Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are also coaches that focus on recruiting and social media and claim "development" with each win when it's the new players developed elsewhere that are the top scorers and best players on the team.

+1000

FCV?

Coaches and clubs are focused on winning, not development. If you want to see true development look at AJAX, they develop players because that make a ton of money on that. Our youth clubs just loose top players to other clubs. They much rather focus on twitter wins with photos of trophies and medals, that is what attracts new players which in return generate new rev streams,

Anonymous wrote:There are also coaches that focus on recruiting and social media and claim "development" with each win when it's the new players developed elsewhere that are the top scorers and best players on the team.

+1000

There are also coaches that focus on recruiting and social media and claim "development" with each win when it's the new players developed elsewhere that are the top scorers and best players on the team.

Anonymous wrote:It really doesn’t have to be one versus the other, but business drives the coach and club (and most parents) towards winning, even at the early ages. However, if the coach is teaching properly from a developmental perspective the team will, more often than not, win. Maybe not right away, but eventually they will.

This is exactly what I was thinking as well when I started this thread. There are some coaches that claim “development” because their team(s) always have loosing records year after year.

It really doesn’t have to be one versus the other, but business drives the coach and club (and most parents) towards winning, even at the early ages. However, if the coach is teaching properly from a developmental perspective the team will, more often than not, win. Maybe not right away, but eventually they will.

If coaches are doing it right, they are looking for competition where the kids will lose! Losing is part of the development process. You learn a lot more about yourself when you lose. With that said, you need wins to keep the kids (and parents) buying into the process. In addition, if a coach is doing it right...lots of small sided games, lots of possession games, lots of 1v1 activities, lots of ball mastery, instilling a possession style of play, and motivating kids to work at home on skills and play pick up soccer....wins will come. No question.

large clubs have no incentive to develop beyond the 1st or 2nd team. What is the ROI for them? nobody is impressed that the 3rd team won a tournament somewhere

going for the win and focusing on just a few players is easier and a lot of coaches are lazy. In many cases, they know they will only be with a team for 1 year, so why put in the extra effort... just show up and check the boxes.

Players should want to win every single play. That mentality goes beyond scores/results.

Anonymous wrote:Question: There are so many posts and articles that indicate that development is much more important than winning. While I agree, but isn’t wins (or team record) a way to gauge how a team or player develops? Similarly, public schools teach/develop kids but they also have quizzes/tests so gauge a student’s progress. Am I wrong with this assessment?

(I understand some will indicate the strong/fast kids and kick/run tactics, but isn’t learning how to deal with this type of teams part of development?)

Most clubs don't assess all aspects of development and even if they do on paper, that may not be likely to translate to playing time. There are all sorts of tactics you can use to win which do not demonstrate development.

Also, clubs regularly bring in new players to win, making less likely that more than a few existing players will get the opportunity to develop.

Team records mean almost nothing in terms of individual development. Yes -- teams should be playing against similarly skilled and athletic teams as much as possible in light of affordability and time constraints. Yes -- there are very important aspects of individual development that are part of games and these really can best be addressed in that context so games themselves are important.

It is a question of what you are paying for and the time you and your kid are committing. If you simply want to play and have fun with friends then low level travel and/or rec. is absolutely fine. Enjoy and focus on other stuff. If you and your kid think they might like to play at a higher level and have the interest and athletic ability -- then higher level travel is fine too. But -- you are paying for your kid to work on becoming a better player -- not for your kid to be on a particular team. If your kid can become a better player elsewhere then move.

And, of course, there is the reality that kids do not like sitting on the bench in a game watching other kids play if they, themselves, are only going to play for a few minutes. Find a team where your kid can play. He/she will become a better player and enjoy themselves more. That, in turn, will make them want to work at becoming even a better player, and then they will have even more fun, etc. .. etc. . .

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Question: There are so many posts and articles that indicate that development is much more important than winning. While I agree, but isn’t wins (or team record) a way to gauge how a team or player develops? Similarly, public schools teach/develop kids but they also have quizzes/tests so gauge a student’s progress. Am I wrong with this assessment?

(I understand some will indicate the strong/fast kids and kick/run tactics, but isn’t learning how to deal with this type of teams part of development?)

Winning at earlier ages likely reflects the size of the player pool for the club. Period. Beyond that, you need to know soccer well to see how your individual child is developing within the context of the team. I think the most practical benchmark if you don't know soccer well is to look at a team's progress against the same teams year over year. It is imperfect -- the rosters change over time -- but it can give you a sense of how your team and coaches are doing relative to other teams. But no, I don't believe winning alone tells you much about development, especially at earlier ages. We moved to a club and team that my child had beaten three times over the course of the year because the other team was part of a club where the coaching was absolutely superb and a nice corrective to some of the tendencies my kid and other younger kids can develop. Even the year over year comparisons vs. the same teams can fall short because of the randomness and variability within soccer games.

Why is that some clubs’ methodology and tendency is to develop only a few players? Only one learns to do the corner kicks, only one does the direct kicks, only one or two play 100% of the game? Does it have to do with the clubs development and playing style method or it has to do with coachs level of knowledge about soccer? Imagine when the rest of the players iget to the recruiting age without ever experienced doing a corner kick under pressure because they never had the opportunity to experience it.

Anonymous wrote:Question: There are so many posts and articles that indicate that development is much more important than winning. While I agree, but isn’t wins (or team record) a way to gauge how a team or player develops? Similarly, public schools teach/develop kids but they also have quizzes/tests so gauge a student’s progress. Am I wrong with this assessment?

(I understand some will indicate the strong/fast kids and kick/run tactics, but isn’t learning how to deal with this type of teams part of development?)

Winning at earlier ages likely reflects the size of the player pool for the club. Period. Beyond that, you need to know soccer well to see how your individual child is developing within the context of the team. I think the most practical benchmark if you don't know soccer well is to look at a team's progress against the same teams year over year. It is imperfect -- the rosters change over time -- but it can give you a sense of how your team and coaches are doing relative to other teams. But no, I don't believe winning alone tells you much about development, especially at earlier ages. We moved to a club and team that my child had beaten three times over the course of the year because the other team was part of a club where the coaching was absolutely superb and a nice corrective to some of the tendencies my kid and other younger kids can develop. Even the year over year comparisons vs. the same teams can fall short because of the randomness and variability within soccer games.

Question: There are so many posts and articles that indicate that development is much more important than winning. While I agree, but isn’t wins (or team record) a way to gauge how a team or player develops? Similarly, public schools teach/develop kids but they also have quizzes/tests so gauge a student’s progress. Am I wrong with this assessment?

(I understand some will indicate the strong/fast kids and kick/run tactics, but isn’t learning how to deal with this type of teams part of development?)