Arlington parent's inclination to talk and talk and talk, rather than to just accept or decline the offer. So, it might take 1-2 days to get through the Red team, then another few days to get through the white, and so on. So, kids were going to school and saying "Larlo was called and made travel soccer" and assumed they didn't make it, or they'd have to wait painfully for a week or even longer - (Memorial Day tornaments would sometimes interrupt the calling cycle). So they moved to an online posting scheme.

Technically, I believe the coaches are supposed to call to warn you if your child is in danger of moving down. But I think with the growth in Arlington and the DA shifting kids around and kids coming from outside at tryouts, potentially moving existing kids down, it doesn't happen as often as it should.

You are also supposed to have a parent meeting within a few weeks of tryouts/offers, so it wouldn't be the whole summer going w/o coach contact.

Thx for the info. Just so you have a comparison, I believe all the points you make above would apply to Loudoun soccer club, which is a bigger Club than even Arlington.

The coaches there still call every single player with their offers. Just providing the information for sake of discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How often do kids who are slow at ages 10-11 speed up later?

I can't answer in general but my older son was chubby and slow at 10-11 and then between 7th/8th grade grew 8 inches, slimmed out and now is markedly faster. He made the team he didn't make the year before when he was chubby and slow. We didn't bother to try out again for the one that told him he would never be a travel soccer player at U9. These kids can change so much when they hit puberty, for better or worse. Puberty happened to be kind to my son.

Yep. My kid was an enormous chubby baby/toddler and a husky (but fast) first/2nd grader.

Theyboegged him as slow his first year of tryouts---mainly by first sight. He excelled greatly and his. Is h kept telling RD and those above they made a placement mistake but to deaf ears.

He is now 11.5 and one of the younger U12s and now dwarfed by the middle schoolers on his team. Now as one of the smaller kids on his current team--he plays whole game and is a clutch player.

The first club left such a sore taste in my mouth. Ironically, all of the kids they praised and said were unbelievable at 8--none of them are on the Ateam 3 years later. Many are in the lowest team going into U13 and their parents are pissed.

We are experiencing the great irony as well. The smug parents that walked around at U9/U10 saying anyone that complained about placement was delusional and their kid was no good. Now at U13, every single one of those players was dropped down, some as far as the bottom team. Guess which parents are running around crying now? Our kids have now moved up and they are crying it's so unfair to their children. It can only be an error if it's their child.

The funny thing about youth soccer, is that kids develop at different paces. A star at U9 isn't necessarily a star at U13, and a dud at U12 can be a star by U16, hence the whole "demotion/promotion" thing. They are placed where they belong according to their development. I know that is not a popular mindset, but it is just how it is, delusions of grandeur notwithstanding.

Except in the instances that the kid was a standout on the team and at tryouts at U9 and placed very poorly. Then, is still a standout down the road and moved up (and Club takes credit for the miraculous development ). No, you f*ckfaces, he was the same younger and you just about destroyed all confidence completely when you kept repeatedly overlooking the kid--even when coaches tried to tell you this and the results were tangible.

Ah yes, the coach is out to get lil johnny. MOVE CLUBS if you aren't happy, there are a million clubs in the area and bitching about it here does nothing. Maybe he was overlooked because he just wasn't a good fit, just because a kid can do a step over does not mean he should be on the team. Wish parents would stop bitching. Skills, fit, and politics are all a part of travel soccer....accept it.

I think we could all do without the politics and ass-kissers.

My policy is to never talk assignments. I sure have seen a lot of horseshit in a few short years. The other two are fine.

Years ago when we lived on the west coast, the club we were at would rotate the coaches to build teams during tryouts. Basically, a coach that was not assigned to the previous year's team would do a full assessment on every player that tried out. They would roster the teams without any knowledge of the previous year's performance or status. In fact, he/she would only know them by number. This could be a coach from another age group or on the other gender's side. Once the roster was built, the assigned coach would take over to train and of course had the ability to reshuffle (but it was pretty spot on in terms of skills so we didn't really see much movement). The tryouts were longer and it wasn't spread across weeks, this was like a 3-4 day tryout in a row. I think they did this up to U12/U13. Their message to the parents was pretty simple, "it is not a perfect solution, but the kids know that they have to earn it every time."

