Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Girl soccer parents are nuts on this forum. Glad I have a boy!

Yes and amazingly, based on having both boys and girls, I’d estimate that the girl parents have about 1/10th the knowledge of the game as the boy parents.

+1

I'm trying to figure out this dynamic.

I'm a mom with all boys. I played D1 soccer. My siblings and I all played high level and my dad coached travel. We were trained by a Dutch coach back in the 70s/early 80s.

Is it that there are more moms involved with daughters, kind of like 'dance moms' and they didn't play in their youth?

Dads have always been accused of 'living vicariously' through their sons on the sport field and that has played out for decades. I see a few crazy dads, but they seem to really thin out when the boys get to middle school/high school.

I also think there are many more opportunities for girls in the sport (more scholarships, etc) and since American women started playing so much earlier than all other women in the world initially have dominated so there is more possibility for them. For a male in the US, playing in FIFA is as likely as winning the $300 million Power Ball (and probably odds are even less than that).

I respect all people's opinions on this forum for what they are. With that said....this gives you zero EXTRA credibility on anything. Everything is different now. The fact that you played soccer in the 70s...what am I supposed to do? Read more closely?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Girl soccer parents are nuts on this forum. Glad I have a boy!

Yes and amazingly, based on having both boys and girls, I’d estimate that the girl parents have about 1/10th the knowledge of the game as the boy parents.

+1

I'm trying to figure out this dynamic.

I'm a mom with all boys. I played D1 soccer. My siblings and I all played high level and my dad coached travel. We were trained by a Dutch coach back in the 70s/early 80s.

you had a boy, if you had a girl, you'd still have the same level of knowledge with a daughter. There are plenty of college soccer players who have daughters and plenty of people who never played who have sons.

A team should win 1/3, lose 1/3 and tie 1/3 if they are playing at the correct level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Girl soccer parents are nuts on this forum. Glad I have a boy!

Yes and amazingly, based on having both boys and girls, I’d estimate that the girl parents have about 1/10th the knowledge of the game as the boy parents.

+1

I'm trying to figure out this dynamic.

I'm a mom with all boys. I played D1 soccer. My siblings and I all played high level and my dad coached travel. We were trained by a Dutch coach back in the 70s/early 80s.

Is it that there are more moms involved with daughters, kind of like 'dance moms' and they didn't play in their youth?

Dads have always been accused of 'living vicariously' through their sons on the sport field and that has played out for decades. I see a few crazy dads, but they seem to really thin out when the boys get to middle school/high school.

I also think there are many more opportunities for girls in the sport (more scholarships, etc) and since American women started playing so much earlier than all other women in the world initially have dominated so there is more possibility for them. For a male in the US, playing in FIFA is as likely as winning the $300 million Power Ball (and probably odds are even less than that).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we putting too much pressure on our kids and coaches to win at younger ages.

We have 4-5 threads talking about results of pre season scrimmages. Not only are they pre season games, they are post Covid pre season games.

I read a lot of posts from ex professional soccer players saying results mean nothing until under 17.

Should the focus be on winning or making our kids better soccer players that understand the game.

It depends: what proportion of kids playing soccer are going to be playing meaningful games at age 18 or older? For those few, this is probably correct, but IMO the great bulk of kids' soccer careers are going to be approaching the end, not the beginning, at age 17.

This. My kids love the game, but high school is probably as far as they'll go. In the long run, which is going to be more important/treasured- tournament wins at U13, playing for a league championship in U14, playing for their high school as a sophomore, or having a great grasp of the game for intramurals as a freshman?

Anonymous wrote:let's say one team plays total kickball but wins with fluke fouls/hand balls in the box, toe-ball goals, and a corner kick deflecting into the goal

4-0 WIN!!!

Who knows? Sometimes a handball in the box is enough to win you a World Cup. It's surely good enough for U14. lol

Anonymous wrote:Are we putting too much pressure on our kids and coaches to win at younger ages.

