Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, there is absolutely no responsibility of the player to find out what improvements need to be made and work towards improving them?

No, at U10 there is a reasonable expectation they will get appropriate playing time. Maybe not start, maybe not every minute of every game, but more than 10 minutes a game.

Now, the coach should be having evaluations with the players. All my kids got those. He can also say that such and such is an expectation to make the team next year. He can and should say to all players that as you move up, playing time changes.

But no, U10. In fact, it is the fall of U10. This is a coaching problem.

Then you should have your kid play in rec. The sad thing is you will not even entertain the idea of determining what shortcomings your player has. While I understand the young age, nevertheless, in travel sports playing time may and can be determined based on merit not just participation. Rec sports allow equal participation regardless of skill or ability to make practices or self improvement.

If you require equal playing time regardless of age you really should consider rec sports especially if you do not feel compelled to help your child improve. Your child is certainly to young to understand this but you are not. Again, the lesson is to work to get better to play more.

I have to wonder if you have any older kids that have been through club soccer.

First, I don't think the OP ever said he wanted equal playing time for his kid. I believe the poster referenced 10 minutes of PT per game, which is absurd at U10.

Second, at U12 and below EVERY player at EVERY level should play 50% of the game at a minimum. The only reason for a coach not to adhere to this would be that they are focused on winning, not development. If that is the case you should RUN from that club.

My daughter plays ECNL at a top club (not in the DC area) and I can tell you that at U14 and below it is extremely rare to see any player not get 50% of a game at minimum. If it happens, it's usually a kid coming back from injury or one that had to be subbed out early for some reason (with no re-entry, that player can't go back in during the same half).

Depends on roster size. My daughter is one of the stronger players on one of her teams and probably in the middle range of the other team. She gets more playing time on the former, and nobody really cares, because the weaker girls on the team are also the ones who are least interested in the game. if we only have 1-2 subs for a game due to no-shows, she might end up playing the entire game except for a water break or two.

I'll get annoyed if she doesn't get a fair share of playing time on either team, because she's one of those players who is more focused with less rest time, and can play any position pretty well. (though she's weakest on striker.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you do not like playing time why not find a new team at a level you’re kid can start and play at

As long as the club will release the player and their money you are good to go. It’s that last part that throws up a roadblock. Sure your kid is playing 15 mins or so a game but if we release them and let you sign up with another club we don’t want to give you any portion of your money back because we budgeted based on keeping those funds. In short we put your kid on the team to get your money. If the club gives the money back (or a proportionate figure) and releases the kid then fine.

Why should a 13 year have to wait half a year to play?

Now, in reality, most clubs and coaches are good about playing time so if you really have an ongoing playing time issue talk about it and if not corrected, leave. Let me say that no club wants parents of kids who do not start to get the idea that they should walk. And, it only takes one kid before a wildfire of defections can set in. Clubs want to keep paying customers happy.

Finally most directors also understand that kids develop at different paces. It is really stupid to focus on kids who are good at 10 and may be all done by the time they are 15, and the star 15 year old may be average at 18. Keep options open and paying customers happy.

I find the majority of Clubs/coaches do this. We have a kid playing up on my youngest child's team who has always played the entire game as striker. 3-years in and he is not effective anymore. Even when he plays like crap in a game--they never sub him out. They marked him as some prodigy at age 7-8, but that is already starting to wear off. There are always favorites and kids that treated differntly in the early years. I have heard coaches talk about 8 years old like they are the next Messi---even at the most 'developmental' Clubs. All this does is turn off most of the other players. Watching a kid get treated differently (fawned over and can miss things, behave bad, etc) affects teammates and it also affects the superstar in a negative way as well. Many I have seen don't work as hard because they are used to everyone fawning over them. The grit is often missing the first time they are faced with challenge and other kids start catching up. I had this scenario in my own household. The way one of my kids was treated at the earliest ages vs the other. They were of equal ability too. But, for whatever reason, coaches fawned over one in the younger years. Who worked harder and kept pushing himself? The kid that always got shit on and had a lot to prove. He was light years above the other one by U15 and it was a real wake-up call for the other one who started commiting more to also practicing on his own. Btw, I've been places where entire teams from age 8 don't vary even as the players become less effective than kids on lower teams. They are viewed a certain way by club/coach and that benefit will carry up to around the teen years when it is too obvious to ignore they aren't the child prodigy after puberty.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, there is absolutely no responsibility of the player to find out what improvements need to be made and work towards improving them?

No, at U10 there is a reasonable expectation they will get appropriate playing time. Maybe not start, maybe not every minute of every game, but more than 10 minutes a game.

Now, the coach should be having evaluations with the players. All my kids got those. He can also say that such and such is an expectation to make the team next year. He can and should say to all players that as you move up, playing time changes.

