Especially when those outsiders become starters instantly. Totallly unfair.

Anonymous wrote:Not looking good for 2nd team kids to move up at u12. Rumor is, our top team took 3 outsiders over 2nd team players. Will follow up. But it’s messed up to take outsiders over 2nd team players.

It might be messed up but it happens at every club. Both my kids are on top teams and I’ve seen it happen every season.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not looking good for 2nd team kids to move up at u12. Rumor is, our top team took 3 outsiders over 2nd team players. Will follow up. But it’s messed up to take outsiders over 2nd team players.

How is it messed up? My U12 kid is an outsider going to a top team. They are coming from a different top team and not the only one. I have no clue whether anyone on the second team “should” have been moved up. I’m sure some were hoping. Why not take someone who is already used to the competition level/speed of play and can hang with current top team players?

This is the PP. You do have a point. But it is also point that if you are on the 2nd team, and the club says stay with us you will be developed, then they never pull 2nd team players up and take better players from outside the club. Then the club does not value 2nd team players and does not develop them. In our case, we have 3-4 2nd team players who have improved drastically, did very well in tryouts, but the top team took outside players who did not even attend tryouts. The whole thing smells like a big back-door deal.

Does the first team always practice with the second team at your club? If not, maybe those other players went to practices with the first team before tryouts. My child did that at one club. On the day we went it was only the first team of their age group training with the first team of the age group one year older.

I agree that if your kid is on the 2nd team and you feel they should be moved up, go to other clubs' practices/tryouts. They may get a first team offer somewhere else. I know at least two kids where that was the case this spring. Different coaches look for different attributes. Loyalty to a club doesn't really make any sense. Some individual coaches might care about a kid's development, but many do not. We got really lucky to have a coach who recognized and pushed for our kid to be moved up to first team when they were a little younger. I do think being on the first team opens doors. Coaches at other clubs are more likely to let you practice with their first team if they know you are already on a first team.

This is the PP. Yes, our 1st team practices separately, so we can't see what they are doing or who attends ect. Another parent on the 1st team told me they took 3x outside the club players who didn't even attend tryouts, they were at their practice sessions. So, yeah...we can't attend our own 1st team practices, but apparently other kids from other 1st teams can.

Have you asked? We asked a few months ago and were told yes. My son performed well and was invited back whenever it didn't conflict with his team's practice. Tryouts are next week and it is looking like he will make the team. Moral of the story? Ask.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not looking good for 2nd team kids to move up at u12. Rumor is, our top team took 3 outsiders over 2nd team players. Will follow up. But it’s messed up to take outsiders over 2nd team players.

How is it messed up? My U12 kid is an outsider going to a top team. They are coming from a different top team and not the only one. I have no clue whether anyone on the second team “should” have been moved up. I’m sure some were hoping. Why not take someone who is already used to the competition level/speed of play and can hang with current top team players?

This is the PP. You do have a point. But it is also point that if you are on the 2nd team, and the club says stay with us you will be developed, then they never pull 2nd team players up and take better players from outside the club. Then the club does not value 2nd team players and does not develop them. In our case, we have 3-4 2nd team players who have improved drastically, did very well in tryouts, but the top team took outside players who did not even attend tryouts. The whole thing smells like a big back-door deal.

Does the first team always practice with the second team at your club? If not, maybe those other players went to practices with the first team before tryouts. My child did that at one club. On the day we went it was only the first team of their age group training with the first team of the age group one year older.

I agree that if your kid is on the 2nd team and you feel they should be moved up, go to other clubs' practices/tryouts. They may get a first team offer somewhere else. I know at least two kids where that was the case this spring. Different coaches look for different attributes. Loyalty to a club doesn't really make any sense. Some individual coaches might care about a kid's development, but many do not. We got really lucky to have a coach who recognized and pushed for our kid to be moved up to first team when they were a little younger. I do think being on the first team opens doors. Coaches at other clubs are more likely to let you practice with their first team if they know you are already on a first team.

This is the PP. Yes, our 1st team practices separately, so we can't see what they are doing or who attends ect. Another parent on the 1st team told me they took 3x outside the club players who didn't even attend tryouts, they were at their practice sessions. So, yeah...we can't attend our own 1st team practices, but apparently other kids from other 1st teams can.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not looking good for 2nd team kids to move up at u12. Rumor is, our top team took 3 outsiders over 2nd team players. Will follow up. But it’s messed up to take outsiders over 2nd team players.

How is it messed up? My U12 kid is an outsider going to a top team. They are coming from a different top team and not the only one. I have no clue whether anyone on the second team “should” have been moved up. I’m sure some were hoping. Why not take someone who is already used to the competition level/speed of play and can hang with current top team players?

