Anonymous wrote:400-1000 per month for mins in games is common at top clubs on west coast.

It’s F in gross.

I was pretty shocked when chatting with a west coast parent and they asked what I pay in 'coach fees' per month... I was stumped (as parent and longtime coach), and told him I had never heard of the concept. He said it is how all of the coaches/clubs in his areas operate, you pay the club a standard fee (for the year) and then pay monthly fees to a coach... Pretty wild if you ask me.

Why do some “top teams” have no bench depth? hmmm maybe because they are pay to play in this way….

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:…for top team selection and/or preferential treatment? It seems to be the only thing that makes sense with some of the u9-u12 teams my DC has played for over the years. It’s obvious to all the other parents that a kid should not be on a team or get reasonable minutes, so one conclusion could be that parents are paying on the side? Is this a thing?

Various discussions and threads about preferential treatment for parents and players and now allegation of paying? Seriously?

One of the dumbest conspiracies. What’s obvious to “other parents” is not obvious to a reasonable person. Ask coaches of any sport and they will tell you that parents all think their kid is somehow better than other kids.

This happens at all the bigger cubs and there are posts about it going back years on here. It's the easiest thing to look up on here with clubs/coaches listed. Can parents be delusional about their child's abilities and be delusional on why they get benched? Absolutely. However, are there many parents paying thousands for play time for their kid through their child's coaches? Absolutely.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you were to watch my sons team which is not a top team but is competitive, you would see a few kids who don't belong. They aren't being paid. It's kind of the opposite. We have a few boys who have been part of the crew for a few years but haven't developed at the same rate. They dont have the same field awareness. But they are part of the team and the best way to learn is through play time. They don't start and they sit the bench when play is close. I keep wondering if they won't make the team next year, but they are friends of ours and it's kind of heartwarming that the team can be competitive and kind. Other families cheer them on. I like being part of a team that gives opportunity.

What would you think if they made the team over kids you know are better after tryouts this spring? Bench chemistry is important?

I am having this exact thought as tryouts are now and I'd rather the more talented player get the spot. However, once the teams are decided, I'd rather even the weaker kids are treated well. So for this season I support playing weaker players equally. But for next season I hope the most talented player gets a spot.

I know my story isnt super relevant to the topic but i think it shows that you can't always know what is going on.

Also at that age kids have good and bad days. Today my son scored his teams only two goals. He goes games in a row without scoring usually. The other team watching today probably thought he was a top player. He's not. But he had a great day today. Just like some players who are normally stars made a lot of mistakes. It's weird to make an assumption about an opposing team based on one game.

400-1000 per month for mins in games is common at top clubs on west coast.

It’s F in gross.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:…for top team selection and/or preferential treatment? It seems to be the only thing that makes sense with some of the u9-u12 teams my DC has played for over the years. It’s obvious to all the other parents that a kid should not be on a team or get reasonable minutes, so one conclusion could be that parents are paying on the side? Is this a thing?

Various discussions and threads about preferential treatment for parents and players and now allegation of paying? Seriously?

One of the dumbest conspiracies. What’s obvious to “other parents” is not obvious to a reasonable person. Ask coaches of any sport and they will tell you that parents all think their kid is somehow better than other kids.

Saw this on 2 teams for my son and it was confirmed pay to play to coach to get their kid on the field early and often. In both cases, coach didn't have another job so this scheme allowed them to make enough money to do soccer as their day job. You definitely want to avoid this type of coach. My kids 2 other coaches had good day jobs, weren't on the take and were clearly much more fair with playing time. When the coach is "offering" these extra lessons to their players, as a parent there definitely feels like it is some kind of troll toll.

Our DC is moving from one top team to another next year. Neither the old nor the new club are the really big/prestigious ones, but the new one in particular is still relatively respected. We have never paid any coach. I think different coaches just like different things. Some want speed and aggressiveness, some want really good technical skills. I don’t know. It seems like you have to look around to find the right fit. We had looked at a couple other clubs that are bigger and more prestigious. It seemed like they weren’t going to seriously consider DC for a spot on the top team even though DC was clearly holding their own with those players when they attended practices. So maybe this issue of not making changes is worse at certain clubs. They probably coast on having just enough really good players on the top team to hide the weaknesses of the others. Whereas maybe the clubs that don’t get the super good kids need a team that is more uniformly good across the board because they can’t just rely on a couple of stars to carry the team.

Anonymous wrote:If you were to watch my sons team which is not a top team but is competitive, you would see a few kids who don't belong. They aren't being paid. It's kind of the opposite. We have a few boys who have been part of the crew for a few years but haven't developed at the same rate. They dont have the same field awareness. But they are part of the team and the best way to learn is through play time. They don't start and they sit the bench when play is close. I keep wondering if they won't make the team next year, but they are friends of ours and it's kind of heartwarming that the team can be competitive and kind. Other families cheer them on. I like being part of a team that gives opportunity.

What would you think if they made the team over kids you know are better after tryouts this spring? Bench chemistry is important?

If you were to watch my sons team which is not a top team but is competitive, you would see a few kids who don't belong. They aren't being paid. It's kind of the opposite. We have a few boys who have been part of the crew for a few years but haven't developed at the same rate. They dont have the same field awareness. But they are part of the team and the best way to learn is through play time. They don't start and they sit the bench when play is close. I keep wondering if they won't make the team next year, but they are friends of ours and it's kind of heartwarming that the team can be competitive and kind. Other families cheer them on. I like being part of a team that gives opportunity.

Anonymous wrote:…for top team selection and/or preferential treatment? It seems to be the only thing that makes sense with some of the u9-u12 teams my DC has played for over the years. It’s obvious to all the other parents that a kid should not be on a team or get reasonable minutes, so one conclusion could be that parents are paying on the side? Is this a thing?

Various discussions and threads about preferential treatment for parents and players and now allegation of paying? Seriously?

One of the dumbest conspiracies. What’s obvious to “other parents” is not obvious to a reasonable person. Ask coaches of any sport and they will tell you that parents all think their kid is somehow better than other kids.

Anonymous wrote:…for top team selection and/or preferential treatment? It seems to be the only thing that makes sense with some of the u9-u12 teams my DC has played for over the years. Its obvious to all the other parents that a kid should not be on a team or get reasonable minutes, so one conclusion could be that parents are paying on the side? Is this a thing?

Absolutely not! This would never happen! But if someone were to offer a coach money, who much should they offer? Asking for a friend.

Anonymous wrote:I think it is as often as direct as that. Some clubs are okay with coaches picking up private training sessions with kids on their teams. Even at the most generous level, this creates a better understanding by the coach of what a particular kid can do, which may make them more likely to use said individual. Or the coach encourages said kid to develop into the player the coach is looking to use. It isn’t paying for minutes but there are often payments and increased minutes.

That’s a reasonable take, but we are talking about kids who aren’t really aware of what’s going on just kicking the ball out of bounds on top teams.

I think it is as often as direct as that. Some clubs are okay with coaches picking up private training sessions with kids on their teams. Even at the most generous level, this creates a better understanding by the coach of what a particular kid can do, which may make them more likely to use said individual. Or the coach encourages said kid to develop into the player the coach is looking to use. It isn’t paying for minutes but there are often payments and increased minutes.

At Loudoun, yes. This is a thing.

…for top team selection and/or preferential treatment? It seems to be the only thing that makes sense with some of the u9-u12 teams my DC has played for over the years. Its obvious to all the other parents that a kid should not be on a team or get reasonable minutes, so one conclusion could be that parents are paying on the side? Is this a thing?