This is nice and all but it is still a bad idea to place this much emphasis on four days versus assessing throughout the year. The only thing that this process eliminates is the "politics" but it does not serve as any better form of tryout simply because a "different set of eyes" is on the kids. To discount progression or regression during the course of a season in favor of how well kids perform over 4 days is still the exact same thing as before. This doesn't reinvent the tryout at all.

The age group head/upper team coach and TD don't see any players except A team all year----how is that fear to all the players in the age group.

This is better. One bad day--okay. They have 4 days to show. Tough shit if they have a bad 4-day show...go down.

That is the way it works in most sports.

Yep. Demoted kid/poor show for 4 days will have an entire year to prove him/herself and move up next year. You know---just like the poor players never being looked at all last year. It's the breaks. Why should that kid be treated any differently?

Because your club should know the kids well enough that 4 days should be the sole determining factor regarding placement for a year. The tryouts should be simply to see where outside talent might fit into the club, not as some coaches first look at kids. That is ludicrous. If the club is well run movement should happen throughout the year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How often do kids who are slow at ages 10-11 speed up later?

I can't answer in general but my older son was chubby and slow at 10-11 and then between 7th/8th grade grew 8 inches, slimmed out and now is markedly faster. He made the team he didn't make the year before when he was chubby and slow. We didn't bother to try out again for the one that told him he would never be a travel soccer player at U9. These kids can change so much when they hit puberty, for better or worse. Puberty happened to be kind to my son.

Yep. My kid was an enormous chubby baby/toddler and a husky (but fast) first/2nd grader.

Theyboegged him as slow his first year of tryouts---mainly by first sight. He excelled greatly and his. Is h kept telling RD and those above they made a placement mistake but to deaf ears.

He is now 11.5 and one of the younger U12s and now dwarfed by the middle schoolers on his team. Now as one of the smaller kids on his current team--he plays whole game and is a clutch player.

The first club left such a sore taste in my mouth. Ironically, all of the kids they praised and said were unbelievable at 8--none of them are on the Ateam 3 years later. Many are in the lowest team going into U13 and their parents are pissed.

We are experiencing the great irony as well. The smug parents that walked around at U9/U10 saying anyone that complained about placement was delusional and their kid was no good. Now at U13, every single one of those players was dropped down, some as far as the bottom team. Guess which parents are running around crying now? Our kids have now moved up and they are crying it's so unfair to their children. It can only be an error if it's their child.

The funny thing about youth soccer, is that kids develop at different paces. A star at U9 isn't necessarily a star at U13, and a dud at U12 can be a star by U16, hence the whole "demotion/promotion" thing. They are placed where they belong according to their development. I know that is not a popular mindset, but it is just how it is, delusions of grandeur notwithstanding.

Except in the instances that the kid was a standout on the team and at tryouts at U9 and placed very poorly. Then, is still a standout down the road and moved up (and Club takes credit for the miraculous development ). No, you f*ckfaces, he was the same younger and you just about destroyed all confidence completely when you kept repeatedly overlooking the kid--even when coaches tried to tell you this and the results were tangible.

Ah yes, the coach is out to get lil johnny. MOVE CLUBS if you aren't happy, there are a million clubs in the area and bitching about it here does nothing. Maybe he was overlooked because he just wasn't a good fit, just because a kid can do a step over does not mean he should be on the team. Wish parents would stop bitching. Skills, fit, and politics are all a part of travel soccer....accept it.

I think we could all do without the politics and ass-kissers.

My policy is to never talk assignments. I sure have seen a lot of horseshit in a few short years. The other two are fine.

Years ago when we lived on the west coast, the club we were at would rotate the coaches to build teams during tryouts. Basically, a coach that was not assigned to the previous year's team would do a full assessment on every player that tried out. They would roster the teams without any knowledge of the previous year's performance or status. In fact, he/she would only know them by number. This could be a coach from another age group or on the other gender's side. Once the roster was built, the assigned coach would take over to train and of course had the ability to reshuffle (but it was pretty spot on in terms of skills so we didn't really see much movement). The tryouts were longer and it wasn't spread across weeks, this was like a 3-4 day tryout in a row. I think they did this up to U12/U13. Their message to the parents was pretty simple, "it is not a perfect solution, but the kids know that they have to earn it every time."

