you should encourage those more motivated players to do ADP and not rec. this is the wrong place for them.

Make it fun.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to balance. Just don't always pair the not interested kid with the interested kid (eg in a practice). It gets frustrating for the kids who have talent/care about being there. Our coach was great and always found a "job" for that kid to do, like put on offense and their job was to kick the ball out (more advanced players get annoyed at that play, but it gave the less confident kids a specific thing to do and they gained confidence).

OP here. You mention the frustration of the kids who have talent. This is a real issue on our team. The 4 or 5 players who want to be on the field, and who want to learn, are being disrupted and held back by those that don't. A 45-minute practice is effectively reduced to 30 minutes. The 15 minutes of lost time arises from the kids who just really don't give a hoot and would rather shift over to the playground.

I realize they are just kids, but there is little point in a child showing up for practice unless that child intends to invest some effort and energy. I'm not trying to turn these kids into pros, but I want them to improve. Much progress could be made if every kid actually wanted to be on the field.

I do try to make the practices fun, and we have a goof-off period at the end of the practice where we just have a good time. So I think there is some levity to the practices. But even so, there are 3 or 4 kids that I just can't seem get pointed in the right direction. Their skills haven't progressed one bit, despite the fact that they have some athletic ability.

This is 8 & 9-year-old rec. If their skills do not progress so what. They are outside having fun. That is all rec soccer should be at that age. Kids who are interested and self-motivated and or parent motivated will move off to travel etc... The rest will either quit or play rec just for fun nothing wrong with that.

You should coach something higher because your view of rec is off.

Signed parent of three kids who played soccer or lax in college, division one. Two of which did not start their sport til 9th grade.

Yeah, this. All we expected from rec soccer was fun and some movement, not skill improvement.

OP here. Tell this to the half of my players that are there to improve. Many kids simply can't fit ADP or travel into their schedule. They are on the soccer field, in the rec league, so that they can learn and improve.

I'm not sure if the existence of ADP is helpful. Perhaps we would be better off with just rec and travel, so that the rec league could have a greater % of players who are motivated. I realize there are pros and cons to having ADP, but the league definitely has an adverse impact on many kids who have talent but who, for one reason or another, must play in rec.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to balance. Just don't always pair the not interested kid with the interested kid (eg in a practice). It gets frustrating for the kids who have talent/care about being there. Our coach was great and always found a "job" for that kid to do, like put on offense and their job was to kick the ball out (more advanced players get annoyed at that play, but it gave the less confident kids a specific thing to do and they gained confidence).

OP here. You mention the frustration of the kids who have talent. This is a real issue on our team. The 4 or 5 players who want to be on the field, and who want to learn, are being disrupted and held back by those that don't. A 45-minute practice is effectively reduced to 30 minutes. The 15 minutes of lost time arises from the kids who just really don't give a hoot and would rather shift over to the playground.

I realize they are just kids, but there is little point in a child showing up for practice unless that child intends to invest some effort and energy. I'm not trying to turn these kids into pros, but I want them to improve. Much progress could be made if every kid actually wanted to be on the field.

I do try to make the practices fun, and we have a goof-off period at the end of the practice where we just have a good time. So I think there is some levity to the practices. But even so, there are 3 or 4 kids that I just can't seem get pointed in the right direction. Their skills haven't progressed one bit, despite the fact that they have some athletic ability.

This is 8 & 9-year-old rec. If their skills do not progress so what. They are outside having fun. That is all rec soccer should be at that age. Kids who are interested and self-motivated and or parent motivated will move off to travel etc... The rest will either quit or play rec just for fun nothing wrong with that.

You should coach something higher because your view of rec is off.

Signed parent of three kids who played soccer or lax in college, division one. Two of which did not start their sport til 9th grade.

Yeah, this. All we expected from rec soccer was fun and some movement, not skill improvement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to balance. Just don't always pair the not interested kid with the interested kid (eg in a practice). It gets frustrating for the kids who have talent/care about being there. Our coach was great and always found a "job" for that kid to do, like put on offense and their job was to kick the ball out (more advanced players get annoyed at that play, but it gave the less confident kids a specific thing to do and they gained confidence).

OP here. You mention the frustration of the kids who have talent. This is a real issue on our team. The 4 or 5 players who want to be on the field, and who want to learn, are being disrupted and held back by those that don't. A 45-minute practice is effectively reduced to 30 minutes. The 15 minutes of lost time arises from the kids who just really don't give a hoot and would rather shift over to the playground.

I realize they are just kids, but there is little point in a child showing up for practice unless that child intends to invest some effort and energy. I'm not trying to turn these kids into pros, but I want them to improve. Much progress could be made if every kid actually wanted to be on the field.

I do try to make the practices fun, and we have a goof-off period at the end of the practice where we just have a good time. So I think there is some levity to the practices. But even so, there are 3 or 4 kids that I just can't seem get pointed in the right direction. Their skills haven't progressed one bit, despite the fact that they have some athletic ability.

This is 8 & 9-year-old rec. If their skills do not progress so what. They are outside having fun. That is all rec soccer should be at that age. Kids who are interested and self-motivated and or parent motivated will move off to travel etc... The rest will either quit or play rec just for fun nothing wrong with that.

You should coach something higher because your view of rec is off.

Signed parent of three kids who played soccer or lax in college, division one. Two of which did not start their sport til 9th grade.

