Goalie - playing time expectations

[Unregistered]

My daughter is 13 and is playing for a well-known club which is considered to be one of the "top" clubs in MA (1st division in MAPLE). She is currently the only goalie on the team but the coach has indicated that he would like find a second goalie. I can't blame him as he needs to have someone available in the event my daughter can't make a game and/or gets injured. But I'm concerned that this will lead to less playing time for her. It's obviously unreasonable to expect another goalie to pay and practice but not play. She's is my only child so this is all new. What can we expect going forward? Do teams play their best goalie first and then only allow the back-up to go in when the game is in hand or do they typically share the responsibilities 50/50? And no, the coach will not allow her to play in the field if and when they find their second goalie?

Thank you.

[Unregistered]

This is typical......but if you get to play 50% of any game you are part of the lucky few.

[Unregistered]

My daughter is 13 and is playing for a well-known club which is considered to be one of the "top" clubs in MA (1st division in MAPLE). She is currently the only goalie on the team but the coach has indicated that he would like find a second goalie. I can't blame him as he needs to have someone available in the event my daughter can't make a game and/or gets injured. But I'm concerned that this will lead to less playing time for her. It's obviously unreasonable to expect another goalie to pay and practice but not play. She's is my only child so this is all new. What can we expect going forward? Do teams play their best goalie first and then only allow the back-up to go in when the game is in hand or do they typically share the responsibilities 50/50? And no, the coach will not allow her to play in the field if and when they find their second goalie?

Thank you.

2 comments.
1. Your coach is not doing his/her job by preventing your child from playing the field.
2. If you find that it becomes a 50/50 deal, ask for 50% of your money back from the club.

[Unregistered]

2 comments.
1. Your coach is not doing his/her job by preventing your child from playing the field.
2. If you find that it becomes a 50/50 deal, ask for 50% of your money back from the club.

This is the first year she's played exclusively at keeper. As much as my daughter would enjoy the opportunity to play in the field once again the coach has indicated that he wants to allow the other members of her team as much of a chance to improve in their positions as possible. Plus we've found that goalies on other teams at this level/age also don't play in the field other than in practice.

[Unregistered]

This is the first year she's played exclusively at keeper. As much as my daughter would enjoy the opportunity to play in the field once again the coach has indicated that he wants to allow the other members of her team as much of a chance to improve in their positions as possible. Plus we've found that goalies on other teams at this level/age also don't play in the field other than in practice.

Either 75% of the time as GK or 50% plus some time as a field player in the second half would be reasonable. Option 2 is preferable for U13-14.

[Unregistered]

This is the first year she's played exclusively at keeper. As much as my daughter would enjoy the opportunity to play in the field once again the coach has indicated that he wants to allow the other members of her team as much of a chance to improve in their positions as possible. Plus we've found that goalies on other teams at this level/age also don't play in the field other than in practice.

Ask the coach to pick up a good field player who can also be a very effective goalie if the need arises. My U11 son is a midfielder but can and has gone into the net when the primary goalie was injured. This way she can play her position most of the time and the team still has back-up if something (god forbid) happens to her.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;451279]Ask the coach to pick up a good field player who can also be a very effective goalie if the need arises.

ASK the coach!? Let him do his job, that is what you are paying him for! Parents like this crack me up. Please don't make any suggestions to the coach about this or really anything, it is crossing a line.

This is coming from a parent of a keeper and field player. The question originally asked is a good one, but truthfully you need to talk with the coach about what his plans are. And then you can decide if you stay with this club or leave. I have been there so I get it. My sons club made the decision to take on another keeper after he'd been their one and only for 5 years. He played 1/2 a game from then on, we weren't happy but just dealt with it. 2 games into the season my son broke his shoulder...so the coach clearly knew what he was doing.

Trust that your childs coach is doing whats best for the team 1st, not the individual player. 2nd he is doing what is best for the club ($$)

[Unregistered]

My daughter is 13 and is playing for a well-known club which is considered to be one of the "top" clubs in MA (1st division in MAPLE). She is currently the only goalie on the team but the coach has indicated that he would like find a second goalie. I can't blame him as he needs to have someone available in the event my daughter can't make a game and/or gets injured. But I'm concerned that this will lead to less playing time for her. It's obviously unreasonable to expect another goalie to pay and practice but not play. She's is my only child so this is all new. What can we expect going forward? Do teams play their best goalie first and then only allow the back-up to go in when the game is in hand or do they typically share the responsibilities 50/50? And no, the coach will not allow her to play in the field if and when they find their second goalie?

Thank you.

Did she enjoy being a field player?

[Unregistered]

Did she enjoy being a field player?

Yes, very much so. But her size and skills are well suited for keeper even more so. Plus she does enjoy the position very much. She's not there by default.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;451279]Ask the coach to pick up a good field player who can also be a very effective goalie if the need arises.

ASK the coach!? Let him do his job, that is what you are paying him for! Parents like this crack me up. Please don't make any suggestions to the coach about this or really anything, it is crossing a line.

This is coming from a parent of a keeper and field player. The question originally asked is a good one, but truthfully you need to talk with the coach about what his plans are. And then you can decide if you stay with this club or leave. I have been there so I get it. My sons club made the decision to take on another keeper after he'd been their one and only for 5 years. He played 1/2 a game from then on, we weren't happy but just dealt with it. 2 games into the season my son broke his shoulder...so the coach clearly knew what he was doing.

Trust that your childs coach is doing whats best for the team 1st, not the individual player. 2nd he is doing what is best for the club ($$)


Silly me for suggesting that. I keep forgetting about the coach worship and he knows best thingie. Thanks for reminding me!

