Anonymous wrote:We are on a U10 “b” team. Great coach that is emphasizing development of all players. That’s how it should be.

Having a coach that focused on development rather than winning is a good thing. Unfortunately, most parents & kids rather be on winning teams, particularly good players. Hence, these development type teams will eventually loose players to better teams. Also, these teams have a hard time filling out their roosters.

We are on a U10 “b” team. Great coach that is emphasizing development of all players. That’s how it should be.

If a coach/team is starting and/or playing certain players more purely due to nepotism or relationships, then this is completely unfair. Recommend moving to another team.

But if the coach is doing it because certain kids have more talent/skills, encourage your kids to practice and train more and harder.

While life is unfair, it typically favors the focused, determined and hard working individuals. Hence, focus on the positive and encourage your son to practice harder & more. He’ll end up being a much better player no matter what team he’s on.

Use this as a “chip on his shoulder” similarly to what Tom Brady does throughout his football career and many other athletes.

I teach this to my daughter.

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you aren't happy find a new club. If your kid is not getting playing time on a travel team, move them down a level to an in house league or rec.

What about if you're unhappy on a macro level?

Maybe this isn't what we should be doing in U.S. soccer at all. We're giving kids bad experiences, which may drive them out of the game. And we may be stifling the development of kids who didn't impress Mr. E License U9 Coach but actually has some talent, aptitude and passion for the game.

Certainly, the older the age group, the less we should expect balance. At U11, OK, maybe some players only get 10-15 minutes per game. At U9? Seriously?

The OP complaint was that the player was only getting 20-25 minutes per game not 10-15. Depending on the age this at or just under half a game or closer to 35%-45% of the game. We also don’t know the actual age or bench size. My guess is it is a large bench which is always a red flag. Even with the best of intentions gameflow and sub moments can easily take a 50% rotation and flush it down to 30% through no real fault of the coach. The problem is still the same though.

At any age, if a kid is only getting 10-15 minutes a game just take the hint and find a more appropriate level. The 30-40% amount of time kid I’d talk to the coach.

Unless your club/coach are setting other goals for a competition and rewarding based on that, why wouldnt all coaches want to win? You are out there playing to win, whatever your strengths/weaknesses. It’s how you go about it that differentiates. Machiavelian, perhaps not the greatest strategy in youth soccer, but if the clubparent expectation is to be “winning”, that club will probably have no problem succeeding, especially in this area. There is nothing wrong with that if thats the goal. That culture could foster development of certain players. Maybe they are looking for 4 to 5 A type aggressive physical 8-10 years old that bring it and can become tekkers and IQ’d too by u12. Instant gratification isnt always the worst. The quick feedback cycle and adjustment is a staple of development.

The bigger picture is that culture and fit at certain times of players “career” period is a poor one. Its the constant clash of social v recreational v competitive tracks. We constantly talk about these eceptional athletes coming into soccer later as if that is something common. Most likely those kids are phenomenal athletes, transitioning common strategies/tactics from other activities. Imagine what they could have been if they had started earlier. But we’d rather say they are equal or better than a diluted pool of players on teams that couldnt “really” choose their top 11. No wonder its doable, we’ve created and maintaining low expectations for most of the players because some clubs just dont have enough of the players that have the appropriate complements of qualities they’d want at their to teams and instead of having the players in appropriate levels, like house b select, clubs are happy to take the parents money and deal with the fallout however disgruntled the players/parents are by unmanaged expectations.

Anonymous wrote:Unequal playing time in the developmental years sucks.

I have a B team daughter with a coach who played the 9 for full games and the "subs" barely played. My daughter was a sub and so we changed clubs. She's now in a better program (which has been the silver lining) and gets far more playing time.
My younger daughter is a very strong player on an U9 A team and has played 3 FULL games so far despite there being 4 subs (7 v 7). She's burning out: "mom, why do I never get a break?" This is crummy too.

They all just want to win.

Yep, and that attitude is as pervasive at all levels of youth soccer, as it is ridiculously stupid at all levels of youth soccer.

Unequal playing time in the developmental years sucks.

I have a B team daughter with a coach who played the 9 for full games and the "subs" barely played. My daughter was a sub and so we changed clubs. She's now in a better program (which has been the silver lining) and gets far more playing time.
My younger daughter is a very strong player on an U9 A team and has played 3 FULL games so far despite there being 4 subs (7 v 7). She's burning out: "mom, why do I never get a break?" This is crummy too.

They all just want to win.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Players on my son's team still get equal playing time (if there's a disparity I can't see it) at U14.

At U9-U11, if that wasn't happening I would definitely leave.

Is this travel? What club? A, B or C team?

Probably outing myself, but it doesn't really matter -- Travel, A team, NCSL Div. 1.

I’m guessing Olney Rangers. It’s a big team so you aren’t outing yourself. If anything, you’re making the coach look good!

Well, then, I want to give the right coach props. It's FPYC. Though my son's team played Olney last week and they are really solid and seem to be well-coached as well.

Too bad we don’t live closer. But I do wonder if it’s just because the talent pool is very tight. On my son’s B team there is a huge range of ability. My son is at the lower end on the field from my observations.

That can be a tough situation if there is a huge difference in abilities on the same team. Most of us are not the best at judging skill though especially with our own kids. More than likely it’s not as big a difference as it seems.

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you aren't happy find a new club. If your kid is not getting playing time on a travel team, move them down a level to an in house league or rec.

What about if you're unhappy on a macro level?

Maybe this isn't what we should be doing in U.S. soccer at all. We're giving kids bad experiences, which may drive them out of the game. And we may be stifling the development of kids who didn't impress Mr. E License U9 Coach but actually has some talent, aptitude and passion for the game.

Certainly, the older the age group, the less we should expect balance. At U11, OK, maybe some players only get 10-15 minutes per game. At U9? Seriously?

10-15 minutes per game at U11? Seriously?

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how important is game play time really? I have a starting player on a DA team. They DA model seams to be more about training and quality of play over quantity. I know others who have kids playing on multiple teams to maximize playing time. Not sure which is the best approach.

The playing time is huge for development regardless of whether it is DA or not. If a player gets 15 minutes of game time on a DA team, he would be better off as a starter for a non-DA club. In a year or two, he is likely to develop more than the bench warmers at DA. But I don't think the original poster is discussing a DA club, the issue is at a much lower level.

They have DA for U9 now?

If you are a superstar U11 you can play on a U12 DA team.

Does anyone who has experience as a college player or high level coach think that a U11 player should play for a lesser team/coach or play for multiple teams to increase playing time?

RantingSoccerDad wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how important is game play time really? I have a starting player on a DA team. They DA model seams to be more about training and quality of play over quantity. I know others who have kids playing on multiple teams to maximize playing time. Not sure which is the best approach.

The playing time is huge for development regardless of whether it is DA or not. If a player gets 15 minutes of game time on a DA team, he would be better off as a starter for a non-DA club. In a year or two, he is likely to develop more than the bench warmers at DA. But I don't think the original poster is discussing a DA club, the issue is at a much lower level.

They have DA for U9 now?

It is only a matter of time and $$$, lol.

Anonymous wrote:I wonder how important is game play time really? I have a starting player on a DA team. They DA model seams to be more about training and quality of play over quantity. I know others who have kids playing on multiple teams to maximize playing time. Not sure which is the best approach.

The playing time is huge for development regardless of whether it is DA or not. If a player gets 15 minutes of game time on a DA team, he would be better off as a starter for a non-DA club. In a year or two, he is likely to develop more than the bench warmers at DA. But I don't think the original poster is discussing a DA club, the issue is at a much lower level.

I agree. With most kids, you can't really tell at the age of 10, if they would be top players. Andryi Shevchenko, who won Ballon d'Or in 2004, had failed a dribbling test while trying out for a youth soccer academy when he was 10. Imagine if he gave up or was written off at that time. He played for a local club and was spotted by a scout of the top division club at a youth tournament. However, scouting is virtually non-existent in this country so it is more difficult for the kids that were written off at the age of 10 to advance to higher level even when they continue playing for smaller lower level clubs. It is not impossible, but is much harder.

The DA model seems ...

I wonder how important is game play time really? I have a starting player on a DA team. They DA model seams to be more about training and quality of play over quantity. I know others who have kids playing on multiple teams to maximize playing time. Not sure which is the best approach.