Most of you have no idea the REAL goal of travel soccer

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all these kids stayed in rec, it wouldn't be an issue. Has totally become keeping up with the Joneses. Bethesda and Potomac must be laughing all the way to the bank. They're becoming the Bullis of soccer leagues - accepted as long as you payyyyyyy!!

Wrong. In rec everyone gets equal playing time in a limited number of games. Truly talented players run circles around less skilled players and it isn't fun for anyone.

Why did people care so much what others do? If you want your kid to stay in rec, keep them in rec. Problem solved.

Not PP but if most kids stay in Rec, not many kids are able to just run circles around other players. There is also a way called "play-up" to fix it if the kid is very good. In regards to the number of games, if you check some teams in CCL/VPL, there were teams that played less 8 games a season. Not that "limited" compared to Rec. And how many those CCL/VPL players can easily run circles when dropped in a random rec team?

I don't know what clubs your DC plays for but yes our travel players will run circles around rec teams even playing up. I've seen it with my own eyes. It sucks for all kids involved.

Regarding games our travel teams go to several tournaments and play friendlies off season with other travel clubs. That never happened when DC played rec.

Wait, our travel team played 16 games last season (including the 2 tournaments) and had about 33 practices, compared to rec that had 8 games and about 8 practices. How is that comparable? We have 2 C team travel players on our rec team and yes they run circles around everyone. Which they like but I kind of wish it wasn't allowed. If everyone were on rec, not even including the top team type players, then the bottom half of talent in rec now would be miserable and would never get passed the ball.

Yeah this is exactly the point.
Serious, good players need the game and practice schedule commitment that travel offers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all these kids stayed in rec, it wouldn't be an issue. Has totally become keeping up with the Joneses. Bethesda and Potomac must be laughing all the way to the bank. They're becoming the Bullis of soccer leagues - accepted as long as you payyyyyyy!!

Wrong. In rec everyone gets equal playing time in a limited number of games. Truly talented players run circles around less skilled players and it isn't fun for anyone.

Why did people care so much what others do? If you want your kid to stay in rec, keep them in rec. Problem solved.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as my kid is one of the talented ones. But when all the good players leave, there's no impetus for any of them to stay (and I'm not talking about the 5 - if that - kids in MSI who may eventually go pro). If travel only accepted the really good kids, then maybe rec would remain somewhat competitive. But they accept everyone now, so it is what it is.

In my experience most may get on the team but only the exceptional players get on top team. Even the kids on the lower skilled travel team benefit from getting professional instruction rather than the parent-coach only approach of rec.

Then something should exist that’s in between. It’s absurd to have middling players paying these ridiculous fees when they have no chance of being on the top team

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all these kids stayed in rec, it wouldn't be an issue. Has totally become keeping up with the Joneses. Bethesda and Potomac must be laughing all the way to the bank. They're becoming the Bullis of soccer leagues - accepted as long as you payyyyyyy!!

Wrong. In rec everyone gets equal playing time in a limited number of games. Truly talented players run circles around less skilled players and it isn't fun for anyone.

Why did people care so much what others do? If you want your kid to stay in rec, keep them in rec. Problem solved.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as my kid is one of the talented ones. But when all the good players leave, there's no impetus for any of them to stay (and I'm not talking about the 5 - if that - kids in MSI who may eventually go pro). If travel only accepted the really good kids, then maybe rec would remain somewhat competitive. But they accept everyone now, so it is what it is.

In my experience most may get on the team but only the exceptional players get on top team. Even the kids on the lower skilled travel team benefit from getting professional instruction rather than the parent-coach only approach of rec.

Then something should exist that’s in between. It’s absurd to have middling players paying these ridiculous fees when they have no chance of being on the top team

What parents spend their money really isn't your concern. They could burn the $3k in a barn fire and it wouldn't be your business.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all these kids stayed in rec, it wouldn't be an issue. Has totally become keeping up with the Joneses. Bethesda and Potomac must be laughing all the way to the bank. They're becoming the Bullis of soccer leagues - accepted as long as you payyyyyyy!!