[Unregistered]

Yes, very much so. But her size and skills are well suited for keeper even more so. Plus she does enjoy the position very much. She's not there by default.

working on footskills is critical for a GK, and no better way than by playing in the field. Your coach should know and understand this.

sounds like your coach is more worried about results than development. I would start contacting other clubs and attend their winter training.

[deano]

just as a field player needs as many touches as possible so does a keeper need as many matches as they can possibly get.
Training is where techniques are taught and learned, but Matches are where the instinct and intuition are grown.
This decision by the coach is not saying your daughter is not good and will be replaced and her field skills are critical for her as keepers play more balls now than ever before.
At "top" clubs however competition for time in goal can and does start earlier.
The thought is that back up is required and having competition for time, more times than not, pushes players to their next level of ability.
Not just physical ability but the psychological side as well. it is hard to sit a match and not play after playing every single minute in goal.
and so they must either believe in themself and their ability or their playing time could diminish.
Self belief and a good support system are crucial for a keeper because the pressure is on them to Stop/Save/Keep out the shots. The ball gets passed them last.
And by that i mean a realistic support system that is not just over the top praise "you are the best and no one else can compare"or the bashing "it's all your fault they scored"
as the parent of a U17 keeper, my son has not had competition for time in goal on his club team.
in the last 2 yrs he has remarked many times that he really enjoys training with other keepers and that it really pushed/motivated him to work harder.
that said, when he had a dip in performance on his high school team and had to sit, a couple of doubts crept in.
That's when not having competition on the club level had not prepared him. After several conversations, and milkshakes, he start owned his part in the dip and let go of the other part. His "A" game came right back and he was starting again.
not that he's "fixed". He was never broken but at 16 he need support and reassurance and belief in him.
i also have a 15 yr old daughter who plays so I know that this doubt goes both ways.
you really will need to decide if sitting half a game is acceptable though.
it will make you swim or sink.
be there for her and she'll do great.
good luck.

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;451288]


Silly me for suggesting that. I keep forgetting about the coach worship and he knows best thingie. Thanks for reminding me!

This isn't a town program you're talking about. This is a club coach likely with extensive education and credentials. He knows what he's doing.

How arrogant can you be? ...making suggestions to him!?

Ridiculous!

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;451305]

This isn't a town program you're talking about. This is a club coach likely with extensive education and credentials. He knows what he's doing.

How arrogant can you be? ...making suggestions to him!?

Ridiculous!


Another thing I've forgotten is to be really rude in this forum.
I have my national youth license so kiss my a$$

[Unregistered]

Oh and one more thing...I'm in England for three weeks in Feb taking an FA course.

Got it?
You have those credentials?

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;451330]



I have my national youth license so kiss my a$$

Well then I stand corrected go right on and make suggestions to the club coach you PAY to train your kid. I'm sure he will appreciate your youth license and the infinite soccer wisdom that comes with it.

And no thanks I only kiss my kids coach's a$$

[Unregistered]

Oh and one more thing...I'm in England for three weeks in Feb taking an FA course.

Got it?
You have those credentials?

blah blah blah not impressed

...you only continue to post your arrogance.

[Unregistered]

blah blah blah not impressed

...you only continue to post your arrogance.

I made an honest suggestion since it appears that the coach has discussed this with the parent/player. People in this forum jumped all over me for suggesting that and called me arrogant for suggesting that.

[Unregistered]

Yes, very much so. But her size and skills are well suited for keeper even more so. Plus she does enjoy the position very much. She's not there by default.

The best keepers that I have seen all could play the field, they have good foot skills, vision, among other qualities. At this age having good field skills will make her a better keeper.

[Unregistered]

Yes, very much so. But her size and skills are well suited for keeper even more so. Plus she does enjoy the position very much. She's not there by default.

That's great if she enjoys being gk. IMO it's just too early to completely give up on the field play. I wonder if Peter Crouch started out as a gk? Good luck.

[Unregistered]

I think this is a common and reasonable situation to be in when your involved with a competitive team. At U 13 things begin to get a bit more serious. How serious is your daughter about soccer? If she's set on being the starting keeper on a top team- then it will be good for her to fight for a starting spot!. Does your club offer separate keeper training? if not, or it's sub-par, go out and get private training. I agree, she should have foot skills and I hope that your coach is allowing her to scrimmage for at least part of her practice time. If her interests are more broad and she's not a live and breathe soccer kind of gal- she could always drop down a level with a team that she can get more playing time and just have fun.

I don't envy the parents of keepers! You have a completely different set of challenges to face while you shepherd her through her youth soccer experience! Good luck!

[Unregistered]

I think this is a common and reasonable situation to be in when your involved with a competitive team. At U 13 things begin to get a bit more serious. How serious is your daughter about soccer? If she's set on being the starting keeper on a top team- then it will be good for her to fight for a starting spot!. Does your club offer separate keeper training? if not, or it's sub-par, go out and get private training. I agree, she should have foot skills and I hope that your coach is allowing her to scrimmage for at least part of her practice time. If her interests are more broad and she's not a live and breathe soccer kind of gal- she could always drop down a level with a team that she can get more playing time and just have fun.

I don't envy the parents of keepers! You have a completely different set of challenges to face while you shepherd her through her youth soccer experience! Good luck!

First, thanks to all who have offered their opinions. There are obviously differing views on the subject and that's to be expected. I would hope that everyone could remain a bit more civil towards those who disagree however.

Now, getting back to the post above, she does receive excellent training from her club on a weekly basis. She has also participated in some training sessions with private instructors as well as clinics sponsored by other clubs (her current coach doesn't know this and probably wouldn't be too happy as he's a bit possessive). She does love the game and the position but also enjoys playing basketball and softball. Time will soon tell if this is her sport of choice obviously.

[ForzaAzzurri]

"Time will soon tell if this is her sport of choice obviously. "

Well, my guess is that if she is spending half of each game on the bench, those other sports are going to look a lot more attractive to her.