This is the PP. You do have a point. But it is also point that if you are on the 2nd team, and the club says stay with us you will be developed, then they never pull 2nd team players up and take better players from outside the club. Then the club does not value 2nd team players and does not develop them. In our case, we have 3-4 2nd team players who have improved drastically, did very well in tryouts, but the top team took outside players who did not even attend tryouts. The whole thing smells like a big back-door deal.

Does the first team always practice with the second team at your club? If not, maybe those other players went to practices with the first team before tryouts. My child did that at one club. On the day we went it was only the first team of their age group training with the first team of the age group one year older.

I agree that if your kid is on the 2nd team and you feel they should be moved up, go to other clubs' practices/tryouts. They may get a first team offer somewhere else. I know at least two kids where that was the case this spring. Different coaches look for different attributes. Loyalty to a club doesn't really make any sense. Some individual coaches might care about a kid's development, but many do not. We got really lucky to have a coach who recognized and pushed for our kid to be moved up to first team when they were a little younger. I do think being on the first team opens doors. Coaches at other clubs are more likely to let you practice with their first team if they know you are already on a first team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents: We want teams to focus on developing players not just winning.

Also Parents: We should cut 3 players because they hold onto the ball too long and have low soccer IQ.

Parents, you are the problem.

We want fairness. Kids who work hard and continue to develop should earn their spot and even move up. On the other hand, kids who consistently hold the team back—whether by being uncoachable, slowing down the team’s development, or contributing to repeated losses—should be moved down to a level that matches their current performance and commitment.

Yes, we want every kid to have a chance to grow, but fairness means holding everyone accountable. It’s not fair to the hardworking players to let others stay in spots they haven’t earned.

One kid scores in almost every game. Multiple goals in some games. But also almost never passes and is responsible for the most turnovers. Can attribute most of the wins to this kid’s goals At same time most of the losses from not distributing the ball and losing the ball. Also less development for the team because one kid hogs the ball. Dilemma?

Being a ballhog + not passing + scoring goals works in lower level leagues. These specific actions DO NOT work at the highest levels. Defenders are too good in the highest levels + will shut down ballhogs that don't pass. You have to play as a team to create opportunities at higher levels of soccer.

Does this apply to Messi too (and his kids)?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not looking good for 2nd team kids to move up at u12. Rumor is, our top team took 3 outsiders over 2nd team players. Will follow up. But it’s messed up to take outsiders over 2nd team players.

How is it messed up? My U12 kid is an outsider going to a top team. They are coming from a different top team and not the only one. I have no clue whether anyone on the second team “should” have been moved up. I’m sure some were hoping. Why not take someone who is already used to the competition level/speed of play and can hang with current top team players?

This is the PP. You do have a point. But it is also point that if you are on the 2nd team, and the club says stay with us you will be developed, then they never pull 2nd team players up and take better players from outside the club. Then the club does not value 2nd team players and does not develop them. In our case, we have 3-4 2nd team players who have improved drastically, did very well in tryouts, but the top team took outside players who did not even attend tryouts. The whole thing smells like a big back-door deal.

This is why you're always supposed to be trying out at and making connections at other clubs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not looking good for 2nd team kids to move up at u12. Rumor is, our top team took 3 outsiders over 2nd team players. Will follow up. But it’s messed up to take outsiders over 2nd team players.

How is it messed up? My U12 kid is an outsider going to a top team. They are coming from a different top team and not the only one. I have no clue whether anyone on the second team “should” have been moved up. I’m sure some were hoping. Why not take someone who is already used to the competition level/speed of play and can hang with current top team players?

This is the PP. You do have a point. But it is also point that if you are on the 2nd team, and the club says stay with us you will be developed, then they never pull 2nd team players up and take better players from outside the club. Then the club does not value 2nd team players and does not develop them. In our case, we have 3-4 2nd team players who have improved drastically, did very well in tryouts, but the top team took outside players who did not even attend tryouts. The whole thing smells like a big back-door deal.

Anonymous wrote:Parents: We want teams to focus on developing players not just winning.

Also Parents: We should cut 3 players because they hold onto the ball too long and have low soccer IQ.

Parents, you are the problem.

Some kids are not developable to the level they are playing at and never will be. Those players should be removed for players who have some of the attributes necessary to succeed at the level of play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents: We want teams to focus on developing players not just winning.

Also Parents: We should cut 3 players because they hold onto the ball too long and have low soccer IQ.

Parents, you are the problem.

We want fairness. Kids who work hard and continue to develop should earn their spot and even move up. On the other hand, kids who consistently hold the team back—whether by being uncoachable, slowing down the team’s development, or contributing to repeated losses—should be moved down to a level that matches their current performance and commitment.

