Reply to Good/bad coaches - development and ethical behavior

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "Good/bad coaches - development and ethical behavior"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]Listen, I'll be snarky for a minute - but it's really hard for both all players to play at least half the game AND for the best (or better) players play significantly more.  Unless you have a relatively tiny roster (14 or less on an 11v11 team), there's going to be haves and have nots.  I think that's important to make sure that spread happens at younger ages,  but I think where folks draw the line of when that shift should happen is individual.  Personally, I'd argue somewhere in the U12-U14 range is the right place.[/quote]

This just isn't true.

My DS' U16 team has a roster of 18 on gamedays (20 total - but injuries have meant this has not yet caused anyone to sit out when healthy).  That's two goal keepers and 16 field players.  The goalkeepers play a half each - always.  Games are 2x40 minutes so there are 800 minutes total available for the other sixteen players.  This is usually shared so that 5-7 players receive about 60 minutes and the remaining 9-11 players receive about 40-45 minutes each.  We have had one "important" game (out of probaby 15 or so games and scrimmages) so far this season and the only changes were that two of the players played the whole game, and two others received only about 25 minutes.[/quote]

+1
This can easily be done if the coach gives a s*@(. Some only care about winning and looking good to their club. It's not a way to develop players at this age and kids in this situation should demand their money back. I don't know of a big club director that would allow this at U14. [/quote]

Then we're not playing the same clubs that you are, because I haven't seen a team do this across the 2 age groups my kids are in (1 boy/1 girl) - and I don't mean just my club, I mean our opponents.  There are always a couple players we play who leave the field for less than 5 minutes a half, and that makes the math hard to get everyone in there for > 50%.   I whole heartedly agree that the way to develop players is to get them gametime and that there should be a good spread.  I also happen to believe that the best way to do this is with smaller rosters and more teams, while letting players move between teams if you have injuries and need an extra body or two, and larger clubs are perfectly capable of that when they have 2+ teams/age group.  It also provides a greater ability to pull players up who deserve a shot at a faster paced game, while giving players who are struggling or working on something at the bottom end of the roster to get the time in a better game situation.  If you've got a roster of 18-20, you aren't developing and giving players elsewhere in the club a shot, because you don't have minutes to give them.  Players don't develop by playing so far above their heads that they don't know what to do, neither do the good players develop to their potential because they won't have other good players moving to the right spots to show them the situation during a game.  That's not just true of soccer, but of any sport.    Should the coach give more playing time?  Absolutely.   Should there be rosters of 17/18 at U13?  No.  12 or more at 7v7?  No.  But that's what we see, many times because we as parents can't bear the thought of our poor child not being on the top team, even when it's clearly not what's best for them or the team. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics