Anonymous wrote:I can vouch that Arlington soccer does call if your kid gets cut. Unfortunately I know this because I got that call earlier today. I'm not excited to break the news to my kid, and I'm really not excited about having to play two more games with all the kids who got in, when she didn't. ugh. I appreciated the call, but man, I just wanted to get off the phone and sulk!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How often do kids who are slow at ages 10-11 speed up later?

I can't answer in general but my older son was chubby and slow at 10-11 and then between 7th/8th grade grew 8 inches, slimmed out and now is markedly faster. He made the team he didn't make the year before when he was chubby and slow. We didn't bother to try out again for the one that told him he would never be a travel soccer player at U9. These kids can change so much when they hit puberty, for better or worse. Puberty happened to be kind to my son.

Yep. My kid was an enormous chubby baby/toddler and a husky (but fast) first/2nd grader.

Theyboegged him as slow his first year of tryouts---mainly by first sight. He excelled greatly and his. Is h kept telling RD and those above they made a placement mistake but to deaf ears.

He is now 11.5 and one of the younger U12s and now dwarfed by the middle schoolers on his team. Now as one of the smaller kids on his current team--he plays whole game and is a clutch player.

The first club left such a sore taste in my mouth. Ironically, all of the kids they praised and said were unbelievable at 8--none of them are on the Ateam 3 years later. Many are in the lowest team going into U13 and their parents are pissed.

We are experiencing the great irony as well. The smug parents that walked around at U9/U10 saying anyone that complained about placement was delusional and their kid was no good. Now at U13, every single one of those players was dropped down, some as far as the bottom team. Guess which parents are running around crying now? Our kids have now moved up and they are crying it's so unfair to their children. It can only be an error if it's their child.

The funny thing about youth soccer, is that kids develop at different paces. A star at U9 isn't necessarily a star at U13, and a dud at U12 can be a star by U16, hence the whole "demotion/promotion" thing. They are placed where they belong according to their development. I know that is not a popular mindset, but it is just how it is, delusions of grandeur notwithstanding.

Except in the instances that the kid was a standout on the team and at tryouts at U9 and placed very poorly. Then, is still a standout down the road and moved up (and Club takes credit for the miraculous development ). No, you f*ckfaces, he was the same younger and you just about destroyed all confidence completely when you kept repeatedly overlooking the kid--even when coaches tried to tell you this and the results were tangible.

Ah yes, the coach is out to get lil johnny. MOVE CLUBS if you aren't happy, there are a million clubs in the area and bitching about it here does nothing. Maybe he was overlooked because he just wasn't a good fit, just because a kid can do a step over does not mean he should be on the team. Wish parents would stop bitching. Skills, fit, and politics are all a part of travel soccer....accept it.

I think we could all do without the politics and ass-kissers.

My policy is to never talk assignments. I sure have seen a lot of horseshit in a few short years. The other two are fine.

Years ago when we lived on the west coast, the club we were at would rotate the coaches to build teams during tryouts. Basically, a coach that was not assigned to the previous year's team would do a full assessment on every player that tried out. They would roster the teams without any knowledge of the previous year's performance or status. In fact, he/she would only know them by number. This could be a coach from another age group or on the other gender's side. Once the roster was built, the assigned coach would take over to train and of course had the ability to reshuffle (but it was pretty spot on in terms of skills so we didn't really see much movement). The tryouts were longer and it wasn't spread across weeks, this was like a 3-4 day tryout in a row. I think they did this up to U12/U13. Their message to the parents was pretty simple, "it is not a perfect solution, but the kids know that they have to earn it every time."

This is nice and all but it is still a bad idea to place this much emphasis on four days versus assessing throughout the year. The only thing that this process eliminates is the "politics" but it does not serve as any better form of tryout simply because a "different set of eyes" is on the kids. To discount progression or regression during the course of a season in favor of how well kids perform over 4 days is still the exact same thing as before. This doesn't reinvent the tryout at all.

The age group head/upper team coach and TD don't see any players except A team all year----how is that fear to all the players in the age group.

This is better. One bad day--okay. They have 4 days to show. Tough shit if they have a bad 4-day show...go down.

That is the way it works in most sports.

Yep. Demoted kid/poor show for 4 days will have an entire year to prove him/herself and move up next year. You know---just like the poor players never being looked at all last year. It's the breaks. Why should that kid be treated any differently?

Because your club should know the kids well enough that 4 days should be the sole determining factor regarding placement for a year. The tryouts should be simply to see where outside talent might fit into the club, not as some coaches first look at kids. That is ludicrous. If the club is well run movement should happen throughout the year.

you're accurate about the feedback/movement throughout the year but you're not taking into account any new talent that shows up at try-outs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How often do kids who are slow at ages 10-11 speed up later?

I can't answer in general but my older son was chubby and slow at 10-11 and then between 7th/8th grade grew 8 inches, slimmed out and now is markedly faster. He made the team he didn't make the year before when he was chubby and slow. We didn't bother to try out again for the one that told him he would never be a travel soccer player at U9. These kids can change so much when they hit puberty, for better or worse. Puberty happened to be kind to my son.

Yep. My kid was an enormous chubby baby/toddler and a husky (but fast) first/2nd grader.

Theyboegged him as slow his first year of tryouts---mainly by first sight. He excelled greatly and his. Is h kept telling RD and those above they made a placement mistake but to deaf ears.

He is now 11.5 and one of the younger U12s and now dwarfed by the middle schoolers on his team. Now as one of the smaller kids on his current team--he plays whole game and is a clutch player.

The first club left such a sore taste in my mouth. Ironically, all of the kids they praised and said were unbelievable at 8--none of them are on the Ateam 3 years later. Many are in the lowest team going into U13 and their parents are pissed.

We are experiencing the great irony as well. The smug parents that walked around at U9/U10 saying anyone that complained about placement was delusional and their kid was no good. Now at U13, every single one of those players was dropped down, some as far as the bottom team. Guess which parents are running around crying now? Our kids have now moved up and they are crying it's so unfair to their children. It can only be an error if it's their child.

The funny thing about youth soccer, is that kids develop at different paces. A star at U9 isn't necessarily a star at U13, and a dud at U12 can be a star by U16, hence the whole "demotion/promotion" thing. They are placed where they belong according to their development. I know that is not a popular mindset, but it is just how it is, delusions of grandeur notwithstanding.

Except in the instances that the kid was a standout on the team and at tryouts at U9 and placed very poorly. Then, is still a standout down the road and moved up (and Club takes credit for the miraculous development ). No, you f*ckfaces, he was the same younger and you just about destroyed all confidence completely when you kept repeatedly overlooking the kid--even when coaches tried to tell you this and the results were tangible.

Ah yes, the coach is out to get lil johnny. MOVE CLUBS if you aren't happy, there are a million clubs in the area and bitching about it here does nothing. Maybe he was overlooked because he just wasn't a good fit, just because a kid can do a step over does not mean he should be on the team. Wish parents would stop bitching. Skills, fit, and politics are all a part of travel soccer....accept it.

I think we could all do without the politics and ass-kissers.

My policy is to never talk assignments. I sure have seen a lot of horseshit in a few short years. The other two are fine.

Years ago when we lived on the west coast, the club we were at would rotate the coaches to build teams during tryouts. Basically, a coach that was not assigned to the previous year's team would do a full assessment on every player that tried out. They would roster the teams without any knowledge of the previous year's performance or status. In fact, he/she would only know them by number. This could be a coach from another age group or on the other gender's side. Once the roster was built, the assigned coach would take over to train and of course had the ability to reshuffle (but it was pretty spot on in terms of skills so we didn't really see much movement). The tryouts were longer and it wasn't spread across weeks, this was like a 3-4 day tryout in a row. I think they did this up to U12/U13. Their message to the parents was pretty simple, "it is not a perfect solution, but the kids know that they have to earn it every time."

This is nice and all but it is still a bad idea to place this much emphasis on four days versus assessing throughout the year. The only thing that this process eliminates is the "politics" but it does not serve as any better form of tryout simply because a "different set of eyes" is on the kids. To discount progression or regression during the course of a season in favor of how well kids perform over 4 days is still the exact same thing as before. This doesn't reinvent the tryout at all.

The age group head/upper team coach and TD don't see any players except A team all year----how is that fear to all the players in the age group.

This is better. One bad day--okay. They have 4 days to show. Tough shit if they have a bad 4-day show...go down.

That is the way it works in most sports.

Yep. Demoted kid/poor show for 4 days will have an entire year to prove him/herself and move up next year. You know---just like the poor players never being looked at all last year. It's the breaks. Why should that kid be treated any differently?

Because your club should know the kids well enough that 4 days should be the sole determining factor regarding placement for a year. The tryouts should be simply to see where outside talent might fit into the club, not as some coaches first look at kids. That is ludicrous. If the club is well run movement should happen throughout the year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How often do kids who are slow at ages 10-11 speed up later?

I can't answer in general but my older son was chubby and slow at 10-11 and then between 7th/8th grade grew 8 inches, slimmed out and now is markedly faster. He made the team he didn't make the year before when he was chubby and slow. We didn't bother to try out again for the one that told him he would never be a travel soccer player at U9. These kids can change so much when they hit puberty, for better or worse. Puberty happened to be kind to my son.

Yep. My kid was an enormous chubby baby/toddler and a husky (but fast) first/2nd grader.

Theyboegged him as slow his first year of tryouts---mainly by first sight. He excelled greatly and his. Is h kept telling RD and those above they made a placement mistake but to deaf ears.

He is now 11.5 and one of the younger U12s and now dwarfed by the middle schoolers on his team. Now as one of the smaller kids on his current team--he plays whole game and is a clutch player.