I know that everybody has their own reasons for doing things, but for me and my kids, a (the?) primary concern is PT...Playing Time. Athletes play the game because it is fun and want to, well, play. I don't know of any kid, in any sport, who has good skill in that particular sport, who doesn't want to compete and play as much as they can. Moreover, they're just that...kids; as a parent (and coach) I want kids to be enjoying their youth years by playing a lot, not spending a significant portion of the time on the bench watching their teammates (and I won't even get into the development side of that). To each his own, but if my kid was looking at an average of 50% playing time, and on top of that I was shelling out some serious money, I can tell you it wouldn't take me long to thank the coach for the head's up and say sayonara. Actually, my kids would already be heading for the door on their own.

Let 'em play!

[Unregistered]

I'm sure the coach knows what they are doing, but you have to decide whether that is good for you.

There are a pile of people that would say U14 and younger if a keep wants to play the field some they should be allowed to. Your child wants to play net. There are teams that will have a primary goalie and stick with them, chosing to have their back up keep play field. If your child says they'd be happier playing 100% of the time, you can arrange that given a good keeper.

There are multiple teams that offer good goalie training. No surprise, good keepers are recruited to top teams at older ages, and in general the best way to get great keeper experience is to have been exposed to a lot of shots.

[beentheredonethat]

My daughter is 13 and is playing for a well-known club which is considered to be one of the "top" clubs in MA (1st division in MAPLE). She is currently the only goalie on the team but the coach has indicated that he would like find a second goalie. I can't blame him as he needs to have someone available in the event my daughter can't make a game and/or gets injured. But I'm concerned that this will lead to less playing time for her. It's obviously unreasonable to expect another goalie to pay and practice but not play. She's is my only child so this is all new. What can we expect going forward? Do teams play their best goalie first and then only allow the back-up to go in when the game is in hand or do they typically share the responsibilities 50/50? And no, the coach will not allow her to play in the field if and when they find their second goalie?

Thank you.

I will tell you that this is a tough one. We have actually had the reverse situation this year and the coach dropped a keeper so my daughter could get more playing time. I had always lobbied to have a second keeper while my daughter was younger and at one point was actually planning to have her leave her team some time back had they not brought one in. As the father of two keepers I will tell you that being the only keeper on a team is not without its own set of disadvantages. Not only is it a lot of pressure for her, but also the rest of the family as well. I am also a big believer in keepers getting field experience and don’t believe that a kid should give up playing in the field until they are certain they want to commit to being a full time keeper. 13 is a pretty good age to make that transition.

The issue we ran into this past year was balancing the playing time. Once you get beyond the basic technical stuff so much of being a good keeper is really based upon experience. It just got to a point where it became too difficult to give both keepers the amount of playing time they needed. Ultimately it was a very touchy situation because my daughter was perceived as the stronger of the two and there were games where the coach elected to not play the other keeper for competitive reasons. It was very tough on the other keeper.

Since we have kids in the same age group, I would be more than happy to compare some notes with you offline. If you are interested send me a private message.

[Unregistered]

My daughter is 13 and is playing for a well-known club which is considered to be one of the "top" clubs in MA (1st division in MAPLE). She is currently the only goalie on the team but the coach has indicated that he would like find a second goalie. I can't blame him as he needs to have someone available in the event my daughter can't make a game and/or gets injured. But I'm concerned that this will lead to less playing time for her. It's obviously unreasonable to expect another goalie to pay and practice but not play. She's is my only child so this is all new. What can we expect going forward? Do teams play their best goalie first and then only allow the back-up to go in when the game is in hand or do they typically share the responsibilities 50/50? And no, the coach will not allow her to play in the field if and when they find their second goalie?

Thank you.

You don't know how fortunate you are. My daughters U13 MAPLE team has a keeper that over the last couple of seasons has become less committed. The writing is on the wall and even though her coach is trying to find a replacement it's not the easiest position to fill. In this case a second gk might be a god-send by introducing competition between two and make both better.

[Unregistered]

If you really want your daughter to develop as a goalie, she needs the competition of another goalie. She will not only train harder at practice but also focus more during the game. Accommodation is player's worst enemy in any sport. You should feel blessed that she has someone chalenging her for the position.

[Unregistered]

btdt and any other parents of keepers. First let me state that I am not the OP. I would like to ask if you pay the same fee as the rest of the parents of field players? If so, are you receiving focused, keeper training through your clubs? I only ask this because it seems to me that if you're paying the same fee, then it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect the same level of attention given the field players.

[Unregistered]

btdt and any other parents of keepers. First let me state that I am not the OP. I would like to ask if you pay the same fee as the rest of the parents of field players? If so, are you receiving focused, keeper training through your clubs? I only ask this because it seems to me that if you're paying the same fee, then it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect the same level of attention given the field players.

OP here. Good point. There's a couple of ways to look at this issue. First, as the only goalie at the moment my daughter plays 100% of every game. There's no other player on the team (19 rostered players) that get that much play. Not even close. So she's really getting the best deal on her team in that regard. If another keeper was added and they split the time equally she would obviously end up with 50% of the playing time. That's likely a bit less than the average of the rest of her team. However, in addition to her regular practices she also gets weekly (well, almost weekly) goalie-specific instruction from the club for no extra fee. So in that regard she's actually getting more from the club than her teammates.

Bottom line: it's complicated to analyze.

[Unregistered]

OP here. Good point. There's a couple of ways to look at this issue. First, as the only goalie at the moment my daughter plays 100% of every game. There's no other player on the team (19 rostered players) that get that much play. Not even close. So she's really getting the best deal on her team in that regard. If another keeper was added and they split the time equally she would obviously end up with 50% of the playing time. That's likely a bit less than the average of the rest of her team. However, in addition to her regular practices she also gets weekly (well, almost weekly) goalie-specific instruction from the club for no extra fee. So in that regard she's actually getting more from the club than her teammates.

