Anonymous wrote:New to the discussion; as an objective reader you both sound snarky and silly quibbling over the word must. Get a life.

I agree my original post and reply was definitely snarky. I was only trying to answer snark with snark....for the cancelling effect. Like each of us wearing a mask. We both wear masks, no one gets sick. We both get snarky, we both laugh.

Neither are a part of either team and have zero clue

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 18 can see the field with relatively normal subbing patterns. For tournaments, I think you need something like the following:

2 goalies
2 FOGO
6 mids
5-6 poles (including LSM)
4-5 attack

That gets you to 19-21 without much effort in substitutions. Thats why around 22-24 is ideal if you have kids that miss for other sports, etc. 18 would be really lean.

18 field players makes some sense. But hard to get by or practice without 2 goalies and 2 Fogos.

you cant make it through a hot summer tournament with 6 mids and kids get hurt:

2 FOGO
2 Goalies
4 Attack
7 Poles - Including 2 LSM
10 Mids

2 Goalies is a must...both the 22s and the 23s have been with single goalies for the last 2-3 seasons and its a lot to ask of the kids.

Doesn't that prove it can be done, therefore isn't a must? Must would mean "can't be done."

Well since you want to try to be clever, let me reply by defining the word MUST for you.

Must means:

be obliged to; should (expressing necessity)

expressing an opinion about something that is logically very likely

So when I say "2 goalies is a must" it means that it is foolhardy to run the risk of having a single skill player at a position. It's not like carrying 1 FOGO where other players could fill in if needed or LSM could take the face offs. As a favorite quote of mine goes "Redundancy is expensive, but indispensable." Apparently so is knowing the definition of words before writing a snarky comment. Enjoy your day and you are welcome for the vocab lesson.

The team has back players to put in goal and moves younger ones up to cover. It is not an issue kids miss they get it covered. Not a big deal for either team you have no clue

New to the discussion; as an objective reader you both sound snarky and silly quibbling over the word must. Get a life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 18 can see the field with relatively normal subbing patterns. For tournaments, I think you need something like the following:

2 goalies
2 FOGO
6 mids
5-6 poles (including LSM)
4-5 attack

That gets you to 19-21 without much effort in substitutions. Thats why around 22-24 is ideal if you have kids that miss for other sports, etc. 18 would be really lean.

18 field players makes some sense. But hard to get by or practice without 2 goalies and 2 Fogos.

you cant make it through a hot summer tournament with 6 mids and kids get hurt:

2 FOGO
2 Goalies
4 Attack
7 Poles - Including 2 LSM
10 Mids

2 Goalies is a must...both the 22s and the 23s have been with single goalies for the last 2-3 seasons and its a lot to ask of the kids.

Doesn't that prove it can be done, therefore isn't a must? Must would mean "can't be done."

Well since you want to try to be clever, let me reply by defining the word MUST for you.

Must means:

be obliged to; should (expressing necessity)

expressing an opinion about something that is logically very likely

So when I say "2 goalies is a must" it means that it is foolhardy to run the risk of having a single skill player at a position. It's not like carrying 1 FOGO where other players could fill in if needed or LSM could take the face offs. As a favorite quote of mine goes "Redundancy is expensive, but indispensable." Apparently so is knowing the definition of words before writing a snarky comment. Enjoy your day and you are welcome for the vocab lesson.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Or you can just let the players, families and coaches decide what is a best fit for their team.

Players and families have no say in roster size.

Of course they do. If you don't think to ask the coaches/club about it, that's on you. Posting complaints on a message board does nothing to solve your concerns.

Anonymous wrote:Or you can just let the players, families and coaches decide what is a best fit for their team.

Players and families have no say in roster size.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 18 can see the field with relatively normal subbing patterns. For tournaments, I think you need something like the following:

2 goalies
2 FOGO
6 mids
5-6 poles (including LSM)
4-5 attack

That gets you to 19-21 without much effort in substitutions. Thats why around 22-24 is ideal if you have kids that miss for other sports, etc. 18 would be really lean.

18 field players makes some sense. But hard to get by or practice without 2 goalies and 2 Fogos.

you cant make it through a hot summer tournament with 6 mids and kids get hurt:

2 FOGO
2 Goalies
4 Attack
7 Poles - Including 2 LSM
10 Mids

2 Goalies is a must...both the 22s and the 23s have been with single goalies for the last 2-3 seasons and its a lot to ask of the kids.

