What if ... there were no tournaments before U12 Spring season?

[Anonymous]

Many young kids would miss out on an enjoyable and useful experience.

[Anonymous]

Kids playing games isn’t the problem, parents assigning to much value to the results is the problem.

Rankings are intended to maintain competitive balance and transparency for tourney seeding. It’s human nature to inflate their actual use and meaning.

[Anonymous]

I like the idea and concept but good luck putting the toothpaste back into the tube.

[Anonymous]

Not sure why this is a good idea? My kids really enjoy tournaments for the festival like atmosphere. They like them more than normal season games. What does taking them away improve?

[Anonymous]

My kids loved those early tournaments and the kids still joke about some of the things that happened during them. Soccer is pay to play and little kid parents are just as willing to pay

[Anonymous]

FPYCparent wrote:
What if, prior to a team's U12 spring season ...

Contests were limited to regular league seasons (results recorded as they are now). Teams can still have/host scrimmages and friendlies with other clubs, just with no results recorded. Clubs could hold tournaments that remain within the club.

Would youth soccer be in a "better" place?

Theoretically, more field space would be available for U12+ tournaments. Perhaps more refs would be available. No magical guest players that show up out of nowhere just for the tourney (again, for the years indicated). Would there be less club-hopping trying to place players on a "winning" team or chasing GotSoccer/YSR points?

I'm trying to come up with arguments against this, if it were a policy.

Thoughts?

I think you could instead just spread them out throughout the year and do less. I like friendly's. they usually are cheaper than doing a tournament. I think that the ECNL teams are doing more of them and less tournaments.

[Anonymous]

I don’t get it. What’s the problem you are trying to solve?

[Anonymous]

I still like the idea of the NCSL having a season long Open tourney

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Many young kids would miss out on an enjoyable and useful experience.

Agree. I have three highly competitive kids who all quit lacrosse because they utilized the proposed 'development' model. My kids wanted to compete.

[Anonymous]

FPYCparent wrote:I'm not suggesting that all competition be banned prior to U12 Spring. I believe league play and scrimmages/friendlies have a place in these age groups. Reserve the tournaments for the later years when the results can mean a little more.

Having been through the early years (DD is now U14), I'm wondering if the tournaments really added anything during those early years. I've had to get DD to the 7:30AM tournament matches on frozen ground at Muldoon's in November and she's had other tournament matches cancelled due to rain-soaked, non-turf fields. DD and her teammates still choose to play ... even with moderate tournament success (no "championships"). Given that tournament outcomes can be manipulated more than league results, I'm trying to look back and assess the benefits of the tournament structure at those ages, especially when compared to league games and scrimmages.

Anyone think that the quality of play would actually improve if tournaments didn't start until late U12?

Sounds like FPYC was a baaaaaaad choice

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many young kids would miss out on an enjoyable and useful experience.

Agree. I have three highly competitive kids who all quit lacrosse because they utilized the proposed 'development' model. My kids wanted to compete.

There has to be a good balance - the endless practices, meaningless scrimmages and friendlies get real old. On the other side the American Kickball focus on cheap results also gets old, is unattractive and doesn't develop the team.

[Anonymous]

FPYCparent wrote:I'm not suggesting that all competition be banned prior to U12 Spring. I believe league play and scrimmages/friendlies have a place in these age groups. Reserve the tournaments for the later years when the results can mean a little more.

Having been through the early years (DD is now U14), I'm wondering if the tournaments really added anything during those early years. I've had to get DD to the 7:30AM tournament matches on frozen ground at Muldoon's in November and she's had other tournament matches cancelled due to rain-soaked, non-turf fields. DD and her teammates still choose to play ... even with moderate tournament success (no "championships"). Given that tournament outcomes can be manipulated more than league results, I'm trying to look back and assess the benefits of the tournament structure at those ages, especially when compared to league games and scrimmages.

Anyone think that the quality of play would actually improve if tournaments didn't start until late U12?

It depends on what you think is the purpose of tournaments. My DD is U12. She loves the tournaments more than the league games, especially out of town tournaments where we stay in a hotel. She gets to hang out with her teammates off the field, go swimming, eat at restaurants with the team. Is it the best thing for her soccer development? Probably not but at U12 I don't think everything the team does needs to be for sake of soccer development. Sometimes it's about having fun.

[Anonymous]

No way to hold tournaments within the club - not enough teams per age group.

[Anonymous]

My kid's U12 team is not doing any pre-season tournaments, but they are playing scrimmages on their home field. Love it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid's U12 team is not doing any pre-season tournaments, but they are playing scrimmages on their home field. Love it!

Smart. Generally a good sign about a club. You have some teams playing about half of their fall games before league play begins. All driven by gotsoccer point grabs. Disgraceful.