Bottom line: it's complicated to analyze.

It appears you are getting an excellent value even if the extra keeper is added and the added competition might be beneficial for her.

[Unregistered]

My daughter is 13 and is playing for a well-known club which is considered to be one of the "top" clubs in MA (1st division in MAPLE). She is currently the only goalie on the team but the coach has indicated that he would like find a second goalie. I can't blame him as he needs to have someone available in the event my daughter can't make a game and/or gets injured. But I'm concerned that this will lead to less playing time for her. It's obviously unreasonable to expect another goalie to pay and practice but not play. She's is my only child so this is all new. What can we expect going forward? Do teams play their best goalie first and then only allow the back-up to go in when the game is in hand or do they typically share the responsibilities 50/50? And no, the coach will not allow her to play in the field if and when they find their second goalie?

Thank you.

This is what will happen. It all depends on the performance of each kid. If they are identical in talent then you can expect a near 50/50 split. But more than likely one of them will be better than the other. It will become obvious very quickly which one is better. Then the better player will start the 1st 1/2 and then start the 2nd 1/2. If the game is too close , the weaker player may not get to play at all. The coach will not tell you this but that is what is going to happen. Good luck and enjoy the ride!

[MASC]

There is only one keeper and the position is not a physical endurance position. Most youth teams try to have at least three keepers. Very few solely play that position.

Most of the players who eventually become high level keepers also are very strong field players. They put in a lot of time training for both field and keeper play.

On my youngest son's HS team, the best keeper on the team never played a game in goal. He was the keeper for a very fine club team, but played center defender in their 4-4-2 or an interior midfield. He was one of the best field players on the team and won all-league and all-scholastic honors.

Such is not unusual. Great keepers are great athletes and capable of field play. I have also seen cases of on one team a player is the keeper and on another team in a different venue plays in the field.

My daughter played with a young lady who was an excellent keeper, but on her club team was asked to play center mid-field since that was where the team had the greatest need. Because she was a very strong keeper and field player she recieved a D1 scholarship playing in goal.

[Unregistered]

Well, here is another perspective. I run a team in MAPLE. I believe that having a willing and dedicated (in the sense of full-time) GK is a luxury for a soccer team, and as such, I am willing to have a qualified such person play for our team for free. My reasoning includes this: none of the players on the roster signed up to play goalkeeper (if you have ever coached boys, you know that they all LOVE to play during practice during particular drills, but come game time, they run as far as they can). Anyway, in this respect, we are like a town/travel team: no willing GK, so we are forced to rotate players into the position. As a result, during the course of the just-completed 9-game MAPLE season, we used 8 different goalkeepers (the rest just don't have the remotest capability). None ever played more than a half a game between the posts, and sometimes we actually changed out at the 15-minute mark, thus using four in a single game. Moreover, I am BIG into playing time, so whoever took a shift as a GK during a particular game almost never got subbed out during the remainder of the game when he was a field player. This is one way we rewarded their selflessness (even so, I usually target and provide a minimum 70% playing time for everybody on my team, so it only a matter of degree).

Now, since a recent post mentioned player fees, I would add that, in case some were to view an offer to play for free as unfair to the other players on the team, I would counter that this would not be a scholarship…in other words, the other players would not be subsidizing this player's freight in any way. We're already paying fixed MAPLE and Tournament registration fees, facility usage fees, etc. The only real added cost would be the $11 MA Youth Soccer registration fee as the keeper wouldn't even need a uniform. [Moreover, our players play less than $700 per year ALL-IN, and that includes annual new uniforms, tournaments, all fees, etc., so it is not like anybody could complain anyway]. But more importantly, and to my main point, the "non-paying" GK would be doing everyone on the team a HUGE service and providing a benefit that has no price, by, among other things, relieving all the "reluctant" keepers—which is to say all of them—from having to play GK. Us coaches get infinite relief by not having to worry about who is playing keeper on game day or how we re-arrange the lineup (and formation based on field players not thus being available on the field) or by needing to rotate keepers during training when we're doing a drill that requires a keeper. And, of added bonus, from a purely competitive standpoint, our team gets to play with a "real" goalkeeper, something I believe each one of our competitors had the luxury of this past season. Oh, and by the way, all but two of those eight 'keepers were barely 4 feet tall…trying to cover an 8-foot high goal! It sure would be nice to get some height back here for a change...

And what does the keeper get? Well, before anyone says you get what you pay for (i.e., nothing), consider that besides saving a ton of money (not inconsequential), said person gets 100% guaranteed exposure to the position during training and all games. If you believe, like me, that ultimately the game is the greatest teacher, no amount of dedicated keeper training is going to match the experience gained from facing real, high-level competition for a full 60 minutes week-in, week-out and during practice. Moreover, during practice sessions when we're not doing a drill requiring a GK, he gets to work, as he should, on his field technical skills and tactical awareness just like everybody else. With a great group of boys, to boot. Not at all a bad deal.

(And if there is a belief that it makes that much of a difference, he can use all the money saved to pay for specialty GK clinics to his heart's content).

With apologies for the length of this post, I will leave with an unabashed solicitation (I would hope it is not inappropriate to use this forum, but I have seen somewhat similar precedence, and it is not like I'm doing it for financial gain, personal or otherwise; we're a small club just looking to give kids a unique and affordable opportunity to participate in premier-level soccer so I would hope the motives are understood). So, with that said, here goes: if you know of someone, for example, a town/travel GK who is looking to improve his game through additional training and bonus match experience, or someone who has always wanted to enjoy the club soccer experience but didn’t want to fork over thousands of dollars (esp. to play GK)—or whatever the case may be—we can work with the family to establish a schedule that works for them. All we ask is that he attend at least one team practice per week and commit to being the full-time goalkeeper on match day. Unless I'm way off, our team should be placed in the third group come the Spring, so there will be lots of highly competitive soccer to be played right away as we continue to improve and look to work our way even further up the ranks.

