U13 - Arlington or Alexandria?

[Anonymous]

I would be careful about going to Arlington unless you are on the top team and thus considered important to Arlington. If you aren't, then you are merely a moneymaker for the club. The club prefers shiny new pennies from outside their club vs actually developing the kids on the lower teams within its own system. I've been extremely disappointed in the development of my son this past year and am looking elsewhere for next year. Just a warning if you aren't on the top team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would be careful about going to Arlington unless you are on the top team and thus considered important to Arlington. If you aren't, then you are merely a moneymaker for the club. The club prefers shiny new pennies from outside their club vs actually developing the kids on the lower teams within its own system. I've been extremely disappointed in the development of my son this past year and am looking elsewhere for next year. Just a warning if you aren't on the top team.

This is every club. Arlington is no different. My DS has been struggling a bit because of size of the players. It doesn't mean that he's not learning, it's just the game has changed and he has not. Development is not linear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be careful about going to Arlington unless you are on the top team and thus considered important to Arlington. If you aren't, then you are merely a moneymaker for the club. The club prefers shiny new pennies from outside their club vs actually developing the kids on the lower teams within its own system. I've been extremely disappointed in the development of my son this past year and am looking elsewhere for next year. Just a warning if you aren't on the top team.

This is every club. Arlington is no different. My DS has been struggling a bit because of size of the players. It doesn't mean that he's not learning, it's just the game has changed and he has not. Development is not linear.

Don’t tell that to winning is everything poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would be careful about going to Arlington unless you are on the top team and thus considered important to Arlington. If you aren't, then you are merely a moneymaker for the club. The club prefers shiny new pennies from outside their club vs actually developing the kids on the lower teams within its own system. I've been extremely disappointed in the development of my son this past year and am looking elsewhere for next year. Just a warning if you aren't on the top team.

I think this is unfortunately, but perhaps unavoidably, an issue everywhere. Development depends on the coach and the top teams get the best coaches. To be fair, some of the red team coaches at Arlington are also good - but I agree they are not as good as the Academy coaches. But show me the club that assigns its best coaches to its second teams....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one third of one practice per week

When you say "scrimmages," are you talking about the short scrimmages that take place at the end of an ENTIRE practice? So you're focusing on a short end-of-practice scrimmage at ONE of the weekly practices? WTF?

So strange to focus on that to the exclusion of the entire practice (and just ONE practice per week you said). I'm pretty sure these girls must be more than holding their own this practice for it to continue. Do you they create a higher competitive level during the entire practice? If so, that is good for all the players.

Like I said, the girls must be very good. Do you really think they would be getting the same development opportunity at the same age group for girls? Doubt it.

Guests get invited all the time to practices and games. I don't see any problem with that (or scholarships for that matter). It seems your beef is that you want to equate a player's end-of-practice "scrimmage" playing time to the amount you paid. Good luck with that! Not sure how your mention of "girls" is even relevant?

I'm not the poster whose kid is sitting out - but it seemed to me he was saying that his kid is missing half an hour a week of practice. If that is truly the case that is over 10% of his weekly practice time - and it is not right that he is loisng that time which has been paid for in order to benefit kids from a different team. I have no problem with some girls practising with the boys - but they really shouldn't be adding so many other kids (irrespective of whether they are girls or boys, or come from inside or outside the club) that they are having to sit existing team members on the sidelines for significant amounts of time each week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one third of one practice per week

When you say "scrimmages," are you talking about the short scrimmages that take place at the end of an ENTIRE practice? So you're focusing on a short end-of-practice scrimmage at ONE of the weekly practices? WTF?

So strange to focus on that to the exclusion of the entire practice (and just ONE practice per week you said). I'm pretty sure these girls must be more than holding their own this practice for it to continue. Do you they create a higher competitive level during the entire practice? If so, that is good for all the players.

Like I said, the girls must be very good. Do you really think they would be getting the same development opportunity at the same age group for girls? Doubt it.

Guests get invited all the time to practices and games. I don't see any problem with that (or scholarships for that matter). It seems your beef is that you want to equate a player's end-of-practice "scrimmage" playing time to the amount you paid. Good luck with that! Not sure how your mention of "girls" is even relevant?

I'm not the poster whose kid is sitting out - but it seemed to me he was saying that his kid is missing half an hour a week of practice. If that is truly the case that is over 10% of his weekly practice time - and it is not right that he is loisng that time which has been paid for in order to benefit kids from a different team. I have no problem with some girls practising with the boys - but they really shouldn't be adding so many other kids (irrespective of whether they are girls or boys, or come from inside or outside the club) that they are having to sit existing team members on the sidelines for significant amounts of time each week.

He’s not sitting out the whole time, and he would not be playing the whole time. So it is not losing 10 percent of practice time. Nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is one third of one practice per week

When you say "scrimmages," are you talking about the short scrimmages that take place at the end of an ENTIRE practice? So you're focusing on a short end-of-practice scrimmage at ONE of the weekly practices? WTF?

So strange to focus on that to the exclusion of the entire practice (and just ONE practice per week you said). I'm pretty sure these girls must be more than holding their own this practice for it to continue. Do you they create a higher competitive level during the entire practice? If so, that is good for all the players.