Wrong. In rec everyone gets equal playing time in a limited number of games. Truly talented players run circles around less skilled players and it isn't fun for anyone.

Why did people care so much what others do? If you want your kid to stay in rec, keep them in rec. Problem solved.

Not PP but if most kids stay in Rec, not many kids are able to just run circles around other players. There is also a way called "play-up" to fix it if the kid is very good. In regards to the number of games, if you check some teams in CCL/VPL, there were teams that played less 8 games a season. Not that "limited" compared to Rec. And how many those CCL/VPL players can easily run circles when dropped in a random rec team?

I don't know what clubs your DC plays for but yes our travel players will run circles around rec teams even playing up. I've seen it with my own eyes. It sucks for all kids involved.

Regarding games our travel teams go to several tournaments and play friendlies off season with other travel clubs. That never happened when DC played rec.

Wait, our travel team played 16 games last season (including the 2 tournaments) and had about 33 practices, compared to rec that had 8 games and about 8 practices. How is that comparable? We have 2 C team travel players on our rec team and yes they run circles around everyone. Which they like but I kind of wish it wasn't allowed. If everyone were on rec, not even including the top team type players, then the bottom half of talent in rec now would be miserable and would never get passed the ball.

Yeah this is exactly the point.
Serious, good players need the game and practice schedule commitment that travel offers.

Kids, doesn’t matter what age or level, should be playing with friends or family. Playing for fun and on their own time is what separates real players from the pack.

[Anonymous]

^ politics does a pretty good job of making that separation at a very young age. That’s why no stars have emerged this area in the last 20-30 years or so. Shit in, shit out. Some of the player quality on so-called “elite” teams is pretty shameful. But, they invest in crap early and freeze out the masses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ politics does a pretty good job of making that separation at a very young age. That’s why no stars have emerged this area in the last 20-30 years or so. Shit in, shit out. Some of the player quality on so-called “elite” teams is pretty shameful. But, they invest in crap early and freeze out the masses.

Wow, this was the start of the bitterness train last night? We’re sorry your kid isn’t where you think they should be. No reason to trash everyone else as a result. There are people and drugs out there that can help you, if you give them a chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If all these kids stayed in rec, it wouldn't be an issue. Has totally become keeping up with the Joneses. Bethesda and Potomac must be laughing all the way to the bank. They're becoming the Bullis of soccer leagues - accepted as long as you payyyyyyy!!

Wrong. In rec everyone gets equal playing time in a limited number of games. Truly talented players run circles around less skilled players and it isn't fun for anyone.

Why did people care so much what others do? If you want your kid to stay in rec, keep them in rec. Problem solved.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as my kid is one of the talented ones. But when all the good players leave, there's no impetus for any of them to stay (and I'm not talking about the 5 - if that - kids in MSI who may eventually go pro). If travel only accepted the really good kids, then maybe rec would remain somewhat competitive. But they accept everyone now, so it is what it is.

In my experience most may get on the team but only the exceptional players get on top team. Even the kids on the lower skilled travel team benefit from getting professional instruction rather than the parent-coach only approach of rec.

Then something should exist that’s in between. It’s absurd to have middling players paying these ridiculous fees when they have no chance of being on the top team

What parents spend their money really isn't your concern. They could burn the $3k in a barn fire and it wouldn't be your business.

This. DD is not anywhere near the top team nor does she want to be. She likes the extra practices and games and has improved a lot since she left rec. She’s happy being on one of the teams with lower pressure players and parents. This is the inbetween and many in our area do not think anything of paying 3k for a yearly activity.

[Anonymous]

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ politics does a pretty good job of making that separation at a very young age. That’s why no stars have emerged this area in the last 20-30 years or so. Shit in, shit out. Some of the player quality on so-called “elite” teams is pretty shameful. But, they invest in crap early and freeze out the masses.

What are they doing better in California and Texas?