This is nice and all but it is still a bad idea to place this much emphasis on four days versus assessing throughout the year. The only thing that this process eliminates is the "politics" but it does not serve as any better form of tryout simply because a "different set of eyes" is on the kids. To discount progression or regression during the course of a season in favor of how well kids perform over 4 days is still the exact same thing as before. This doesn't reinvent the tryout at all.

The age group head/upper team coach and TD don't see any players except A team all year----how is that fear to all the players in the age group.

This is better. One bad day--okay. They have 4 days to show. Tough shit if they have a bad 4-day show...go down.

That is the way it works in most sports.

Yep. Demoted kid/poor show for 4 days will have an entire year to prove him/herself and move up next year. You know---just like the poor players never being looked at all last year. It's the breaks. Why should that kid be treated any differently?

Because your club should know the kids well enough that 4 days should be the sole determining factor regarding placement for a year. The tryouts should be simply to see where outside talent might fit into the club, not as some coaches first look at kids. That is ludicrous. If the club is well run movement should happen throughout the year.

you're accurate about the feedback/movement throughout the year but you're not taking into account any new talent that shows up at try-outs.

[Anonymous]

I can vouch that Arlington soccer does call if your kid gets cut. Unfortunately I know this because I got that call earlier today. I'm not excited to break the news to my kid, and I'm really not excited about having to play two more games with all the kids who got in, when she didn't. ugh. I appreciated the call, but man, I just wanted to get off the phone and sulk!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How often do kids who are slow at ages 10-11 speed up later?

I can't answer in general but my older son was chubby and slow at 10-11 and then between 7th/8th grade grew 8 inches, slimmed out and now is markedly faster. He made the team he didn't make the year before when he was chubby and slow. We didn't bother to try out again for the one that told him he would never be a travel soccer player at U9. These kids can change so much when they hit puberty, for better or worse. Puberty happened to be kind to my son.

Yep. My kid was an enormous chubby baby/toddler and a husky (but fast) first/2nd grader.

Theyboegged him as slow his first year of tryouts---mainly by first sight. He excelled greatly and his. Is h kept telling RD and those above they made a placement mistake but to deaf ears.

He is now 11.5 and one of the younger U12s and now dwarfed by the middle schoolers on his team. Now as one of the smaller kids on his current team--he plays whole game and is a clutch player.

The first club left such a sore taste in my mouth. Ironically, all of the kids they praised and said were unbelievable at 8--none of them are on the Ateam 3 years later. Many are in the lowest team going into U13 and their parents are pissed.

We are experiencing the great irony as well. The smug parents that walked around at U9/U10 saying anyone that complained about placement was delusional and their kid was no good. Now at U13, every single one of those players was dropped down, some as far as the bottom team. Guess which parents are running around crying now? Our kids have now moved up and they are crying it's so unfair to their children. It can only be an error if it's their child.

The funny thing about youth soccer, is that kids develop at different paces. A star at U9 isn't necessarily a star at U13, and a dud at U12 can be a star by U16, hence the whole "demotion/promotion" thing. They are placed where they belong according to their development. I know that is not a popular mindset, but it is just how it is, delusions of grandeur notwithstanding.

Except in the instances that the kid was a standout on the team and at tryouts at U9 and placed very poorly. Then, is still a standout down the road and moved up (and Club takes credit for the miraculous development ). No, you f*ckfaces, he was the same younger and you just about destroyed all confidence completely when you kept repeatedly overlooking the kid--even when coaches tried to tell you this and the results were tangible.

Ah yes, the coach is out to get lil johnny. MOVE CLUBS if you aren't happy, there are a million clubs in the area and bitching about it here does nothing. Maybe he was overlooked because he just wasn't a good fit, just because a kid can do a step over does not mean he should be on the team. Wish parents would stop bitching. Skills, fit, and politics are all a part of travel soccer....accept it.

I think we could all do without the politics and ass-kissers.

My policy is to never talk assignments. I sure have seen a lot of horseshit in a few short years. The other two are fine.