The first club left such a sore taste in my mouth. Ironically, all of the kids they praised and said were unbelievable at 8--none of them are on the Ateam 3 years later. Many are in the lowest team going into U13 and their parents are pissed.

We are experiencing the great irony as well. The smug parents that walked around at U9/U10 saying anyone that complained about placement was delusional and their kid was no good. Now at U13, every single one of those players was dropped down, some as far as the bottom team. Guess which parents are running around crying now? Our kids have now moved up and they are crying it's so unfair to their children. It can only be an error if it's their child.

The funny thing about youth soccer, is that kids develop at different paces. A star at U9 isn't necessarily a star at U13, and a dud at U12 can be a star by U16, hence the whole "demotion/promotion" thing. They are placed where they belong according to their development. I know that is not a popular mindset, but it is just how it is, delusions of grandeur notwithstanding.

Except in the instances that the kid was a standout on the team and at tryouts at U9 and placed very poorly. Then, is still a standout down the road and moved up (and Club takes credit for the miraculous development ). No, you f*ckfaces, he was the same younger and you just about destroyed all confidence completely when you kept repeatedly overlooking the kid--even when coaches tried to tell you this and the results were tangible.

Ah yes, the coach is out to get lil johnny. MOVE CLUBS if you aren't happy, there are a million clubs in the area and bitching about it here does nothing. Maybe he was overlooked because he just wasn't a good fit, just because a kid can do a step over does not mean he should be on the team. Wish parents would stop bitching. Skills, fit, and politics are all a part of travel soccer....accept it.

I think we could all do without the politics and ass-kissers.

My policy is to never talk assignments. I sure have seen a lot of horseshit in a few short years. The other two are fine.

Years ago when we lived on the west coast, the club we were at would rotate the coaches to build teams during tryouts. Basically, a coach that was not assigned to the previous year's team would do a full assessment on every player that tried out. They would roster the teams without any knowledge of the previous year's performance or status. In fact, he/she would only know them by number. This could be a coach from another age group or on the other gender's side. Once the roster was built, the assigned coach would take over to train and of course had the ability to reshuffle (but it was pretty spot on in terms of skills so we didn't really see much movement). The tryouts were longer and it wasn't spread across weeks, this was like a 3-4 day tryout in a row. I think they did this up to U12/U13. Their message to the parents was pretty simple, "it is not a perfect solution, but the kids know that they have to earn it every time."

This is nice and all but it is still a bad idea to place this much emphasis on four days versus assessing throughout the year. The only thing that this process eliminates is the "politics" but it does not serve as any better form of tryout simply because a "different set of eyes" is on the kids. To discount progression or regression during the course of a season in favor of how well kids perform over 4 days is still the exact same thing as before. This doesn't reinvent the tryout at all.

The age group head/upper team coach and TD don't see any players except A team all year----how is that fear to all the players in the age group.

This is better. One bad day--okay. They have 4 days to show. Tough shit if they have a bad 4-day show...go down.

That is the way it works in most sports.

Yep. Demoted kid/poor show for 4 days will have an entire year to prove him/herself and move up next year. You know---just like the poor players never being looked at all last year. It's the breaks. Why should that kid be treated any differently?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why does Arlington Soccer post tryout results online? So instead of a caring phone call from a coach role model, young boys and girls find out online that their coach moved them down 1 or 2 teams, and then the family just goes the whole summer with no courtesy call from the coach and starts up in the Fall with the new team/coach??? Wondering how it works from those who have already been through this. I know players moving up get LOTS of contact and feedback pre-tryouts about their potential movement, but do the Arlington coaches really blow off the players moved down and never even five the player feedback or explanation?

Or maybe it is just the bad coaches? Or maybe feedback is only for the players and families that bother to follow up and ask for an explamation , although I imagine most aren't apt to bother doing that for obvious reasons. TIA.

They used to call but people complained about it. A LOT. Because they always started with the Red team and worked down. Phone calls take a lot longer than online postings, and coaches have real jobs (some), families (some), and they are often coaching in the evenings and weekends. So, they would start to call, and maybe get through 6 phone calls at a time - given Arlington parent's inclination to talk and talk and talk, rather than to just accept or decline the offer. So, it might take 1-2 days to get through the Red team, then another few days to get through the white, and so on. So, kids were going to school and saying "Larlo was called and made travel soccer" and assumed they didn't make it, or they'd have to wait painfully for a week or even longer - (Memorial Day tornaments would sometimes interrupt the calling cycle). So they moved to an online posting scheme.

Technically, I believe the coaches are supposed to call to warn you if your child is in danger of moving down. But I think with the growth in Arlington and the DA shifting kids around and kids coming from outside at tryouts, potentially moving existing kids down, it doesn't happen as often as it should.

You are also supposed to have a parent meeting within a few weeks of tryouts/offers, so it wouldn't be the whole summer going w/o coach contact.