Spring 2017 soccer club tryouts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

PP above is probably one of those parents still struggling to understand offsides.

No s in offside. The player was in an offside position when the ball was played to him. Those are the same parents who scream at the AR from 70 yards away because, apparently, they have a better view of the play.

You hit my favorite source of entertainment. Sometimes I don't think the refs understand it. A few weeks ago I watched two of our players (both certified refs) explain to a ref what the call should be after he blew his whistle. The center knew it was a foul, but had no idea what the restart should be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

[Anonymous]

And wow -- you didn't read point 3 at all.

Point 1 was a simple correction of facts. Someone in the thread didn't believe anyone meets the bus before 7 a.m. In Fairfax County, plenty of middle schoolers do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

It was known at least a year in advance. You should have played up and nothing you are complaining about would have mattered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

It was known at least a year in advance. You should have played up and nothing you are complaining about would have mattered.

I'm not the PP, but I don't understand how playing up last year would resolve the issue of some kids having one fewer year in travel. My kid is another late 2005 who went from U10 to U12 this year. He has had three years in travel and some kids on his team have had four. If he had played up in U11 last year, how would that have changed that fact?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or a former National team player. The rest of you are idiots.

Btw, nothing in the prior post mentioned lack of possession.

Then perhaps you should coach.

I'm an ex high school football and lacrosse player that gave up on soccer at age 11. I know nothing about soccer except from just watching my son play and enjoying the moment. I don't get why everyone gets so worked up over "bad" plays or "bad" refereeing. Just grab a nice cup of coffee sit back and watch your son/daughter play, we have the luxury in this country where our weekends are spent with our kids and not struggling with some of the issues that exist in other parts of the world. Some in this country would find it hard to afford or have time to spend with their kids. As someone that has been deployed overseas to defend this country, I enjoy nothing more than being with my kids and neighbors. Regardless of sport!

Great dad! Great attitude! I'd love to have you on the sidelines on our team. Super chill parents, mildly intense and great coach, and kids playing their game for themselves and their team and being really successful because of the great environment and relationships they've/we've developed.

I agree 100%

Thank you for your service and for your appreciation of what you've helped to support!

[Anonymous]

Don't listen to the asshole above you. Most Clubs were not allowing 10-year olds to play up. Most Clubs have strict rules agai st playing up. It isn't like a U-10 could have asked to play U1- last year which is why all those kids had to skip the entire U11year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't listen to the asshole above you. Most Clubs were not allowing 10-year olds to play up. Most Clubs have strict rules agai st playing up. It isn't like a U-10 could have asked to play U1- last year which is why all those kids had to skip the entire U11year.

I mean the asshole the op I agree was quoting. It isn't just a simple year change. It short-changed many kids in their prime a full developmental year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

[Anonymous]

Where did this 'missed year' go? Did they teleport your kid forward a year? Did he jump into a Delorean? Your player was born in a specific year (04, 05, whatever). If in the age group change the designation of that year changed, he cannot have 'missed' a year. You are making an awful lot out of a label.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Where did this 'missed year' go? Did they teleport your kid forward a year? Did he jump into a Delorean? Your player was born in a specific year (04, 05, whatever). If in the age group change the designation of that year changed, he cannot have 'missed' a year. You are making an awful lot out of a label.

God- you idiot.

If you are an 11 or 12+ Fall Birthday when the change was made you are skipping an entire year and moving up to be with a group that has played a year of travel longer--jumping to a bigger field/more players earlier. Yes--the older kids on the team will graduate a year earlier from HS and then your last year you are stuck with hardly any club teammates because they have already left for college. So the year you didn't lose is the shitty year where it doesn't matter and everyone would have already applied to colleges.

It was irrelevant for most 2008s last year and every birth year thereafter.

Our club put the older kids with the young birth dates on the lower teams at the initial merge. Yes--my Fall U12 (shoukd ha e been U11) was better than the majority of early birth dates by the end of the year. However, missing/jumping a year in the middle part of your travel experience was a bigger disadvantage than just being a younger birth year always. This was different.

[Anonymous]

^^irinically, for HS and college ball the kids f@cked over with the birth change have the advantage there because they are essentially playing down with their classmates a U-younger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, bubble-dwelling bullies living vicariously through your early-blooming kids. Let's drop a few facts here:

1. Plenty of Fairfax County middle schoolers have to catch buses before 7 a.m. Kilmer starts at 7:30. Typical bus rider is on the bus between 6:30 and 7.

That still doesn't mean that your kid will be practicing from 8-9:30



2. Sure, the truly elite players who could be playing up an age group anyway aren't affected by the age-group change, and they'll stand out in 100-player cattle-call tryouts. Let the rest of us have a conversation without passive-aggressively bragging about your brilliant kid.

The Bell Curve holds true for both ends. The truth is kids 20-80 are closer and harder to figure out. Go to a smaller club if you don't like the "cattle call."

3. Tryouts are good for telling you the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent. It's easy for the rest to get lost in the shuffle, especially when you have coaches paying intermittent attention. The best of both worlds is to have a "blind" tryout with independent evaluators AND opinions from current coaches, which can be weighed in whatever ratio makes sense.

It wouldn't matter because kids 20-80 are on a sliding gradient scale. No matter how many double blind tryouts you run there will be mistakes made.



4. The age-group change screwed tons of kids. Yes, again, your little Christian Pulisic or Mallory Pugh wouldn't be affected. The average player who had to jump from U9 to U11 is suddenly going against players who have two years of travel soccer to her one. That's a massive difference. It's not just that they were "the big kids" in the old age groups and now they're smaller. They did, in fact, lose an entire year of development. If the new age groups had been in place when they started, then they would've been among the younger U9s, but they would have had a year of U9, then a year of U10 and so forth. They did not. Get that through that thick mass of insecurity over your kids' accomplishments that you call a brain.

The age group change happened, we are a year into already, move on. There has always been kids who were lucky to get the "good birthday". I'm sorry that you didn't but that is out of your control. What is in your control is working with your kid or getting extra training for your kid.

Read it again to see why this isn't a simple case of "the good birthday." It's a case of putting second-year and first-year travel players together at U10, and it's a case of putting third-year and second-year players together at U11. That screwed up everyone trying to arrange competitive matchups, and kids who aren't early-blooming athletes struggled against kids who had an extra year of experience.

It's not about my kid. I'm capable of thinking outside my bubble.

Now -- is there anything we can do about it today? No. Changing it back would just mess everyone up once again. Some clubs have curricula in which they plan out how they're going to train kids year by year, and they've already had to change on the fly for kids who've skipped a year. Going back would make it worse.

But just be aware that when you say it all evened out because it just changed who was older within an age group, you're wrong. That's all.

My kid had no travel experience before this year at u10 and was according to the coach, his best player at year end. You are making a mountain outmoded a molehill.

Which means there are 10-11 kids on his team alone whose experience differs from yours.

Congratulations on your kid being exceptionally talented or an athletic early bloomer. You are clearly the superior parent, and we all await your future directives.

Nope, just a normal kid whose parent doesn't spend pages making excuses for on a message board. There is no "missed" year except in your head.

NP here, perhaps it would be clearer to say "missed a year *of travel*." It's simply impossible to deny it. For example, every kid in travel soccer with an August-Dec 2006 birthday went from U9 (2015 - 2016 season) to U11 (2016 - 2017 season). U10 was missed. Period.