Years ago when we lived on the west coast, the club we were at would rotate the coaches to build teams during tryouts. Basically, a coach that was not assigned to the previous year's team would do a full assessment on every player that tried out. They would roster the teams without any knowledge of the previous year's performance or status. In fact, he/she would only know them by number. This could be a coach from another age group or on the other gender's side. Once the roster was built, the assigned coach would take over to train and of course had the ability to reshuffle (but it was pretty spot on in terms of skills so we didn't really see much movement). The tryouts were longer and it wasn't spread across weeks, this was like a 3-4 day tryout in a row. I think they did this up to U12/U13. Their message to the parents was pretty simple, "it is not a perfect solution, but the kids know that they have to earn it every time."

This is nice and all but it is still a bad idea to place this much emphasis on four days versus assessing throughout the year. The only thing that this process eliminates is the "politics" but it does not serve as any better form of tryout simply because a "different set of eyes" is on the kids. To discount progression or regression during the course of a season in favor of how well kids perform over 4 days is still the exact same thing as before. This doesn't reinvent the tryout at all.

The age group head/upper team coach and TD don't see any players except A team all year----how is that fear to all the players in the age group.

This is better. One bad day--okay. They have 4 days to show. Tough shit if they have a bad 4-day show...go down.

That is the way it works in most sports.

Yep. Demoted kid/poor show for 4 days will have an entire year to prove him/herself and move up next year. You know---just like the poor players never being looked at all last year. It's the breaks. Why should that kid be treated any differently?

Because your club should know the kids well enough that 4 days should be the sole determining factor regarding placement for a year. The tryouts should be simply to see where outside talent might fit into the club, not as some coaches first look at kids. That is ludicrous. If the club is well run movement should happen throughout the year.

you're accurate about the feedback/movement throughout the year but you're not taking into account any new talent that shows up at try-outs.

No, not true, in fact I actually typed the bolded statement above. Outside talent is to be compared to in house talent for placement. Tryouts should not be used to evaluate inhouse kids. If you don't already know what you have as far as players go after a year then you are doing it wrong.

[Anonymous]

^^how are they evaluating them when they don't go to any of the games of below A/B players. They don't watch other kids at practice. They don't give any weight to lower team coaches. TDs havent seen them.

So, nope, in many clubs they aren't evaluating most kids at all all year--definitely no comparisons against existing upper level.

We had one player move up mid-year that was markedly worse than everyone on the team and team below. Blatantly obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can vouch that Arlington soccer does call if your kid gets cut. Unfortunately I know this because I got that call earlier today. I'm not excited to break the news to my kid, and I'm really not excited about having to play two more games with all the kids who got in, when she didn't. ugh. I appreciated the call, but man, I just wanted to get off the phone and sulk!

Was she moved to a lower team from the one she was on, or cut as in left with no team? Tough process to go through, we have been through it as well. At least your coach didn't let you find out from the web. Credit to him/her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They used to call but people complained about it. A LOT. Because they always started with the Red team and worked down. Phone calls take a lot longer than online postings, and coaches have real jobs (some), families (some), and they are often coaching in the evenings and weekends. So, they would start to call, and maybe get through 6 phone calls at a time - given Arlington parent's inclination to talk and talk and talk, rather than to just accept or decline the offer. So, it might take 1-2 days to get through the Red team, then another few days to get through the white, and so on. So, kids were going to school and saying "Larlo was called and made travel soccer" and assumed they didn't make it, or they'd have to wait painfully for a week or even longer - (Memorial Day tornaments would sometimes interrupt the calling cycle). So they moved to an online posting scheme.

Technically, I believe the coaches are supposed to call to warn you if your child is in danger of moving down. But I think with the growth in Arlington and the DA shifting kids around and kids coming from outside at tryouts, potentially moving existing kids down, it doesn't happen as often as it should.

You are also supposed to have a parent meeting within a few weeks of tryouts/offers, so it wouldn't be the whole summer going w/o coach contact.

Thx for the info. Just so you have a comparison, I believe all the points you make above would apply to Loudoun soccer club, which is a bigger Club than even Arlington.

The coaches there still call every single player with their offers. Just providing the information for sake of discussion.

Fair enough. Also, just for sake of discussion, I was giving out information, not agreeing or disagreeing with it.

