Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

Also as the kids get older they tend to get dropped back at age and often times it is no surprise that in most of the playups instances they are born in the first quarter of the year anyways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

At U13 and U14, almost none of the A team superstars from U9/10 are on any of the top teams---DA or A team.

That's actually not true. U14 DA parent here with an late year 04, so he was on the 04/05 teams back at U9-U10. Did a lot of tournaments and the soccer world gets super small as time goes by and you see the same faces over and over again. The fact is that almost all of the current U13-U14 DA players in this area were on highly competitive A teams at U9/10. Back then it was clubs like Bethesda, Joga, McLean, Loudoun, Arlington, PWSI, SAC, Woodbridge, Stoddert, LMVSC. There are a few kids who came from smaller clubs and/or slightly less competitive teams, but I can't think of a single example of a kid who was on a B team at his club at U9/U10 who is now U13-U14 DA. There may be a few of them out there, but they are definitely few and far between.

[Anonymous]

U12 Boys:

VDA:
Jan-Apr-10
Sept-Dec- 3
Playups- 4 (3 playups are July/Aug 07 and 1 is Feb 07)

VDA:
Jan-Mar-8
Oct-Dec- 2

Arlington:
Jan-Apr- 8
Sept-Dec- 4
Playups- 3 (All Jan-Apr 07)

Arlington:
Jan-Mar- 7
Oct-Dec- 3

Continental FC
Jan-Apr- 7
Sept-Dec- 2
Playups- 0

Continental FC:
Jan-Mar- 3
Oct-Dec- 2

PA Classics
Jan-Apr-12
Sept-Dec- 3
Playups- 1 (Jan 07)

PA Classics:
Jan-Mar- 8
Oct-Dec- 2

FC Greater Boston Bolts:
Jan-Apr- 11
Sept-Dec- 7
Playups- 3 (all Jan-Mar 07)

FC Greater Boston Bolts:
Jan-Mar- 9
Oct-Dec- 5

[Anonymous]

Seems to me that the VDA teams (u12/13) are well represented by pwsi players....and that's not necessarily a positive statement. seems to be a biased selection process. i'm not bitter that my son wasn't selected, but I was surprised to learn a particular player is not on the squad (but yet, 07's are). at the end of the day, the coach gets to decide as to who he/she want to include. and if he/she has had a prior relationship with said player, that player has the upper hand vrs. somebody whom he/she has never met or seen prior to tryouts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems to me that the VDA teams (u12/13) are well represented by pwsi players....and that's not necessarily a positive statement. seems to be a biased selection process. i'm not bitter that my son wasn't selected, but I was surprised to learn a particular player is not on the squad (but yet, 07's are). at the end of the day, the coach gets to decide as to who he/she want to include. and if he/she has had a prior relationship with said player, that player has the upper hand vrs. somebody whom he/she has never met or seen prior to tryouts.

Well, playups are obviously not uncommon but the numbers are generally pretty limited. VDA appears to be the exception with both the numbers but also the ages of the kids. As demonstrated pretty much all of the playups really just missed the cutoff by a month but the July and August 07 kids at VDA IS uncommon. But also as stated, in nearly all cases playups end up playing at age at some point.

[Anonymous]

Is vda loudoun? McLean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is vda loudoun? McLean?

VDA is a combination of PWSI, VSA, VYS and CYA. PWSI is the real driver of the club though.

[Anonymous]

"but the July and August 07 kids at VDA IS uncommon."

...and why not just take an 06 kid and develop him would be my point. I don't see the logic in taking an 07 when they are just another player....if the 07 player is an exceptional talent, then yes...but not the case here. favoritism does prevail at times is the only conclusion I can draw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"but the July and August 07 kids at VDA IS uncommon."

...and why not just take an 06 kid and develop him would be my point. I don't see the logic in taking an 07 when they are just another player....if the 07 player is an exceptional talent, then yes...but not the case here. favoritism does prevail at times is the only conclusion I can draw.

These are just numbers that we are seeing. I certainly don't know the players, I don't know their potential or talent level but it is my experience that favoritism rarely comes into play with playups. In most cases kids are being played up in order to be challenged.

[Anonymous]

A conclusion that I will draw is that players born in the last three months of the year do have representation on the U12 DAs. So let's not say that there are "almost no players" born October though December. While it may not be 25% of the rosters, it's in the ballpark. Also note that a large portion of the local DAs haven't posted their rosters yet (McLean, DCU, Loudoun, Bethesda).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A conclusion that I will draw is that players born in the last three months of the year do have representation on the U12 DAs. So let's not say that there are "almost no players" born October though December. While it may not be 25% of the rosters, it's in the ballpark. Also note that a large portion of the local DAs haven't posted their rosters yet (McLean, DCU, Loudoun, Bethesda).