Like I said, the girls must be very good. Do you really think they would be getting the same development opportunity at the same age group for girls? Doubt it.

Guests get invited all the time to practices and games. I don't see any problem with that (or scholarships for that matter). It seems your beef is that you want to equate a player's end-of-practice "scrimmage" playing time to the amount you paid. Good luck with that! Not sure how your mention of "girls" is even relevant?

I'm not the poster whose kid is sitting out - but it seemed to me he was saying that his kid is missing half an hour a week of practice. If that is truly the case that is over 10% of his weekly practice time - and it is not right that he is loisng that time which has been paid for in order to benefit kids from a different team. I have no problem with some girls practising with the boys - but they really shouldn't be adding so many other kids (irrespective of whether they are girls or boys, or come from inside or outside the club) that they are having to sit existing team members on the sidelines for significant amounts of time each week.

He’s not sitting out the whole time, and he would not be playing the whole time. So it is not losing 10 percent of practice time. Nonsense.

I'm guessing he will comment directly - but when he said he's missing a third of one practice - I'm interpreting that as missing half an hour total per week.

[Anonymous]

I'm not the poster whose kid is sitting out - but it seemed to me he was saying that his kid is missing half an hour a week of practice. If that is truly the case that is over 10% of his weekly practice time - and it is not right that he is loisng that time which has been paid for in order to benefit kids from a different team. I have no problem with some girls practising with the boys - but they really shouldn't be adding so many other kids (irrespective of whether they are girls or boys, or come from inside or outside the club) that they are having to sit existing team members on the sidelines for significant amounts of time each week.


He’s not sitting out the whole time, and he would not be playing the whole time. So it is not losing 10 percent of practice time. Nonsense.


I'm guessing he will comment directly - but when he said he's missing a third of one practice - I'm interpreting that as missing half an hour total per week.

He's not playing in the scrimmage for that practice at all many times, so yes. I am paying for the practice, and he is not participating meaningfully. The girls are definitely very strong players, and that is great, but they have their own practice with their own team, and clearly there are not enough spots for all players if he and one or two other boys are sitting out.

But, actually, I don't know why I am arguing the rights and wrongs of this. It isn't working for me or my son, and I'm not going to continue to pay for it after this year. If someone else would be happy with it, great, come try out and take a spot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He's not playing in the scrimmage for that practice at all many times, so yes. I am paying for the practice, and he is not participating meaningfully. The girls are definitely very strong players, and that is great, but they have their own practice with their own team, and clearly there are not enough spots for all players if he and one or two other boys are sitting out.

But, actually, I don't know why I am arguing the rights and wrongs of this. It isn't working for me or my son, and I'm not going to continue to pay for it after this year. If someone else would be happy with it, great, come try out and take a spot.

I've never seen a bench warmer during the team scrimmages at the end of practices. What year are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's not playing in the scrimmage for that practice at all many times, so yes. I am paying for the practice, and he is not participating meaningfully. The girls are definitely very strong players, and that is great, but they have their own practice with their own team, and clearly there are not enough spots for all players if he and one or two other boys are sitting out.

But, actually, I don't know why I am arguing the rights and wrongs of this. It isn't working for me or my son, and I'm not going to continue to pay for it after this year. If someone else would be happy with it, great, come try out and take a spot.

I've never seen a bench warmer during the team scrimmages at the end of practices. What year are you?

They aren’t playing the other half of the team. They are playing another Alexandria team.

[Anonymous]

I've never seen a bench warmer during the team scrimmages at the end of practices. What year are you?

I'm not OP, and my kid is definitely not on the red team. However, we have kids who play much, much less than others in the scrimmages at the end of practice. Sometimes there is a legitimate reason (e.g., an injury), but sometimes it is the same few kids who are the weaker players. My kid is not one of them, but I find that it creates bad blood between kids on the same team, and am not happy with it for that reason.

[Anonymous]

This seems psychologically bent on many levels. Is this a motivational tactic by the coaches? Do they care about team morale?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This seems psychologically bent on many levels. Is this a motivational tactic by the coaches? Do they care about team morale?

this thread is U13, no coach who sits players for the majority of games let alone scrimmages cares about team morale. It's one thing at older ages, but U13 coincides with kids going haywire in so many ways, having playing time in practice as something that is earned is just messed up

[Anonymous]

My son plays for Alexandria and we are happy there. We also have friends that are very happy in Arlington. I would suggest emailing the lead coach from each club and arranging for your son to do a practice with each. That way he can get a feel for each style and maybe see if he is already friends with potential teammates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I've never seen a bench warmer during the team scrimmages at the end of practices. What year are you?

I'm not OP, and my kid is definitely not on the red team. However, we have kids who play much, much less than others in the scrimmages at the end of practice. Sometimes there is a legitimate reason (e.g., an injury), but sometimes it is the same few kids who are the weaker players. My kid is not one of them, but I find that it creates bad blood between kids on the same team, and am not happy with it for that reason.

Yeah. Definitely wrong, and I would leave too.