Anonymous wrote:You agreed to coach a team, everyone on the team.
Your query is limited to rec but travel has the same issue.
Coach them all. Lead the team where they can and should go. There is no magic trick except for a long grind of development and time

who the heck is paying $3k per year for a travel player and the kid isn't even interested? Crazy

I realize they are just kids, but there is little point in a child showing up for practice unless that child intends to invest some effort and energy. I'm not trying to turn these kids into pros, but I want them to improve. Much progress could be made if every kid actually wanted to be on the field.

I mean, if any team had all motivated players, yes, it would be better than having some players that are not motivated. But, that's usually not the case, even in travel. In rec, they may not really care about improving, nor may their parents. They may just be there to be outdoors and have fun.

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to balance. Just don't always pair the not interested kid with the interested kid (eg in a practice). It gets frustrating for the kids who have talent/care about being there. Our coach was great and always found a "job" for that kid to do, like put on offense and their job was to kick the ball out (more advanced players get annoyed at that play, but it gave the less confident kids a specific thing to do and they gained confidence).

OP here. You mention the frustration of the kids who have talent. This is a real issue on our team. The 4 or 5 players who want to be on the field, and who want to learn, are being disrupted and held back by those that don't. A 45-minute practice is effectively reduced to 30 minutes. The 15 minutes of lost time arises from the kids who just really don't give a hoot and would rather shift over to the playground.

I realize they are just kids, but there is little point in a child showing up for practice unless that child intends to invest some effort and energy. I'm not trying to turn these kids into pros, but I want them to improve. Much progress could be made if every kid actually wanted to be on the field.

I do try to make the practices fun, and we have a goof-off period at the end of the practice where we just have a good time. So I think there is some levity to the practices. But even so, there are 3 or 4 kids that I just can't seem get pointed in the right direction. Their skills haven't progressed one bit, despite the fact that they have some athletic ability.

I would look to get some small wins for those that don't seem as interested. Find a couple of things they can do well and concentrate on that. Give them fewer choices in their position. "if you get the ball, you can do X or Y, that's it." Praise them if they do X or Y even if the option didn't work out, they did the right thing. Hearing, "that's OK" or "I like what you were thinking" goes a long way to building confidence. Confidence is a main reason why they aren't interested. Once the get that then their motivation will go up.

It's hard to balance. Just don't always pair the not interested kid with the interested kid (eg in a practice). It gets frustrating for the kids who have talent/care about being there. Our coach was great and always found a "job" for that kid to do, like put on offense and their job was to kick the ball out (more advanced players get annoyed at that play, but it gave the less confident kids a specific thing to do and they gained confidence).

Don't "run" a practice, have fun, realize they are 8 and 9 not 18 moist of those girls won't be playing soccer in a few years and they will be playing something else.

I have picture of the team I coached at that age in my office.
2 played high school soccer, 1 played field hockey, 1 played volleyball, 2 played lacrosse, 2 cheer/poms and a few nothing. Those who played for high school teams also played cllub year round but always joined our rec team every year.

Now they are all successful young ladies in college, some playing in college but the most important thing I learned was my job was not to coach them to be better soccer players but to be confident, believe in themselves, be happy and have fun. We won some, we lost a lot but we always had fun and they kept coming back year after year and by the end of high school they "coached" themselves and played rec through their junior year.

It was very strange showing up for games and them driving themselves and thinking back to all the cleats I had to tie or have extra ponytail holders around my wrist.

Great memories, cherish it, don't ruin it by think they all have to be good.

Anonymous wrote:You coach them all. Do your best to make practices fun, based on what the kids on your team enjoy. Try to do things that build a sense of team -- kids who maybe don't care about the sport may care about their teammates if they have some connections.

Also, "disinterested" doesn't mean " not interested." It means "not influenced by considerations of personal advantage, unbiased, not having a personal stake in the outcome." I realize I'm fighting a losing battle on this point, but still I try.

Thanks for the soccer advice. Good advice.

In regard to advice on use of the English language, I'm not seeking any on the soccer board. Please fight your "battle" elsewhere, and also take a second look at the definition of "disinterested":

[url]
https://www.google.com/search?q=disinterested&rlz=1C1GCEB_enUS925US925&oq=disinterested&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i433l6j0j46i433j0.1532j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8[/url]

You coach them all. Do your best to make practices fun, based on what the kids on your team enjoy. Try to do things that build a sense of team -- kids who maybe don't care about the sport may care about their teammates if they have some connections.

Also, "disinterested" doesn't mean " not interested." It means "not influenced by considerations of personal advantage, unbiased, not having a personal stake in the outcome." I realize I'm fighting a losing battle on this point, but still I try.

You agreed to coach a team, everyone on the team.
Your query is limited to rec but travel has the same issue.
Coach them all. Lead the team where they can and should go. There is no magic trick except for a long grind of development and time

I've coached a girls rec league team the last couple of years. Ages 8 and 9.

Half of the players are motivated and eager to learn, and half are not (they have been forced to play by their parents).

It can be challenging to run a practice in which 50% of the kids are motivated and 50% are counting the seconds until the practice is over.

I'm curious to hear from other coaches in similar situations. What has been your approach for dealing with the disinterested half of the team? Do you invest extra time in them, trying to get them interested in the game? Or do you simply try to minimize the negative effect that they have on the positive half of the team?