There are a few things at play here:

1. The original context as stated, "^^ with DA pushed back to younger and younger ages and only a few locations---it's unrealistic that people are going to drive their 10-year olds 4-nights per week in 1-hour long rush hour traffic.

DA isn't the answer either. "

Are there 10 year old kids? Yes. Is it hyperbole to make misleading statements regarding the suffering that the DA is putting upon 10 year olds? Yes

2. 107 total players are on the rosters across the 5 mentioned clubs, 17 were Sept-Dec (16%), 11 playups (10%) for a total of 28 kids (26%). This is compared to 48 kids born between Jan-Apr (45%).

So 11 sets of parents CHOSE to accept an offer to have their kids to play-up. Considering they could be on the DA the following year this is a choice made by both parent and coach.

However, the kids we are really interested in here are the kids who were truly born within the actual birth year 06. This reduces the rosters from the 5 clubs down to 96 from 107 within the actual age 06 birth year. Of those 96 kids the percentages are now 50% of the U12 DA rosters are represented by kids who are born between Jan-Apr while only 17% of the rosters were born between Sept-Dec. Removing the 07 born kids moves the 1st quarter born representation up 5 whole points to 1 point for late quarter born kids.

My conclusion is the 5 kids who are 10 year olds per U12 DA team, half of which are playing above their age group, will survive the assumed 1 hour drives to practice four days a week. I mean, especially considering the NoVA DAs are all an hour away from each other during rush hour already.

So DA isn't the answer because 17%-26% of the kids are 10 years old?

[Anonymous]

^^ wow. Aren't you a genius? There are tons of parents that refused to sit in 45-60 minutes of traffic a night for some perceived eliteness for 10-14 year olds. Even with kids that are better talents.

At our Club, U12 is the former A team from U11---so yea they will have a short commute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FC Greater Boston Bolts U12 Boys

Oct-Dec? 5

Jan-Apr? 12

I could keep going on but most teams do not yet have their rosters posted still but it won't change anything. RAE is real and NO there are not "Lots" of kids on DA teams born in the last four months. So no, there are not lots of ten year old kids being dragged to far away practices.

Actually since your last statement failed to condition the 10 year old kids only from DA, there are plenty of 10 year old kids being dragged off to far away practices to be on a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th(they exist) team for their maybe U12, U11, or perhaps U11(next year).

I'm trolling...

I'll take the bait anyway

On most clubs 2nd-4th or lower teams the birth-date distribution is more even through all four quarters of the year. But most clubs A teams whether they are DA or not are usually similarly unevenly distributed at the younger ages. With that understanding, it makes very little sense to drive a 2nd or 4th team kid to anything other than the best of the most convenient clubs to play soccer.

I would completely agree, try to convince some parents that their soccer club within 10 minutes away is as good as being on Loudoun's 5th team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ wow. Aren't you a genius? There are tons of parents that refused to sit in 45-60 minutes of traffic a night for some perceived eliteness for 10-14 year olds. Even with kids that are better talents.

At our Club, U12 is the former A team from U11---so yea they will have a short commute.

I didn't claim to be a genius. Just pointing out in numbers the hyperbole of the sheer number of ten year old kids affected by a U12 DA age group. Also considering that the other "Captain Obvious" point that by the end of this year all those 06 ten year olds will be 11 years old.

Yes I went overboard just to point out what a trivial problem it actually is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems to me that the VDA teams (u12/13) are well represented by pwsi players....and that's not necessarily a positive statement. seems to be a biased selection process. i'm not bitter that my son wasn't selected, but I was surprised to learn a particular player is not on the squad (but yet, 07's are). at the end of the day, the coach gets to decide as to who he/she want to include. and if he/she has had a prior relationship with said player, that player has the upper hand vrs. somebody whom he/she has never met or seen prior to tryouts.

Well, playups are obviously not uncommon but the numbers are generally pretty limited. VDA appears to be the exception with both the numbers but also the ages of the kids. As demonstrated pretty much all of the playups really just missed the cutoff by a month but the July and August 07 kids at VDA IS uncommon. But also as stated, in nearly all cases playups end up playing at age at some point.

I happen to know a few of the 07 players in 2006 VDA(U12) they're favorite's of Quan. They're good, don't get me wrong, but they're no better than other players on PWSI's U12 NPL(1st) team.