So how to contact us if you'd like to pursue this opportunity? Here is a hint on how to find out, but you need to do a little fun detective work on the MAPLE website…during the just-completed Fall season, as a team, we had the fewest goals-against of ANY team in the entire BU12 age group. [Imagine that! With no true goalkeeper! Ironic, huh?...]. Anyway, if you are so inclined, once you figure out what team we are, you must click on the actual team link, not the club link, as the URL is identified within the text associated with the team itself (you'll know you have the wrong website if you don’t see a team photo on our team's home page).

: )

[MASC]

I am at total odds with the above post. At 11 years old, you want to specialize that completely? This is not development; it is stunting a player's development, the GK, solely to allow winning more and more games. This is what is wrong with youth soiccer.

What is also wrong is the 11v11 play at U12. 8v8 on properly sized fields with properly sized goals is more appropriate.

Imagine: Players in goal barely 4 ft tall unable to even touch the top bar when they jump.

This is not what is being recommended for these age groups by USYSA or any other of the National organizations around the world. Every else 7v7 or 8v8 is what is being played at this age.

If juggling a line-up because a specific player is in goal, is a challenge, game management skills need to be refined. These are not difficult problems. I've been there and done that many times. With more experience managing such is an enjoyable excercise.

[Unregistered]

I am at total odds with the above post. At 11 years old, you want to specialize that completely? This is not development; it is stunting a player's development, the GK, solely to allow winning more and more games. This is what is wrong with youth soiccer.

What is also wrong is the 11v11 play at U12. 8v8 on properly sized fields with properly sized goals is more appropriate.

Imagine: Players in goal barely 4 ft tall unable to even touch the top bar when they jump.

This is not what is being recommended for these age groups by USYSA or any other of the National organizations around the world. Every else 7v7 or 8v8 is what is being played at this age.

If juggling a line-up because a specific player is in goal, is a challenge, game management skills need to be refined. These are not difficult problems. I've been there and done that many times. With more experience managing such is an enjoyable excercise.

The poster above you is what's wrong with youth soccer? Really? I have to respectfully disagree. Now I probably don't have your experience, but what I believe is wrong with youth soccer are the adults who get involved who end up creating situations where it's no longer fun for the kids. A parent who yells at their kid. A coach who yells at their players. Clubs who don't properly place kids in the correct environment so that they are out matched and in a little over their heads. When it's no longer fun is when it is ruined for the kids. You essentially stated that he was what's wrong with youth soccer. Well, I think that sounds a little inflammatory. All he was looking for was a dedicated keeper. I read his post, thoroughly. He is rotating/juggling his players through the position, efficiently I think. It sounds like his kids just don't like the position. They are being "forced" to play there and that can't be fun for them. He stated he was big on playing time for all, but for those that fill in, he increases playing time a little. Sounds like encouragement to me. You are right though, kids should not be forced to specialize in that position at that young age. However, there are kids who actually enjoy playing keeper and it sounds like that is who he is looking for. He even stated that the kid who agreed to play keeper for him would also be trained as a field player, so I don't think the accusation of stunting that players developement is accurate. No where in his post does he state that he is doing this to "win more games" He just wants to make sure his kids are having fun and not placed in a position they don't enjoy. That was my take. And since when is winning become what's wrong with youth soccer. I've already said it, but i'll say it again, fun comes first. For kids, winning is fun. What's wrong with that. Winning is not a dirty word. My daughter plays u13 and she really enjoys playing. Because I make sure she finds herself in positive environments. We have walked away from teams where either the coach was a screamer, or the parents were "rabid". She finds fun in winning. I will not discourage that. She is currently receiving proper training. The focus of her training is developement. Now, most of these kids won't advance beyond high school. So whats wrong with enjoying their time in the light now? As long as they are being trained properly, Technically and tactically. I don't know that coach. I didn't try and look up what team he is from. I just found what you said about him being what's wrong with youth soccer inflammatory and unwarranted.
Just another overbearing father.

[Unregistered]

The poster above you is what's wrong with youth soccer? Really? I have to respectfully disagree. Now I probably don't have your experience, but what I believe is wrong with youth soccer are the adults who get involved who end up creating situations where it's no longer fun for the kids. A parent who yells at their kid. A coach who yells at their players. Clubs who don't properly place kids in the correct environment so that they are out matched and in a little over their heads. When it's no longer fun is when it is ruined for the kids. You essentially stated that he was what's wrong with youth soccer. Well, I think that sounds a little inflammatory. All he was looking for was a dedicated keeper. I read his post, thoroughly. He is rotating/juggling his players through the position, efficiently I think. It sounds like his kids just don't like the position. They are being "forced" to play there and that can't be fun for them. He stated he was big on playing time for all, but for those that fill in, he increases playing time a little. Sounds like encouragement to me. You are right though, kids should not be forced to specialize in that position at that young age. However, there are kids who actually enjoy playing keeper and it sounds like that is who he is looking for. He even stated that the kid who agreed to play keeper for him would also be trained as a field player, so I don't think the accusation of stunting that players developement is accurate. No where in his post does he state that he is doing this to "win more games" He just wants to make sure his kids are having fun and not placed in a position they don't enjoy. That was my take. And since when is winning become what's wrong with youth soccer. I've already said it, but i'll say it again, fun comes first. For kids, winning is fun. What's wrong with that. Winning is not a dirty word. My daughter plays u13 and she really enjoys playing. Because I make sure she finds herself in positive environments. We have walked away from teams where either the coach was a screamer, or the parents were "rabid". She finds fun in winning. I will not discourage that. She is currently receiving proper training. The focus of her training is developement. Now, most of these kids won't advance beyond high school. So whats wrong with enjoying their time in the light now? As long as they are being trained properly, Technically and tactically. I don't know that coach. I didn't try and look up what team he is from. I just found what you said about him being what's wrong with youth soccer inflammatory and unwarranted.
Just another overbearing father.