Or Iceland?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ politics does a pretty good job of making that separation at a very young age. That’s why no stars have emerged this area in the last 20-30 years or so. Shit in, shit out. Some of the player quality on so-called “elite” teams is pretty shameful. But, they invest in crap early and freeze out the masses.

What are they doing better in California and Texas?

Or Iceland?

Iceland has an open-door policy and tons of B-license coaches, so you can basically walk into a club and get decent training.

Might not explain everything, but it helps.

[Anonymous]

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ politics does a pretty good job of making that separation at a very young age. That’s why no stars have emerged this area in the last 20-30 years or so. Shit in, shit out. Some of the player quality on so-called “elite” teams is pretty shameful. But, they invest in crap early and freeze out the masses.

What are they doing better in California and Texas?

Or Iceland?

Iceland has an open-door policy and tons of B-license coaches, so you can basically walk into a club and get decent training.

Might not explain everything, but it helps.

Weird -- not sure why I wasn't signed in for that post. It was me.

They develop everyone as well. They don’t put kids in a “trash heap category” at U9, etc. They invest and know development is unpredictable. Without a large player pool, they don’t push anyone away or anoint a kid at 9/10 as a “star” like they do around here. Like many other countries, they know a kid at 8 can turn out very differently at 17/18.

[Anonymous]

Get real. The private schools, travel soccer, college placements have more to do with social groups than quality education. They just want to be sure their child is among the same or higher class of people , socioeconomically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ politics does a pretty good job of making that separation at a very young age. That’s why no stars have emerged this area in the last 20-30 years or so. Shit in, shit out. Some of the player quality on so-called “elite” teams is pretty shameful. But, they invest in crap early and freeze out the masses.

What are they doing better in California and Texas?

Or Iceland?

Iceland has an open-door policy and tons of B-license coaches, so you can basically walk into a club and get decent training.

Might not explain everything, but it helps.

Weird -- not sure why I wasn't signed in for that post. It was me.

They develop everyone as well. They don’t put kids in a “trash heap category” at U9, etc. They invest and know development is unpredictable. Without a large player pool, they don’t push anyone away or anoint a kid at 9/10 as a “star” like they do around here. Like many other countries, they know a kid at 8 can turn out very differently at 17/18.

You folks really can’t figure out why TX, CA, and Iceland (kinda laughed at this one) are doing better than NOVA at soccer? Two concepts: weather & demographics (TX and CA) and lack of alternatives (Iceland).

[Anonymous]

#soccergoals

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ politics does a pretty good job of making that separation at a very young age. That’s why no stars have emerged this area in the last 20-30 years or so. Shit in, shit out. Some of the player quality on so-called “elite” teams is pretty shameful. But, they invest in crap early and freeze out the masses.

What are they doing better in California and Texas?

Or Iceland?

Iceland has an open-door policy and tons of B-license coaches, so you can basically walk into a club and get decent training.

Might not explain everything, but it helps.

Weird -- not sure why I wasn't signed in for that post. It was me.

They develop everyone as well. They don’t put kids in a “trash heap category” at U9, etc. They invest and know development is unpredictable. Without a large player pool, they don’t push anyone away or anoint a kid at 9/10 as a “star” like they do around here. Like many other countries, they know a kid at 8 can turn out very differently at 17/18.

You folks really can’t figure out why TX, CA, and Iceland (kinda laughed at this one) are doing better than NOVA at soccer? Two concepts: weather & demographics (TX and CA) and lack of alternatives (Iceland).

Munich, Amsterdam, Manchester—you been in their weather before? Demographics? Pretty homogenous. Your theory doesn’t hold.

[Anonymous]

Someone asked why this thread keeps going. Here's your answer:

https://www.starsandstripesfc.com/usmnt-news/2019/2/20/18232519/usa-usmnt-ussf-us-soccer-financial-disclosure-jurgen-klinsmann-bruce-arena

We pay to develop our kids. We pay a lot. And US Soccer sits on a >$100 million investment portfolio and does .... nothing.