Anonymous wrote:I really wish that they played 9 v 9 on proportional fields. Part of the reason clubs play "up" at 11 v 11 the spring of U12 is that the players have outgrown the 9 v 9 field (that they have played on since 7 v 7). At that point, you have goalies punting from one box to another and shots on goal from close to midfield. The 9 v 9 field is really too small at that point.

Funny you say that because some clubs have home fields that are as big as possible on a typical 11 v 11 just shortened. However, most are just dividing them to get the most possible games in. My kid has been 11 v 11 for a couple years now, but the field differences were extreme.

I really wish that they played 9 v 9 on proportional fields. Part of the reason clubs play "up" at 11 v 11 the spring of U12 is that the players have outgrown the 9 v 9 field (that they have played on since 7 v 7). At that point, you have goalies punting from one box to another and shots on goal from close to midfield. The 9 v 9 field is really too small at that point.

Teams 3, 4 and 5 are revenue teams - find a small club where your kid can play on 1st or 2nd team in the appropriate division in an appropriate league, and develop as a player

Anonymous wrote:My kid plays for a big academy. He is on the 3rd team (out of 5). Team did terrible in the Fall season (finished 7th out of 8 teams). Many games we didn't cross the midfield. The academy has decided to sign the team up to play a year up this Spring to prepare them for 11 a side in the Fall. I cannot wrap my head around this decision. I believe half the team will not finish the season playing this sport due to frustration or injury. At the tail end in the Fall, the team played a year up in a tournament and managed to lose every game including the consolation game in a lopsided manner.
When I have asked the administrators what is the thought process, they tell me that at this age results dont matter and that its good for the kids to face high level competition.
The situation seems insane to me. Any thoughts?

Run from ANY club rushing to 11v11. It is called development for a reason. It takes time. If you are U11 and U12, ask the questions at tryouts so you are not blindsided.

3/4 of the U13 MLS Next I players can't receive and turn under pressure and the games are glorified cross country meets with poor touches.

Anonymous wrote:Whoever your striker is, they are going to hate it. They will never get the ball and just stand up top waiting for your team to long ball it to them for most of the game. Then, your team will get into the bad habit of kicking it to the striker. My kid is striker now, who should be playing 9v9 but our club has them playing up 11v11 (because it looks good on paper) and they never touch the ball unless they go back to help out the defense. There is not much development going on for the team. The other kids are bigger, faster and just mentally process the game faster. Playing up 1 year should not be for the average team.

When a kid (usually bigger faster early developer) is used only as a striker to outrun opponents and score goals on weak goalies, it's a disservice to the kid

They grow minus learning required skillsets to deal with stronger defenders and good goalies when they get older and the physical advantage is gone. They are also very weak in other areas of the field

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid plays for a big academy. He is on the 3rd team (out of 5). Team did terrible in the Fall season (finished 7th out of 8 teams). Many games we didn't cross the midfield. The academy has decided to sign the team up to play a year up this Spring to prepare them for 11 a side in the Fall. I cannot wrap my head around this decision. I believe half the team will not finish the season playing this sport due to frustration or injury. At the tail end in the Fall, the team played a year up in a tournament and managed to lose every game including the consolation game in a lopsided manner.
When I have asked the administrators what is the thought process, they tell me that at this age results dont matter and that its good for the kids to face high level competition.
The situation seems insane to me. Any thoughts?

We are definitely operating fast and loose with 'academy'

That aside, the fact you're completely consumed with team performance over your kid's individual development means whatever team he's on won't make much of a difference

Team cannot cross the mid field most games...Explain to me as a toddler how anyone can someone flourish under those conditions. Asking for a friend...

What age is this?

11

Whoever your striker is, they are going to hate it. They will never get the ball and just stand up top waiting for your team to long ball it to them for most of the game. Then, your team will get into the bad habit of kicking it to the striker. My kid is striker now, who should be playing 9v9 but our club has them playing up 11v11 (because it looks good on paper) and they never touch the ball unless they go back to help out the defense. There is not much development going on for the team. The other kids are bigger, faster and just mentally process the game faster. Playing up 1 year should not be for the average team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid plays for a big academy. He is on the 3rd team (out of 5). Team did terrible in the Fall season (finished 7th out of 8 teams). Many games we didn't cross the midfield. The academy has decided to sign the team up to play a year up this Spring to prepare them for 11 a side in the Fall. I cannot wrap my head around this decision. I believe half the team will not finish the season playing this sport due to frustration or injury. At the tail end in the Fall, the team played a year up in a tournament and managed to lose every game including the consolation game in a lopsided manner.
When I have asked the administrators what is the thought process, they tell me that at this age results dont matter and that its good for the kids to face high level competition.
The situation seems insane to me. Any thoughts?

We are definitely operating fast and loose with 'academy'

That aside, the fact you're completely consumed with team performance over your kid's individual development means whatever team he's on won't make much of a difference

Team cannot cross the mid field most games...Explain to me as a toddler how anyone can someone flourish under those conditions. Asking for a friend...

What age is this?

Whatever age, as a team and coach they sound out of their depth

Yes, adversity is good and required, but there needs to be occasional rewards for effort
One thing the coach should do is set in game goals and benchmarks that has nothing to do with the scoreboard.