Doesn't that prove it can be done, therefore isn't a must? Must would mean "can't be done."

High school, roster is even bigger. At least 3 true SSDMs, as they ride and you need fresh attack. Watch a high level IAC, WCAC, or MIAA game. In club, kids play both ways. Just a lower intensity. Public school parents have no idea if they haven't seen it. They are run like NCAA programs and it's a full field game. They actually have D coordinators and slide packages.

Or you can just let the players, families and coaches decide what is a best fit for their team.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 18 can see the field with relatively normal subbing patterns. For tournaments, I think you need something like the following:

2 goalies
2 FOGO
6 mids
5-6 poles (including LSM)
4-5 attack

That gets you to 19-21 without much effort in substitutions. Thats why around 22-24 is ideal if you have kids that miss for other sports, etc. 18 would be really lean.

18 field players makes some sense. But hard to get by or practice without 2 goalies and 2 Fogos.

you cant make it through a hot summer tournament with 6 mids and kids get hurt:

2 FOGO
2 Goalies
4 Attack
7 Poles - Including 2 LSM
10 Mids

2 Goalies is a must...both the 22s and the 23s have been with single goalies for the last 2-3 seasons and its a lot to ask of the kids.

Doesn't that prove it can be done, therefore isn't a must? Must would mean "can't be done."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More than 18 can see the field with relatively normal subbing patterns. For tournaments, I think you need something like the following:

2 goalies
2 FOGO
6 mids
5-6 poles (including LSM)
4-5 attack

That gets you to 19-21 without much effort in substitutions. Thats why around 22-24 is ideal if you have kids that miss for other sports, etc. 18 would be really lean.

18 field players makes some sense. But hard to get by or practice without 2 goalies and 2 Fogos.

you cant make it through a hot summer tournament with 6 mids and kids get hurt:

2 FOGO
2 Goalies
4 Attack
7 Poles - Including 2 LSM
10 Mids

2 Goalies is a must...both the 22s and the 23s have been with single goalies for the last 2-3 seasons and its a lot to ask of the kids.

Anonymous wrote:More than 18 can see the field with relatively normal subbing patterns. For tournaments, I think you need something like the following:

2 goalies
2 FOGO
6 mids
5-6 poles (including LSM)
4-5 attack

That gets you to 19-21 without much effort in substitutions. Thats why around 22-24 is ideal if you have kids that miss for other sports, etc. 18 would be really lean.

18 field players makes some sense. But hard to get by or practice without 2 goalies and 2 Fogos.

you cant make it through a hot summer tournament with 6 mids and kids get hurt:

2 FOGO
2 Goalies
4 Attack
7 Poles - Including 2 LSM
10 Mids

More than 18 can see the field with relatively normal subbing patterns. For tournaments, I think you need something like the following:

2 goalies
2 FOGO
6 mids
5-6 poles (including LSM)
4-5 attack

That gets you to 19-21 without much effort in substitutions. Thats why around 22-24 is ideal if you have kids that miss for other sports, etc. 18 would be really lean.

18 field players makes some sense. But hard to get by or practice without 2 goalies and 2 Fogos.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:2023 does not have 27 players

Team App says they do

So this must be a parent poster. Suggest you escalate your issues to your Head Coach or the VLC Leadership. I'm sure they will take care of you.

I don't think the HC or leadership are capable of solving this parent's issue, unless they plan to move 7-9 players off the team. But perhaps next August they will do so.

Anonymous wrote:HS rosters are 35 to 40 college some are over 50. 25
Is small by comparison. In my experience every kid plays. Girls roster not relevant to VLC thread

What does this have to do with anything?

HS rosters of the exceptional privates are that many but only about 18 play in games. The rest of the team might be out there just to get a letter or are underclassmen or fulfilling an after school exercise requirement. Colleges use the large rosters to allow for full payment tuition and multi-field scrimmaging and again, only about 18 see the field. And every kid does not play on rosters of 25+ unless the games are absolute blowouts. If a team has close to 25 players and that roster is getting close to equal playing time, they are losing a lot of games.