Reply to Soccer tournament- mostly on bench

Forum Index » Soccer

Reply to "Soccer tournament- mostly on bench"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
[quote]The kids care and know if they won for not. I've seen this BS argument for so long in soccer - we're developing players, we don't care if we win! Well, if you are doing a better job than the next coach, you will win. It's such a dodge of responsibility. In no other sport in the US does anyone say 'we don't care who wins'. You have 10 - 12 years olds in Little League mastering the game - but at 10 in soccer we don't care who wins? More than a few years ago now, we had NCSL as the dominant local soccer league, but it had promotion and relegation, which required you to - horrors - WIN to stay in your division or else face relegation to a lower division. That league is now basically a shadow of what it was, so everyone can play in leagues that just require your check to clear.[/quote]

I don't understand your point in the context of OP's post Winning is important so it is better for a coach to get players from elsewhere to give the appearance that his team won even though it wasn't his players who contributed to the win?  Your argument might make sense if coaches were consistently training and playing he same group of players, not routinely adding and subtracting players to produce wins on any given day.

Tournaments are tiered. A good club/coach puts each team in the appropriate tier. If the team has no chance of winning without the guest players, then the coach isn't doing is job and the "win" is a cover.

Maybe my kids are weird, but at that age, the would have much rather played than won sitting on the bench. [/quote]

Tournaments are bracketed, yes, but that is imperfect at best.  The variability in a single bracket can be quite high.

My point is that the development and winning are incongruous idea is persistent throughout soccer,  and it's a line of BS being pushed by people who would prefer to avoid accountability.  If the OP's team was blown out all weekend, they would likely complain about the lack of development, or poor bracketing by the tournament.  Thee were even complaining about how darn cold it was!

The way you have the most happy players and parents is to win.  That should be the objective.  Good development will enable that.  So will good use of guest players when needed, [b]a practice that has been significantly enabled by USYS's changes to the club pass system.[/b]  An if your player finds he/she is not on the field as much as they would like - they have a choice to train and commit, or moving on.[/quote]

[b]OP stated that the guest players were not players from the same club.[/b] But in any event, [b]the point of club passes is not to stack lower level teams with higher level players, although that is what most clubs actually do. The point was to let players developing more quickly play up or to allow a player to rehab by playing at a lower level.[/b] It was never meant to make lower level teams better by allowing top team players to guest play.

Where are you watching/coaching?  I have rarely seen a coach or club focus on development of players over winning. The problem with emphasizing winning is that kids become pawns and do not necessarily develop.  You get players the team needs, usually from outside of the club, and sit the not quite there yet players you picked who are actually on the team.  [/quote]

USYS has nothing to do with club passes.  Whether to allow clubs to move players between teams is usually a league policy.  Tournaments will also have rules on how many guest players to allow.

OP stated that the players were from "the elite team" in the same club.

I agree the point of club passes is not to stack lower level teams with higher level players.  It is mostly meant for threshold type players - meaning bottom of the roster A team kids and top of the roster B team kids.  Especially at larger clubs, there's often not a lot of difference between them, and what differences do exist when the teams are picked in May could be erased or reversed by November.   The kids who are usually subs on the higher team can benefit from getting some games with the lower team where they will be (and feel) more important and play more prominent roles.  The top kids on the lower team will also benefit from getting some minutes playing with and against better players in the more challenging games with the higher team.   That's how it is supposed to work.  If a club is moving its best players down from a higher team just to help a lower team get results, that's almost never a good thing.

Developing players with a competitive winning mentality is a critical part of soccer development.  So players absolutely 100% should be taught that winning matters, and they should go out there and do everything in their power to help their team win.  For the adults in charge though, development should come first.  I agree that bringing in "ringers" just to win a few games in a tournament only helps the coach avoid accountability.   If a coach wants to prove they are doing a good job at development, the best way to measure that is for the team to play some of the same teams at multiple times during the year - without bringing in new players.  The results and quality of play (both individually and collectively) should improve in comparison to the those teams throughout the year.  If not, it means the other coaches have done a better job.

[/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