Very good response. This proves that what's wrong with YOUTH soccer is NOT the YOUTH but rather the ADULTS.

[Unregistered]

Very good response. This proves that what's wrong with YOUTH soccer is NOT the YOUTH but rather the ADULTS.

Come on, there is very little that's wrong with American youth soccer when you look at the big picture. Quit bashing the Adults. Without adult involvment in youth soccer - there would be no coaches, managers, referees, .... NOR parents to PAY for all of this....

Perfect? No. A great experience for the vast majority of kids and adults involved? Absolutely!

JB

[Unregistered]

Come on, there is very little that's wrong with American youth soccer when you look at the big picture. Quit bashing the Adults. Without adult involvment in youth soccer - there would be no coaches, managers, referees, .... NOR parents to PAY for all of this....

Perfect? No. A great experience for the vast majority of kids and adults involved? Absolutely!

JB


I posted that...I was in Africa this spring and the kids there are amazing players without the infrastructure/refs/leagues etc that we have. Several of these kids are playing D1 soccer in the US. No DAP there for them to "get noticed" etc....

Let the kids play! Organize/teach and get out of the way!

[Unregistered]

Come on, there is very little that's wrong with American youth soccer when you look at the big picture. Quit bashing the Adults. Without adult involvment in youth soccer - there would be no coaches, managers, referees, .... NOR parents to PAY for all of this....

Perfect? No. A great experience for the vast majority of kids and adults involved? Absolutely!

JB

JB, I'm not bashing all adults. Your right, adult involvement is necessary as you state. I was just pointing out that the problems with youth soccer, and I probably should have been a little more clear, are with the few adults who have a negative effect for a larger group of people. It doesn't take alot of adults to ruin the experience for even more kids. The problems are with few coaches who shout at their players. I would hope you agree with me that a coach should NEVER shout at a child who makes a mistake while playing. This will only stunt developement. A coach should not coach a player while "on the ball". A parent should NEVER demean or shout at their kid for not playing well enough. A club should not place a child in over their heads. I only base my opinion from my own experience. I made these mistakes with my son. It is a great experience for the vast majority of kids. However, if the experience is being ruined for a few kids, then thats a few too many. I will add however that I encountered the shouting coaches and parents in Town Soccer. Club Soccer has been a vastly better experience, with the exception of a few girls being placed in over their heads.
Overbearing Father.

[MASC]

The poster stated a dedicated keeper. That means by any reading of the post 100% of the time in goal in all games. I feel that for an 11 year old such is inappropriate.

Children change by the minute. Playing 100% of the time in goal in the league and tournament games is not providing proper development for the child. To play in the field in practice is not the same as in a game. There is a comfort level when playing in practice.

My reading of the post was that of someone whose primary interest was winning and that by taking his strongest players and putting them in goal he was weakening/disrupting the play in the field. There is place on this web site to advertise for players.

I have been in his position. It is a delicate balance. The players who are willing to take turns in goal get rewarded. The reward could come in the form of being allowed to take penalty kicks, direct kicks close to the penalty area, and corner kicks. It might involve being able to chose a favorite drill in practice.

Even when I had one or more players who only wanted to play in goal at these young ages, they rarely played more than a half in goal. The piece of the puzzle is that many times those only interested in playing in goal are not as strong in that position as many of the field players. On a reasonably strong team at these ages, there are few shots on goal and most of those are directly on the keeper (one sometimes feels that there is a bull's eye drawn on the keeper's mid-section).

Please recall that this was in reference to 11 year olds. The situation at older ages, e.g. U15+ is entirely different.

[Unregistered]

The poster stated a dedicated keeper. That means by any reading of the post 100% of the time in goal in all games. I feel that for an 11 year old such is inappropriate.

Children change by the minute. Playing 100% of the time in goal in the league and tournament games is not providing proper development for the child. To play in the field in practice is not the same as in a game. There is a comfort level when playing in practice.

My reading of the post was that of someone whose primary interest was winning and that by taking his strongest players and putting them in goal he was weakening/disrupting the play in the field. There is place on this web site to advertise for players.

I have been in his position. It is a delicate balance. The players who are willing to take turns in goal get rewarded. The reward could come in the form of being allowed to take penalty kicks, direct kicks close to the penalty area, and corner kicks. It might involve being able to chose a favorite drill in practice.

Even when I had one or more players who only wanted to play in goal at these young ages, they rarely played more than a half in goal. The piece of the puzzle is that many times those only interested in playing in goal are not as strong in that position as many of the field players. On a reasonably strong team at these ages, there are few shots on goal and most of those are directly on the keeper (one sometimes feels that there is a bull's eye drawn on the keeper's mid-section).

Please recall that this was in reference to 11 year olds. The situation at older ages, e.g. U15+ is entirely different.

You have the experience. That I will not argue. I guess we just read his post differently, so we will just have to disagree. My only issue is that I am not willing to say that he is what's wrong with youth soccer. On this, I'll agree with JB and state that for the most part, youth soccer is fine, with few exceptions.

[Unregistered]

The poster stated a dedicated keeper. That means by any reading of the post 100% of the time in goal in all games. I feel that for an 11 year old such is inappropriate.