But no, U10. In fact, it is the fall of U10. This is a coaching problem.

Then you should have your kid play in rec. The sad thing is you will not even entertain the idea of determining what shortcomings your player has. While I understand the young age, nevertheless, in travel sports playing time may and can be determined based on merit not just participation. Rec sports allow equal participation regardless of skill or ability to make practices or self improvement.

If you require equal playing time regardless of age you really should consider rec sports especially if you do not feel compelled to help your child improve. Your child is certainly to young to understand this but you are not. Again, the lesson is to work to get better to play more.

Anonymous wrote:So, there is absolutely no responsibility of the player to find out what improvements need to be made and work towards improving them?

Sure as I said earlier, if a kid has discipline issues it is no problem to follow team or club rules on that as long as they are actually written out somewhere. Every club typically does that. Missing practices and games might be a issue too, but clubs and coaches typically do not press on those because (a) typically it is not the kid’s issue or decision to show up late, or miss a practice, and it is not a discussion that most coaches or club officers want to get into; and (b) rules have to be uniformity enforced. So, if bench player is late to pre-game warmup and rule is he must sit the first half, that same rule will apply if star player is late the next game. As an aside, I remember once fairly early in my kids u14 year her coach was ticked that people were late showing up at the field for a tournament so he said the first 11 kids start and play the first half. They were all pretty good so not a big deal except the starting keeper was not in the first 11. So, had to wing it that first half. Pretty funny but parents and kids were good at showing up on time after that.

As kids get better, grow, get faster or slower over time you may find that different players start or get more playing time. But, still, other than disciplinary issues every kid must play at least 50% of every game with no exceptions. If a coach does not want to do that then the easy thing to do is not put a kid on the team and don’t take his/her parents’ money.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, there is absolutely no responsibility of the player to find out what improvements need to be made and work towards improving them?

Absolutely the player has the responsibility to listen to the coach's feedback, however the coach should really initiate that feedback more frequently if they believe they are in the player development business. If they accept a player/money that they now feel is not working out well, that should be cause to deviate from the once a season/year feedback session.

Yes - the coach has the responsibility to help the player what improvements need to be made to get more playing time. It starts with the adult being the adult. Don't put it on little kids to initiate contact and press a paid coach to do his or her job.

Anonymous wrote:So, there is absolutely no responsibility of the player to find out what improvements need to be made and work towards improving them?

Absolutely the player has the responsibility to listen to the coach's feedback, however the coach should really initiate that feedback more frequently if they believe they are in the player development business. If they accept a player/money that they now feel is not working out well, that should be cause to deviate from the once a season/year feedback session.

Anonymous wrote:So, there is absolutely no responsibility of the player to find out what improvements need to be made and work towards improving them?

No, at U10 there is a reasonable expectation they will get appropriate playing time. Maybe not start, maybe not every minute of every game, but more than 10 minutes a game.

Now, the coach should be having evaluations with the players. All my kids got those. He can also say that such and such is an expectation to make the team next year. He can and should say to all players that as you move up, playing time changes.

But no, U10. In fact, it is the fall of U10. This is a coaching problem.

So, there is absolutely no responsibility of the player to find out what improvements need to be made and work towards improving them?

Anonymous wrote:If you do not like playing time why not find a new team at a level you’re kid can start and play at

As long as the club will release the player and their money you are good to go. It’s that last part that throws up a roadblock. Sure your kid is playing 15 mins or so a game but if we release them and let you sign up with another club we don’t want to give you any portion of your money back because we budgeted based on keeping those funds. In short we put your kid on the team to get your money. If the club gives the money back (or a proportionate figure) and releases the kid then fine.

Why should a 13 year have to wait half a year to play?

Now, in reality, most clubs and coaches are good about playing time so if you really have an ongoing playing time issue talk about it and if not corrected, leave. Let me say that no club wants parents of kids who do not start to get the idea that they should walk. And, it only takes one kid before a wildfire of defections can set in. Clubs want to keep paying customers happy.

Finally most directors also understand that kids develop at different paces. It is really stupid to focus on kids who are good at 10 and may be all done by the time they are 15, and the star 15 year old may be average at 18. Keep options open and paying customers happy.

Anonymous wrote:If you do not like playing time why not find a new team at a level you’re kid can start and play at

Or find a coach who knows how to allocate playing time at the U10 level. And I would also on my way out let the club know why, as this is inappropriate.

If you do not like playing time why not find a new team at a level you’re kid can start and play at

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread started out great but then went to total BS after about page 2. The distinction between rec and travel for playing time the first few years of travel should not exist. They are kids developing and they signed up to play not to sit on the bench. If you're a coach and you don't want to play all your players don't have them on your team. You don't take a 10 year-old on your team and then tell them they're not good enough to play. Some of these people on here are disgusting and have absolutely no business being around children.

