Reply to Reflections from an aging soccer dad

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "Reflections from an aging soccer dad"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote]You also make some valid points, however....

Depending on the age of the player the C team is really the line between travel and rec soccer. Once a player is on the full field playing on the C team is essentially organized rec soccer. Take the C team at High School ages, if there even are any. These teams are loaded with kids who are either still passionate about the game or are playing for social reasons. But at this level and age other things are usually more important.

Younger kids on C teams are a different story and it is not surprising that C team kids make the A team, especially at U13-U14 when puberty hits as well as the first wave of kids who wish to play or try other things weeds out players.

But frankly C teams by their nature are very transient and there is not much that will ever change that. During 11v11 years the best C team player is the 37th ranked player in the club. How the club came to that conclusion is certainly full of faults but it is safe to say that the 37th best kid is certainly a bubble B team player. Bubble players at all levels are most likely to move to a better situation if one presents itself. The only kids who stay put are those middle kids on the team.

[b]I'm not going to call you a liar here but the bolded part I do not believe happened at all at least not in the sense of a player in good standing, mid season was told by the coach and by the club that they have been replaced and are now off the team and out of the club. The contract is for the year and unless payments have not been made, conduct that is detrimental to the team, or a player simply is no longer attending practices no players are cut loose mid season. I would believe that a player and parent got upset about a new kid and their players role changed. This may have led to a departure mid season but that is not the same as being cut. [/quote][/b]

First, as to the C team argument, trust me, that kid is small and he was never going to get a look at his old club because that's how they do things there. No one watches the lower teams and coaches don't advocate for their players to move up. I've seen if for years. As a parent of a small player, I know well that the timing of puberty makes a huge difference at 12, 13, 14, etc., but that is one of my points. Some of those small kids have a ton of talent - keep giving them quality training so that they can be top team players when they grow. Don't stick them on a C team with rec players and have them scrimmage every practice (and charge thousands of dollars for the privilege).

As to the part I bolded, I assure you that I am not lying, but perhaps I wasn't clear about how the "cuts" came about.  The families received notice over the winter saying that going forward, we don't see your kid making the roster or getting playing time, so we are going to part ways (and provide a partial refund).  The kid wasn't told that he was being replaced for someone else, but then a new player shows up and is added to the team.  There was no advance warning.  Perhaps experience is part of the reason why we see things differently?  Why I think that the dynamics of club soccer is detrimental to the soccer and emotional development of many kids?

Frankly, even if I accepted your argument that soccer is a year to year commitment, that idea might be palatable if clubs actually honored that single year commitment for the entire year. By this I mean:

1) You commit to the club, coach and team for a year:
2) The coach and team remain the relatively the same for the year no mid-season coaching changes and see #4 below) (barring emergencies, of course);
3) You have an idea when you make the commitment what the roster size will be (as in, don't tell us the roster size is 16 and then wind up with 22 kids);
4) No new players are  added to the team during the season (aside from injuries or departures), increasing the roster size or significantly taking away playing time; 
5) This one is important - players and/or families are given regular, quality feedback regarding performance, strengths, weaknesses, and areas to work on. Whether a demotion is a cut or natural movement reflecting that development is not linear, or whatever, it feels like a "cut" if the player or parents (depending on age) are not aware of bubble status.

Someone posted this link earlier, but there is good advice there about what  I would like to see at more clubs

[url]https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/81127/running-a-youth-club-steve-gans-advice-for-docs.html[/url]

Here is a quotation:
Every year I advise many parents regarding college recruiting and during the time of tryouts for the next club season. One particular scenario I have seen often that is regrettably common amongst many clubs is the following: a player who has played several years for a club attends tryouts for the next season and does not thereafter receive any communication for a protracted period of time (though they know that other players are receiving offers for the team). Parents understandably become frustrated and perplexed, and they wonder what is going on.

In my experience, this sudden silence from the familiar club means that the player is on the “bubble” of making the team, and the coach is waiting out the process to see how many extended offers will be accepted. The awkward situation develops as a result of less than ideal DOC communication skills or policies, and simply put, long-serving club players and their families deserve more straightforward communication about where they stand.

That is a situation in my opinion wherein it is absolutely appropriate for a parent to contact the DOC to ask for a timely explanation.

Also, keep in mind that while you do deny that a demotion is a "cut," a change in team can be about way more than just finding an appropriate environment developmentally.  In my experience, with multiple kids, EDP is the best league with the best competition and the least amount of travel. If all of a club's teams play in EDP, moving to an A to B team (for a strong team) might be fine. But if it the difference between EDP and say CCL2, that's more travel for a lower level of competition. Or, if you have two kids in a club, the CCL idea is that all of the club's teams play in one place each day. I'm not a fan of the CCL, but makes some sense from that perspective.  If one kid is demoted to CCL2 team and the other remains in CCL, the entire dynamic changes for a family.  It is way more travel and will result in the family going separate ways every weekend.

Everyone wants to make this about unreasonable parents huffing and puffing that clubs don't see their kids as future stars. There are plenty of crazies.  But more of us are reasonable than you think. I have no problem if any coach thinks my child does not fit on a team or isn't working hard. But the coach should be communicating with the child on a regular basis.  The time to learn about bubble status, or perceived lack of effort, or whatever is not following tryouts.  Kid not hustling?  Fine - challenge him to do better or sit him on the bench. But don't tell him that if he hustles he will get more playing time, notice that he hustles, and then keep him on the bench because you added a new player to the team who plays his position.  That's the type of situation I'm complaining about.  The best players are naturally motivated, driven by ego. Many others struggle with motivation and confidence. It is way more healthy for a kid to be challenged and to develop within the context of the team. The more outside factors beyond kids' control, whether it is parental relationships (i.e. parent coach never takes his kid out), new players join team, younger players play up so that bench players don't get in a game, etc., the more the experience seems random and not fun.

Communicating and motivating players is the job of a coach.  What I am saying is that many, many coaches and clubs are failing in this regard. From the outside looking in, it seems like clubs are more interested in adding players from elsewhere, harming other clubs by taking away their players, increasing chances of winning now at the expense of players who they picked and who regularly attend practice and work, than they are at actually communicating with their players and promoting their development.

[/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