Anonymous wrote:U10 girls - we are in Fairfax. Have two games in Calvert County and one in Waldorf. Definitely not doing it based on distance. Games are also uneven, which sucks even more to drive to a horrible grass field and win by 7+ goals.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Are folks finding their DC's team /level of competition (even if losing or winning all their matches) is sufficient this Spring? I am for DS and DD with rare exceptions.
Sadly, no. Most of the games thus far have been far too easy. This is U9 however, and others report that there is no effort put into parity at this age, only proximity. Seems very foolish to me.
With nary a match played on the fall / hardly any data, how do you propose the schedule makers create a competitive schedule? And for new teams forming for this fall at U9, what is your genius solution?
Nary a match? We played a full fall season. Is it too much to ask to organize a division so that there’s parity among the teams? It’s not good for anyone when my boy’s team wins 11-0 even after playing “only left foot shots” from 7-0 on; it’s not good for the winning players (who get complacent, don’t learn from their bad habits, etc.) and it’s not good for the losing team obviously, who get down on the game and can’t try to execute what they’re learning in practice because they are so outmatched.
As for the snark about U9 being a meaningless cash grab — news for you sweetheart, it’s all a cash grab at every age. But not even good life skills are taught by repeatedly being on the winning or losing end of heavily lopsided games.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Are folks finding their DC's team /level of competition (even if losing or winning all their matches) is sufficient this Spring? I am for DS and DD with rare exceptions.
Sadly, no. Most of the games thus far have been far too easy. This is U9 however, and others report that there is no effort put into parity at this age, only proximity. Seems very foolish to me.
With nary a match played on the fall / hardly any data, how do you propose the schedule makers create a competitive schedule? And for new teams forming for this fall at U9, what is your genius solution?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Are folks finding their DC's team /level of competition (even if losing or winning all their matches) is sufficient this Spring? I am for DS and DD with rare exceptions.
Sadly, no. Most of the games thus far have been far too easy. This is U9 however, and others report that there is no effort put into parity at this age, only proximity. Seems very foolish to me.
With nary a match played on the fall / hardly any data, how do you propose the schedule makers create a competitive schedule? And for new teams forming for this fall at U9, what is your genius solution?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Are folks finding their DC's team /level of competition (even if losing or winning all their matches) is sufficient this Spring? I am for DS and DD with rare exceptions.
Sadly, no. Most of the games thus far have been far too easy. This is U9 however, and others report that there is no effort put into parity at this age, only proximity. Seems very foolish to me.
Anonymous wrote:U10 girls - we are in Fairfax. Have two games in Calvert County and one in Waldorf. Definitely not doing it based on distance. Games are also uneven, which sucks even more to drive to a horrible grass field and win by 7+ goals.
U9 and U10 barely count.Anonymous wrote:Are folks finding their DC's team /level of competition (even if losing or winning all their matches) is sufficient this Spring? I am for DS and DD with rare exceptions.
Anonymous wrote:U12 boys Div 1 - very good, fairly even
U10 Girls - not much competition except for 1 game; need to play stronger teams
U9 boys - team isn't strong so def getting blown out