Everyone acts as though the kid did not practice all week. Yes, minutes matter but so does practice. So does committing to get better and the parents need to recognize that it is a process and it takes time. Playing time in travel is not a guarantee, you must know that going into a travel team. You are free to disagree with the minutes and you May have your own philosophy regarding playing time but it must be the same as the coach.

The choices now are:
Take ownership and talk with the coach about what the player needs to do to earn more playing time.

Seek out a coach next year who plays everyone half a game no matter how much or how little they work in practice.

And if you do leave to find a coach who agrees with you, you will have wasted an opportunity to find out what weaknesses your kid can improve upon. You will have denied your kid the opportunity to truly develop.

Just curious PP, and all the others in the "tell your kid to work harder" camp, do you have older children?


I probably felt as you do when my kids were U9 and U10, but over the years, things tend to play out in ways you might not expect. Winning seems so important at that age, but no 9 year old should be accepted on a team and then not play at least half a game. How is the kid supposed to get better without game experience? It is not all about practice. Heck, many clubs with multiple teams in an age group have only a quarter of the field to use in practice.

Not to mention, teams in larger clubs often scrimmage in practice against other teams, and the weaker players will sit out in those scrimmages.

Yes, I have older kids who have gone through this. It isn’t about winning and that is a crutch argument. Train away from club, work with the coach to identify weaknesses and work on them. If you do those things then over time playing time will increase.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread started out great but then went to total BS after about page 2. The distinction between rec and travel for playing time the first few years of travel should not exist. They are kids developing and they signed up to play not to sit on the bench. If you're a coach and you don't want to play all your players don't have them on your team. You don't take a 10 year-old on your team and then tell them they're not good enough to play. Some of these people on here are disgusting and have absolutely no business being around children.

Everyone acts as though the kid did not practice all week. Yes, minutes matter but so does practice. So does committing to get better and the parents need to recognize that it is a process and it takes time. Playing time in travel is not a guarantee, you must know that going into a travel team. You are free to disagree with the minutes and you May have your own philosophy regarding playing time but it must be the same as the coach.

The choices now are:
Take ownership and talk with the coach about what the player needs to do to earn more playing time.

Seek out a coach next year who plays everyone half a game no matter how much or how little they work in practice.

And if you do leave to find a coach who agrees with you, you will have wasted an opportunity to find out what weaknesses your kid can improve upon. You will have denied your kid the opportunity to truly develop.

Just curious PP, and all the others in the "tell your kid to work harder" camp, do you have older children?


I probably felt as you do when my kids were U9 and U10, but over the years, things tend to play out in ways you might not expect. Winning seems so important at that age, but no 9 year old should be accepted on a team and then not play at least half a game. How is the kid supposed to get better without game experience? It is not all about practice. Heck, many clubs with multiple teams in an age group have only a quarter of the field to use in practice.

Not to mention, teams in larger clubs often scrimmage in practice against other teams, and the weaker players will sit out in those scrimmages.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread started out great but then went to total BS after about page 2. The distinction between rec and travel for playing time the first few years of travel should not exist. They are kids developing and they signed up to play not to sit on the bench. If you're a coach and you don't want to play all your players don't have them on your team. You don't take a 10 year-old on your team and then tell them they're not good enough to play. Some of these people on here are disgusting and have absolutely no business being around children.

Everyone acts as though the kid did not practice all week. Yes, minutes matter but so does practice. So does committing to get better and the parents need to recognize that it is a process and it takes time. Playing time in travel is not a guarantee, you must know that going into a travel team. You are free to disagree with the minutes and you May have your own philosophy regarding playing time but it must be the same as the coach.

The choices now are:
Take ownership and talk with the coach about what the player needs to do to earn more playing time.

Seek out a coach next year who plays everyone half a game no matter how much or how little they work in practice.

And if you do leave to find a coach who agrees with you, you will have wasted an opportunity to find out what weaknesses your kid can improve upon. You will have denied your kid the opportunity to truly develop.

Just curious PP, and all the others in the "tell your kid to work harder" camp, do you have older children?


I probably felt as you do when my kids were U9 and U10, but over the years, things tend to play out in ways you might not expect. Winning seems so important at that age, but no 9 year old should be accepted on a team and then not play at least half a game. How is the kid supposed to get better without game experience? It is not all about practice. Heck, many clubs with multiple teams in an age group have only a quarter of the field to use in practice.

Not to mention, teams in larger clubs often scrimmage in practice against other teams, and the weaker players will sit out in those scrimmages.