We have 4-5 threads talking about results of pre season scrimmages. Not only are they pre season games, they are post Covid pre season games.

I read a lot of posts from ex professional soccer players saying results mean nothing until under 17.

Should the focus be on winning or making our kids better soccer players that understand the game.

It depends: what proportion of kids playing soccer are going to be playing meaningful games at age 18 or older? For those few, this is probably correct, but IMO the great bulk of kids' soccer careers are going to be approaching the end, not the beginning, at age 17.

You know I've been following this forum for about 4 years now and read just about everything. I thought I've seen it all until I saw these "Let's post the results of scrimmages" threads. I was like WTF? We have lost our way. But let's chalk that up to Covid insanity and just a huge brain fart to care about those things. With that said....I do think it's important for kids to win even before 17. I've used the example in the pasty about Little League World Series. These kids are frickin 11 years old and flying from Asia to middle of nowhere PA to play baseball. I don't see anyone talking about winning isn't important there and saying how kids need to rotate positions and it's all about development. So I think there is a time and place for everything. Kids need to learn how to play soccer and develop their skills from an early age. They need to be with coaches that allow mistakes, encourage creativity. encourage 1v1s, etc. So that winning does follow but winning while playing good soccer. Kids NEED to win to stay engaged and kids NEED to lose too so they don't fall apart when things get tough when it matters. Losing is part of the process but so is winning. Embrace both. You need both to develop. Handling loss is a skill like so many other things that are important in soccer.

Anonymous wrote:Should the focus be on winning or making our kids better soccer players that understand the game.

Coach here

I'd argue that in order to "focus on winning" you need players that understand the game. This obviously is less true at times and at certain levels, but I imagine almost every coach wants a player with a good soccer IQ.

Players naturally want to win. I'd argue people in general want to win. It's when parents and coaches make winning the end all be all that we run into trouble. At the professional level, I somewhat understand, but at the youth level there have been plenty of times where I thought we played an excellent game, but our opponent was simply better or a fluke goal cost us the game. I make sure to let my players know when I feel we play well and when we don't. They know the score, they don't need me to hammer the result of the match into them. Their performance on the other hand - I feel I'm responsible for. It represents a part of me and my training.

I haven't read the scrimmages threads, but I imagine just about everything is being over amplified simply because we haven't had any actual soccer in like 10 months so any news is big news to some people. Especially when you consider the folks on here are probably some of the most fervent parents in the area.

I imagine you'll see a lot of anomalies this fall and hopefully by spring things will get somewhat back to "normal".

Anonymous wrote:let's say one team plays total kickball but wins with fluke fouls/hand balls in the box, toe-ball goals, and a corner kick deflecting into the goal

4-0 WIN!!!

Nothing wrong with a good toe ball goal if its done with purpose and understanding lol.

let's say one team plays total kickball but wins with fluke fouls/hand balls in the box, toe-ball goals, and a corner kick deflecting into the goal

4-0 WIN!!!

Anonymous wrote:Are we putting too much pressure on our kids and coaches to win at younger ages.

We have 4-5 threads talking about results of pre season scrimmages. Not only are they pre season games, they are post Covid pre season games.

I read a lot of posts from ex professional soccer players saying results mean nothing until under 17.

Should the focus be on winning or making our kids better soccer players that understand the game.

It should be on both, but yes trying kids out in different spots, especially during scrimmages is a good thing. At the same time let the parents discuss scores too. Why not? Yes, I’d rather see my kids and her team play really well and lose vs. play crappy and get a lucky win, but when they win they tend to be happier so yes let’s root for them to win. It is a sport after all.

Anonymous wrote:Are we putting too much pressure on our kids and coaches to win at younger ages.

We have 4-5 threads talking about results of pre season scrimmages. Not only are they pre season games, they are post Covid pre season games.

I read a lot of posts from ex professional soccer players saying results mean nothing until under 17.

Should the focus be on winning or making our kids better soccer players that understand the game.

Results mean everything under 17 for the clubs because the clubs do not make money after u17.