Arl did it that way before the old TD left and went to Loudoun. That TD is back, obviously (although not as TD) and I heard that for his particular age group, while he didn't call all of the players individually, he did send emails prior to them posting it online and he also did call a few kids who were "demoted" or heard later than others, or whatever. At least that was what I heard from some parents in that group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can vouch that Arlington soccer does call if your kid gets cut. Unfortunately I know this because I got that call earlier today. I'm not excited to break the news to my kid, and I'm really not excited about having to play two more games with all the kids who got in, when she didn't. ugh. I appreciated the call, but man, I just wanted to get off the phone and sulk!

Hang in there. I had the same thing happen and when I told her she was relieved, she told us she enjoyed it but in the end she didn't. It also opened doors for other things she wanted to do (volleyball) and she thrived in that and made her club team in that and played 4 years varsity and plays in college, one doors closes another opens. If she had made that team she would have been the last one off the bench until she aged out.

I really appreciate the coach doing what he is paid to do, make the tough decisions and it changed her life-for the better and no more cold outdoor games

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can vouch that Arlington soccer does call if your kid gets cut. Unfortunately I know this because I got that call earlier today. I'm not excited to break the news to my kid, and I'm really not excited about having to play two more games with all the kids who got in, when she didn't. ugh. I appreciated the call, but man, I just wanted to get off the phone and sulk!

Hang in there. I had the same thing happen and when I told her she was relieved, she told us she enjoyed it but in the end she didn't. It also opened doors for other things she wanted to do (volleyball) and she thrived in that and made her club team in that and played 4 years varsity and plays in college, one doors closes another opens. If she had made that team she would have been the last one off the bench until she aged out.

I really appreciate the coach doing what he is paid to do, make the tough decisions and it changed her life-for the better and no more cold outdoor games

This is one of the many great life-lessons from soccer: handling disappointment and moving on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How often do kids who are slow at ages 10-11 speed up later?

I can't answer in general but my older son was chubby and slow at 10-11 and then between 7th/8th grade grew 8 inches, slimmed out and now is markedly faster. He made the team he didn't make the year before when he was chubby and slow. We didn't bother to try out again for the one that told him he would never be a travel soccer player at U9. These kids can change so much when they hit puberty, for better or worse. Puberty happened to be kind to my son.

Yep. My kid was an enormous chubby baby/toddler and a husky (but fast) first/2nd grader.

Theyboegged him as slow his first year of tryouts---mainly by first sight. He excelled greatly and his. Is h kept telling RD and those above they made a placement mistake but to deaf ears.

He is now 11.5 and one of the younger U12s and now dwarfed by the middle schoolers on his team. Now as one of the smaller kids on his current team--he plays whole game and is a clutch player.

The first club left such a sore taste in my mouth. Ironically, all of the kids they praised and said were unbelievable at 8--none of them are on the Ateam 3 years later. Many are in the lowest team going into U13 and their parents are pissed.

We are experiencing the great irony as well. The smug parents that walked around at U9/U10 saying anyone that complained about placement was delusional and their kid was no good. Now at U13, every single one of those players was dropped down, some as far as the bottom team. Guess which parents are running around crying now? Our kids have now moved up and they are crying it's so unfair to their children. It can only be an error if it's their child.

The funny thing about youth soccer, is that kids develop at different paces. A star at U9 isn't necessarily a star at U13, and a dud at U12 can be a star by U16, hence the whole "demotion/promotion" thing. They are placed where they belong according to their development. I know that is not a popular mindset, but it is just how it is, delusions of grandeur notwithstanding.

Except in the instances that the kid was a standout on the team and at tryouts at U9 and placed very poorly. Then, is still a standout down the road and moved up (and Club takes credit for the miraculous development ). No, you f*ckfaces, he was the same younger and you just about destroyed all confidence completely when you kept repeatedly overlooking the kid--even when coaches tried to tell you this and the results were tangible.

Ah yes, the coach is out to get lil johnny. MOVE CLUBS if you aren't happy, there are a million clubs in the area and bitching about it here does nothing. Maybe he was overlooked because he just wasn't a good fit, just because a kid can do a step over does not mean he should be on the team. Wish parents would stop bitching. Skills, fit, and politics are all a part of travel soccer....accept it.

I think we could all do without the politics and ass-kissers.