Children change by the minute. Playing 100% of the time in goal in the league and tournament games is not providing proper development for the child. To play in the field in practice is not the same as in a game. There is a comfort level when playing in practice.

My reading of the post was that of someone whose primary interest was winning and that by taking his strongest players and putting them in goal he was weakening/disrupting the play in the field. There is place on this web site to advertise for players.

Please recall that this was in reference to 11 year olds. The situation at older ages, e.g. U15+ is entirely different.

You could have simply apologized for your accusatory, gratuitously personal rant--rather than try to justify and explain it away.

This coach who "advertised" was offering a spot on his club team--for free--to a capable kid wanting or willing to serve--for that team--as a dedicated keeper. The coach explained his reasoning, in detail, with good humor. He was not generally endorsing young kids specializing as keepers. But, for reasons that clearly went beyond trying to win, he thinks it is fair, all around, to solicit a kid who would serve as his club's dedicated keeper, for free.

In your haste to condemn early specialization, you couldn't bother to recognize or acknowledge that this coach was actually offering an opportunity to a kid whose parents might not be able to afford playing club soccer at all. Obviously, parents with your (reasonable) view that early specialization can be detrimental--and who can afford an alternative club path--should not and will not take up this coach's offer. But also obviously, this coach was not looking for kids with such parents.

You seem to think that playing a limited club schedule as a dedicated keeper would somehow mean that a kid could not develop field skills. But why not? A minimum commitment of one club practice and one club game a week leaves plenty of time for developing field skills outside of a club soccer environment. Moreover, in effect, this coach's offer meant that the "dedicated keeper" could spend the other club practice working on field skills--if the kid cared enough and was able to show up for it.

So, in this case, there really isn't much to reasonably disagree about. Your "reading" of it is less than uncharitable.

[Unregistered]

You could have simply apologized for your accusatory, gratuitously personal rant--rather than try to justify and explain it away.

This coach who "advertised" was offering a spot on his club team--for free--to a capable kid wanting or willing to serve--for that team--as a dedicated keeper. The coach explained his reasoning, in detail, with good humor. He was not generally endorsing young kids specializing as keepers. But, for reasons that clearly went beyond trying to win, he thinks it is fair, all around, to solicit a kid who would serve as his club's dedicated keeper, for free.

In your haste to condemn early specialization, you couldn't bother to recognize or acknowledge that this coach was actually offering an opportunity to a kid whose parents might not be able to afford playing club soccer at all. Obviously, parents with your (reasonable) view that early specialization can be detrimental--and who can afford an alternative club path--should not and will not take up this coach's offer. But also obviously, this coach was not looking for kids with such parents.

You seem to think that playing a limited club schedule as a dedicated keeper would somehow mean that a kid could not develop field skills. But why not? A minimum commitment of one club practice and one club game a week leaves plenty of time for developing field skills outside of a club soccer environment. Moreover, in effect, this coach's offer meant that the "dedicated keeper" could spend the other club practice working on field skills--if the kid cared enough and was able to show up for it.

So, in this case, there really isn't much to reasonably disagree about. Your "reading" of it is less than uncharitable.

Bravo!

[Unregistered]

Hello, I am the person who posted the free offer to a dedicated keeper. I was out all day today, and just returned to catch up on TS.

I wanted to thank the individual(s) who submitted post #35 and #42 (I would venture they are the one and the same person?) and came to my "defense" with an ACCURATE understanding of what I wrote, and, of course, to other posters who likewise understood. You clearly READ what I wrote (which I thought was rather clear cut to begin with) and interpreted my position exactly as I intended.

I wouldn't even know where to begin to address the poster who immediately replied to my post. All I can say is read it again---every word---and maybe even my "philosophy" and desription of the program I offer, that can be viewed on my website. Better yet, read the subseqeunt posts again and perhaps come to a practice or game and speak to the players and parents that are on the team; with apologies to the many fine coaches out there, and for my temporary lack of modesty, but if I am what is wrong with youth soccer, then God help us all.

There is one thing I will, however, address, since it regards an issue not germaine to the offer itself, or the potential candidate's role as GK. That is, the inference to my "managing" the currrent situation. What part of "no willing" GKs did you not understand? Yes, just like you, I have "managed" the situation---and quite well, thankyouverymuch---but it is not and will never be, all things being equal, an "enjoyable experience." Not at the club level, anyway. Do you know how many times my team has to get called onto the field by the referee at the start of the second half because I don't have a GK because I'm begging/pleading/bartering/etc? I respect my players (merely twelve-year olds looking to have fun, mind you) and so I will not just order someone onto the field. With all due respect, you have no idea how unpleasant it was for everyone in some games and I would venture that by definition your situation was obviously different. Fortunately, my kids are great sports and we eventually worked it out. If anyone thinks going into every game like this is good for either the players or the coaches (or the parents, for that matter), when there is a better alternative---a WILLING GK who moreover wants none other than to play the position---well, maybe I should get my head examined.

AT

[Unregistered]

The poster stated a dedicated keeper. That means by any reading of the post 100% of the time in goal in all games. I feel that for an 11 year old such is inappropriate.

Children change by the minute. Playing 100% of the time in goal in the league and tournament games is not providing proper development for the child. To play in the field in practice is not the same as in a game. There is a comfort level when playing in practice.

My reading of the post was that of someone whose primary interest was winning and that by taking his strongest players and putting them in goal he was weakening/disrupting the play in the field. There is place on this web site to advertise for players.

I have been in his position. It is a delicate balance. The players who are willing to take turns in goal get rewarded. The reward could come in the form of being allowed to take penalty kicks, direct kicks close to the penalty area, and corner kicks. It might involve being able to chose a favorite drill in practice.