Yes, we want every kid to have a chance to grow, but fairness means holding everyone accountable. It’s not fair to the hardworking players to let others stay in spots they haven’t earned.

One kid scores in almost every game. Multiple goals in some games. But also almost never passes and is responsible for the most turnovers. Can attribute most of the wins to this kid’s goals At same time most of the losses from not distributing the ball and losing the ball. Also less development for the team because one kid hogs the ball. Dilemma?

Being a ballhog + not passing + scoring goals works in lower level leagues. These specific actions DO NOT work at the highest levels. Defenders are too good in the highest levels + will shut down ballhogs that don't pass. You have to play as a team to create opportunities at higher levels of soccer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents: We want teams to focus on developing players not just winning.

Also Parents: We should cut 3 players because they hold onto the ball too long and have low soccer IQ.

Parents, you are the problem.

We want fairness. Kids who work hard and continue to develop should earn their spot and even move up. On the other hand, kids who consistently hold the team back—whether by being uncoachable, slowing down the team’s development, or contributing to repeated losses—should be moved down to a level that matches their current performance and commitment.

Yes, we want every kid to have a chance to grow, but fairness means holding everyone accountable. It’s not fair to the hardworking players to let others stay in spots they haven’t earned.

One kid scores in almost every game. Multiple goals in some games. But also almost never passes and is responsible for the most turnovers. Can attribute most of the wins to this kid’s goals At same time most of the losses from not distributing the ball and losing the ball. Also less development for the team because one kid hogs the ball. Dilemma?

Did you seriously just say less development for the team because of one kid?

How old is this Khan of all Khans?

My kid is u15 on a top 30 in the nation team. Here's some feedback on this topic. First some players are just going to be more physically able than others. Coaches will ALWAYS pick these players first because they all think they can develop any player to the highest levels. These players will always have an advantage sometimes people call it RAE but that kind of thing goes away by u13-u14. Soccer IQ is usually how smaller players differentiate themselves but this only works if coach's respect more of a possession style of play. Once you get to the highest levels all the players have a high soccer iq, they practice constantly, and the truly gifted use their gifts to take things to the next level.

Reguardiing how players get picked for the top team. Usually you can tell if the club is into recruiting over development if their top team is really good and the 2nd 3rd etc teams are nonexistent. Clubs that value development have several levels of teams and they're all relatively good. They'll also likely have a big rec program. All groups should be funneling top players up once talent is identified.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents: We want teams to focus on developing players not just winning.

Also Parents: We should cut 3 players because they hold onto the ball too long and have low soccer IQ.

Parents, you are the problem.

We want fairness. Kids who work hard and continue to develop should earn their spot and even move up. On the other hand, kids who consistently hold the team back—whether by being uncoachable, slowing down the team’s development, or contributing to repeated losses—should be moved down to a level that matches their current performance and commitment.

Yes, we want every kid to have a chance to grow, but fairness means holding everyone accountable. It’s not fair to the hardworking players to let others stay in spots they haven’t earned.

One kid scores in almost every game. Multiple goals in some games. But also almost never passes and is responsible for the most turnovers. Can attribute most of the wins to this kid’s goals At same time most of the losses from not distributing the ball and losing the ball. Also less development for the team because one kid hogs the ball. Dilemma?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents: We want teams to focus on developing players not just winning.

Also Parents: We should cut 3 players because they hold onto the ball too long and have low soccer IQ.

Parents, you are the problem.

We want fairness. Kids who work hard and continue to develop should earn their spot and even move up. On the other hand, kids who consistently hold the team back—whether by being uncoachable, slowing down the team’s development, or contributing to repeated losses—should be moved down to a level that matches their current performance and commitment.

Yes, we want every kid to have a chance to grow, but fairness means holding everyone accountable. It’s not fair to the hardworking players to let others stay in spots they haven’t earned.

In most cases the players are just as hard working if not more but they just aren’t as good. If you still want to replace them with better players then all your talk about accountability is code for winning over development.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parents: We want teams to focus on developing players not just winning.

Also Parents: We should cut 3 players because they hold onto the ball too long and have low soccer IQ.

Parents, you are the problem.

We want fairness. Kids who work hard and continue to develop should earn their spot and even move up. On the other hand, kids who consistently hold the team back—whether by being uncoachable, slowing down the team’s development, or contributing to repeated losses—should be moved down to a level that matches their current performance and commitment.

Yes, we want every kid to have a chance to grow, but fairness means holding everyone accountable. It’s not fair to the hardworking players to let others stay in spots they haven’t earned.

This is a great sentiment but as parents we also are biased and don't see all the practices and unless a soccer coach or player can't also not necessarily judge soccer skills or development.