I was struck by Keeper's assertion that the two best teams will and should move to 1 team by U16
I have no problem with them joining on 1 team if that is what the girls want to do. But why is it "right" that they all go to 1 team at U16? If this the "right" thing to do it raises some interesting questions.
If they do all go to 1 team; what happens to the 18 or so players who don't make that team?
How does building combined entity that might have the talent to win a national title, balance against the heartache and disruption for the 1/2 of the girls that get left behind?
How many of the girls who get left behind may be late bloomers who’s' development is considerably slowed by the disruption?
Can the selection of the players judged to be the best of the bunch potentially result in bad chemistry and a lesser team despite the supposedly better talent?
Aren't both teams very competitive right now and isn't having two very strong teams in an age group a viable option?
How many families want to drive extra miles 3-4 times a week for the new super team when they are already playing on a great team?
Etc, Etc.
I am interested in discussing the concept that Keeper espoused when she said "At this level, by U16 they will and should be on one team." and would ask any discussion of the specific teams not come into play (these are still young girls - no good can come from discussing the specific teams- and the combination of named posters who come from those two teams and anonymous pot shot artists is a bad mix) I intentionally moved this to a new thread so as not to interfere with the Stars thread and hope that we can have a good conceptual discussion without any references to individuals coaching, playing or parenting on either team.
Originally posted by keeper
If they do all go to 1 team; what happens to the 18 or so players who don't make that team?
How does building combined entity that might have the talent to win a national title, balance against the heartache and disruption for the 1/2 of the girls that get left behind?
How many of the girls who get left behind may be late bloomers who’s' development is considerably slowed by the disruption?
Can the selection of the players judged to be the best of the bunch potentially result in bad chemistry and a lesser team despite the supposedly better talent?
Aren't both teams very competitive right now and isn't having two very strong teams in an age group a viable option?
How many families want to drive extra miles 3-4 times a week for the new super team when they are already playing on a great team?
Etc, Etc.
I am interested in discussing the concept that Keeper espoused when she said "At this level, by U16 they will and should be on one team." and would ask any discussion of the specific teams not come into play (these are still young girls - no good can come from discussing the specific teams- and the combination of named posters who come from those two teams and anonymous pot shot artists is a bad mix) I intentionally moved this to a new thread so as not to interfere with the Stars thread and hope that we can have a good conceptual discussion without any references to individuals coaching, playing or parenting on either team.
Comment