Also playing strong teams of same age is as good as playing up for competition

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid plays for a big academy. He is on the 3rd team (out of 5). Team did terrible in the Fall season (finished 7th out of 8 teams). Many games we didn't cross the midfield. The academy has decided to sign the team up to play a year up this Spring to prepare them for 11 a side in the Fall. I cannot wrap my head around this decision. I believe half the team will not finish the season playing this sport due to frustration or injury. At the tail end in the Fall, the team played a year up in a tournament and managed to lose every game including the consolation game in a lopsided manner.
When I have asked the administrators what is the thought process, they tell me that at this age results dont matter and that its good for the kids to face high level competition.
The situation seems insane to me. Any thoughts?

We are definitely operating fast and loose with 'academy'

That aside, the fact you're completely consumed with team performance over your kid's individual development means whatever team he's on won't make much of a difference

Team cannot cross the mid field most games...Explain to me as a toddler how anyone can someone flourish under those conditions. Asking for a friend...

I agree with you and I hate this position that some people take that if you or your child cares about wins or losses that is some sort of moral failing. A team that is not at all competitive in their division/league is not a fun team to play on. And if the team isn't competitive, there is very little development happening. It is reasonable that players and parents would be unhappy. That is very different than a parent who argues that only the starters should get playing time so that the team can win every game.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid plays for a big academy. He is on the 3rd team (out of 5). Team did terrible in the Fall season (finished 7th out of 8 teams). Many games we didn't cross the midfield. The academy has decided to sign the team up to play a year up this Spring to prepare them for 11 a side in the Fall. I cannot wrap my head around this decision. I believe half the team will not finish the season playing this sport due to frustration or injury. At the tail end in the Fall, the team played a year up in a tournament and managed to lose every game including the consolation game in a lopsided manner.
When I have asked the administrators what is the thought process, they tell me that at this age results dont matter and that its good for the kids to face high level competition.
The situation seems insane to me. Any thoughts?

We are definitely operating fast and loose with 'academy'

That aside, the fact you're completely consumed with team performance over your kid's individual development means whatever team he's on won't make much of a difference

Team cannot cross the mid field most games...Explain to me as a toddler how anyone can someone flourish under those conditions. Asking for a friend...

What age is this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid plays for a big academy. He is on the 3rd team (out of 5). Team did terrible in the Fall season (finished 7th out of 8 teams). Many games we didn't cross the midfield. The academy has decided to sign the team up to play a year up this Spring to prepare them for 11 a side in the Fall. I cannot wrap my head around this decision. I believe half the team will not finish the season playing this sport due to frustration or injury. At the tail end in the Fall, the team played a year up in a tournament and managed to lose every game including the consolation game in a lopsided manner.
When I have asked the administrators what is the thought process, they tell me that at this age results dont matter and that its good for the kids to face high level competition.
The situation seems insane to me. Any thoughts?

We are definitely operating fast and loose with 'academy'

That aside, the fact you're completely consumed with team performance over your kid's individual development means whatever team he's on won't make much of a difference

Team cannot cross the mid field most games...Explain to me as a toddler how anyone can someone flourish under those conditions. Asking for a friend...

Anonymous wrote:My kid plays for a big academy. He is on the 3rd team (out of 5). Team did terrible in the Fall season (finished 7th out of 8 teams). Many games we didn't cross the midfield. The academy has decided to sign the team up to play a year up this Spring to prepare them for 11 a side in the Fall. I cannot wrap my head around this decision. I believe half the team will not finish the season playing this sport due to frustration or injury. At the tail end in the Fall, the team played a year up in a tournament and managed to lose every game including the consolation game in a lopsided manner.
When I have asked the administrators what is the thought process, they tell me that at this age results dont matter and that its good for the kids to face high level competition.
The situation seems insane to me. Any thoughts?

We are definitely operating fast and loose with 'academy'

That aside, the fact you're completely consumed with team performance over your kid's individual development means whatever team he's on won't make much of a difference

You need to band together as parents and send a group e-mail to your Tech Director and request to stay 9v9. We played 1 year up in the fall and it has been difficult. 2 wins 8 losses. They added extra kids and aside from losing, my kid touches the ball a lot less now. My kid is a winger and he hardly ever sees the ball. Our defense & goal keeper gets more practice as we can't get it past half way line either. It would have been better for him to have played 9v9.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its so they can expand the roster and make more money. It is actually better for your kid to stay 9v9 as long as possible. Get out if you can.

Theoretically, but no one is joining a team that lost all their fall games.

That's assuming that all parents check the record of the team they are thinking about joining, before deciding which team to try out for. I wouldn't be surprised if more than half don't.

my sons team did the same - not a strong team and then they pushed them up in the spring of u12 year. It got even worse the following year when we had been in a mid-level NCSL division in u12 fall and doing okay, then with the team consolidation (4 teams => 3 teams for 11v11), we got to a top NCSL division. I asked the coach why this happened and he said he didn't know and didn't care. I asked the admin & TD and they said they pre-coordinated it with the coach. My takeaway was that the coach just didn't care and so we spent the next 1.5 years getting back into the 'right' NCSL division. A lot of families left because it wasn't fun when the kids knew they were going to lose every game, and we couldn't even get into the right divisions for tournaments because we were playing in too high an NCSL division. The coach (& some parents) might envision some long-term benefits, but the kids are at the age where they start to get a vote, and a lot of them stopped playing soccer because of that coach & situation. Coach wasn't a bad person, he just didn't care enough to spend the time to get us in the right division.