My policy is to never talk assignments. I sure have seen a lot of horseshit in a few short years. The other two are fine.

Years ago when we lived on the west coast, the club we were at would rotate the coaches to build teams during tryouts. Basically, a coach that was not assigned to the previous year's team would do a full assessment on every player that tried out. They would roster the teams without any knowledge of the previous year's performance or status. In fact, he/she would only know them by number. This could be a coach from another age group or on the other gender's side. Once the roster was built, the assigned coach would take over to train and of course had the ability to reshuffle (but it was pretty spot on in terms of skills so we didn't really see much movement). The tryouts were longer and it wasn't spread across weeks, this was like a 3-4 day tryout in a row. I think they did this up to U12/U13. Their message to the parents was pretty simple, "it is not a perfect solution, but the kids know that they have to earn it every time."

This is nice and all but it is still a bad idea to place this much emphasis on four days versus assessing throughout the year. The only thing that this process eliminates is the "politics" but it does not serve as any better form of tryout simply because a "different set of eyes" is on the kids. To discount progression or regression during the course of a season in favor of how well kids perform over 4 days is still the exact same thing as before. This doesn't reinvent the tryout at all.

The age group head/upper team coach and TD don't see any players except A team all year----how is that fear to all the players in the age group.

This is better. One bad day--okay. They have 4 days to show. Tough shit if they have a bad 4-day show...go down.

That is the way it works in most sports.

Yep. Demoted kid/poor show for 4 days will have an entire year to prove him/herself and move up next year. You know---just like the poor players never being looked at all last year. It's the breaks. Why should that kid be treated any differently?

Because your club should know the kids well enough that 4 days should be the sole determining factor regarding placement for a year. The tryouts should be simply to see where outside talent might fit into the club, not as some coaches first look at kids. That is ludicrous. If the club is well run movement should happen throughout the year.

you're accurate about the feedback/movement throughout the year but you're not taking into account any new talent that shows up at try-outs.

No, not true, in fact I actually typed the bolded statement above. Outside talent is to be compared to in house talent for placement. Tryouts should not be used to evaluate inhouse kids. If you don't already know what you have as far as players go after a year then you are doing it wrong.

gotcha, agree, coaches should know where current inhouse talent stands.

[Anonymous]

15:06 here - cut completely. I'm sad for her; maybe she'll be ok with not having to practice 3 days a week. I know she'd like a bit more free time than she has now. I just took the club and team fees out of my fall budget, and that part was awesome, at least.

Coach (new guy) seemed like a nice guy - made me wish we got the chance to play for him!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:15:06 here - cut completely. I'm sad for her; maybe she'll be ok with not having to practice 3 days a week. I know she'd like a bit more free time than she has now. I just took the club and team fees out of my fall budget, and that part was awesome, at least.

Coach (new guy) seemed like a nice guy - made me wish we got the chance to play for him!

I'm sorry to hear this. You could move to PAC, they are still holding try-outs this week and don't cut unless they can't fit more kids on a team. My son didn't make it into Arlington or McLean and really likes PAC. There are quite a few Arlington kids on it.

[Anonymous]

sorry to hear, PP - but she can still play soccer! Will just take some legwork on your part, many roster spots still open, teams are still practicing for the next couple of weeks. If she wants to play, get in touch with some other coaches, take her around to some practices, and talk with them afterwards. They can steer you in the direction of your next step - maybe a good summer camp and she can roster somewhere in fall, maybe she can find another team right away

Kids move away over summer, etc - it takes some extra work on your part, but definitely possible!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:15:06 here - cut completely. I'm sad for her; maybe she'll be ok with not having to practice 3 days a week. I know she'd like a bit more free time than she has now. I just took the club and team fees out of my fall budget, and that part was awesome, at least.

Coach (new guy) seemed like a nice guy - made me wish we got the chance to play for him!

Age 13 or older? Good time to transition to another sport or activity. Volleyball and softball are really just getting started at that age. Could catch up pretty fast in swimming. Twelve and younger? If still liking soccer find a team where she can shine a bit and then find a high school girl player willing to work with her on skills and fitness. We did that with my daughter when she was cut at u11. She just graduated from college where she played 4 years finishing as team MVP her senior year.