Even when I had one or more players who only wanted to play in goal at these young ages, they rarely played more than a half in goal. The piece of the puzzle is that many times those only interested in playing in goal are not as strong in that position as many of the field players. On a reasonably strong team at these ages, there are few shots on goal and most of those are directly on the keeper (one sometimes feels that there is a bull's eye drawn on the keeper's mid-section).

Please recall that this was in reference to 11 year olds. The situation at older ages, e.g. U15+ is entirely different.

You are contradicting yourself. How could his interest be in only winning when you yourself say that many times those only interested in playing in goal are not as strong in that position. I have never seen a team with more than one kid that wanted to play goal! Most nave none, just like the original poster said. Somehow you have come across a group with multiple kids wanting to play goal!

And, BTW. Who cares if a kid plays goal forever? The kid gets to play. His parents don't have to pay. It's not like any of these kids are in training to win the Gold Cup now is it? Please get off your High Horse Player Development track and smell the coffee.

[Unregistered]

I wanted to thank the individual(s) who submitted post #35 and #42 (I would venture they are the one and the same person?) and came to my "defense" with an ACCURATE understanding of what I wrote, and, of course, to other posters who likewise understood. You clearly READ what I wrote (which I thought was rather clear cut to begin with) and interpreted my position exactly as I intended.

AT

Not the same person. I posted at #42--after I could stand no more. Thank you for your reasonableness, thoughtfulness, and commitment.

[Unregistered]

Poster of #35 here. I just found the team's websight. MASC, I think you should look it up also. After reading the posts from AT and researching his sight, Apologies should be in order. Nothing wrong in admitting you may have jumped to an inapropriate conclusion, and apologizing for that. In fact, in the future you should be more careful before making the accusation of "this is what's wrong with youth soccer". nuff said.
overbearing father.

[Unregistered]

OK! I'm going to bite on this one. This is strictly from the perspective of a head coach who happens to specialize in GK's. The original question was expectations when 2 keepers are on a team. Given the information provided, I have a couple of small comments that you can do what you want with. #1-thank your lucky stars that your 13 year old has someone to push them, besides themselves or you. #2- the fact that the coach said no field play at 12-13 for a keeper scares me. #2a-the best keepers in the world learn how the enemy plays(forwards), and there is no better way than to play the position. #3- you sure that he/she will always be a GK. some of the best forwards who have ever played, have played as a dedicated keeper at some point. playing field helps you learn the tricks of their trade, so that you can be a better keeper. I also believe in the reverse that forwards should train as keepers. You would be amazed at the comfortability of a forward with back to goal, who has played GK. Never mind the natural goal scoring instinct that most keeps have when playing the field. All good reasons to be happy with a second GK. Now as far as playing time at that age for GK's. 50/50 till someone takes it from the other. Wether you split it every half, or every other game.

[Unregistered]

I'm disappointed to see that this thread has died out. My daughters maple team needs a goalie and I thought this would be the perfect place to discuss the possibility of finding one. With as many kids as there are playing soccer in the state of ma you'd think one would be easy to find. Are there any goalies looking to play for a competitive girls u13 team?

[Unregistered]

I'm disappointed to see that this thread has died out. My daughters maple team needs a goalie and I thought this would be the perfect place to discuss the possibility of finding one. With as many kids as there are playing soccer in the state of ma you'd think one would be easy to find. Are there any goalies looking to play for a competitive girls u13 team?

I know a girl looking to play maple . She plays on town but would love to play competitive club. What club are you affiliated with? The cost may be an issue . Do they give financial help?

[soccermom18]

What town does she play for. Don't worry about the cost right now. Maybe she could come to our winter training.

[Unregistered]

2 comments.
1. Your coach is not doing his/her job by preventing your child from playing the field.
2. If you find that it becomes a 50/50 deal, ask for 50% of your money back from the club.

So all the other parents should pay based on playing time? What is this a pay as you use model?

[Unregistered]

[QUOTE=Unregistered;451279]2 games into the season my son broke his shoulder...so the coach clearly knew what he was doing.

Trust that your childs coach is doing whats best for the team 1st, not the individual player. 2nd he is doing what is best for the club ($$)

So if your teams best striker was injured instead of your son then the coach clearly would Not know what he was doing? Give me a break!

[Unregistered]

What town does she play for. Don't worry about the cost right now. Maybe she could come to our winter training.

My previous response was with a newly created account. Let's try this again. This post is in response to "I know a girl looking to play maple . She plays on town but would love to play competitive club. What club are you affiliated with? The cost may be an issue . Do they give financial help?". If you tell me where this girl lives it will give me a better idea of whether or not she'd be within driving distance.

[Unregistered]

My previous response was with a newly created account. Let's try this again. This post is in response to "I know a girl looking to play maple . She plays on town but would love to play competitive club. What club are you affiliated with? The cost may be an issue . Do they give financial help?". If you tell me where this girl lives it will give me a better idea of whether or not she'd be within driving distance.

Sorry I don't think their interested. The parents don't have the money even in the future for a sport like this. The little they have goes to the college fund . Some parents put themselves in debt for this and never see a return on the investment. Too bad though she is a great player. Hope you find a goalie. What happen to the current goalie ?

[Unregistered]

just not as committed as she needs to be to compete at the level that this team does. if you think of anyone else just add to this thread. i always come back hoping that we'll get lucky.

[Unregistered]

So funny. You must be the coach. No money = no commitment to your club. At the end of the day its all about writing the checks.

[Unregistered]

So funny. You must be the coach. No money = no commitment to your club. At the end of the day its all about writing the checks.

no, i'm not the coach and i'm not understanding your comment. you said she's not interested so i didn't think there was anything else to discuss. if she is interested the coach has already told me he'd be willing to take a look at her. not everyone's as cinical as this forum would lead one to believe. or am i completely missing the point and your comment was spectulation about our current goalie?