Originally posted by Unregistered
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Playing Time
Collapse
X
-
Unregistered
- Quote
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostGood points. And I agree. The problem starts with clubs that try to have large rosters. And we know why they do that. The roster should have about 1.5x the starting lineup. That way, everyone plays at least half the game and the coach has discretion to play others more. If a club puts out a roster with more than 1.5x, the chances of playing at least a half go farther down. One of the first questions a parent should ask when the coach first brings up their playing time philosophy is "how many kids on the roster?" The answer will tell you how easy or difficult it will be for the coach to implement their plan.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostAgreed. This was something we asked about when moving to the McClub. We were assured that the team would have 18 players and our kid would get minutes. By August they changed their tune, saying the team would have 22 players and they would be rotating out. I couldn't believe we left a top club for that disaster.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Uh everyone is aware that top level teams over u12 have no where near equal playing time. That is completely assumed. There is no "contract" walk worth your feet the bottom of the roster is easily replaced hence the business model is to keep the top of the roster happy. Most of the top 5 will be upset when and if they come off the field. Middle 12 battling for time. Bottom 5 token minutes Wake up and smell the roses.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostUh everyone is aware that top level teams over u12 have no where near equal playing time. That is completely assumed. There is no "contract" walk worth your feet the bottom of the roster is easily replaced hence the business model is to keep the top of the roster happy. Most of the top 5 will be upset when and if they come off the field. Middle 12 battling for time. Bottom 5 token minutes Wake up and smell the roses.
the OP asked about PT for u9-u11. I totally agree over U12 or so it shouldn't be equal but earned. However, a coach still owes it to all his players (not just the top ones) to try and develop them. Token minutes here and there won't aid in development. If the coach thinks they're un-developable (is that a word?) then he shouldn't have taken them in the first place. There's ways to manage a roster/rotations so that players can get more than 5 minutes without sacrificing too much.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
So, by way of example, if a team is playing a sixty minute game 9 v. 9. you'd have eight field players dividing a total of 480 minutes of playing time. With a roster of 13 field players (excluding the goalie) that comes out to an average of about 37 minutes a game per kid.
On some teams you'll see a 1/3 of the roster playing 50 minutes, another 1/3 getting the average and the bottom third getting 20ish minutes a game.
On other teams you'll see the vast majority of the kids play in the 35-40 minute range.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostSo, by way of example, if a team is playing a sixty minute game 9 v. 9. you'd have eight field players dividing a total of 480 minutes of playing time. With a roster of 13 field players (excluding the goalie) that comes out to an average of about 37 minutes a game per kid.
On some teams you'll see a 1/3 of the roster playing 50 minutes, another 1/3 getting the average and the bottom third getting 20ish minutes a game.
On other teams you'll see the vast majority of the kids play in the 35-40 minute range.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View Postno stop watch in this family. my kids play full game or we move on. can't develop on the bench
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Yes there is a contract
The club advertises that they offer the best development and the contract says that the club will develop. If you take that to a court, the verdict would be based on the definition of development and a coach would be hard pressed to ever say that playtime in games was not a significant part of development.
Yes...keep the stopwatch out and make sure your kid, or, if you are the coach, the kids get significant playing time.
Yes...the OP did highlight a younger age where this is an absolute necessity.
However, this applies to all ages. Unless you can tell me that physical, mental, and skill development plateau at age 12 then playtime has to be go until at least age 15/16. Personally, I would even go beyond since development goes beyond that. As important, at this age is, assuming that the kid might want to play college ball, that coaches won't see you if you are on the bench and you don't get much of a rhythm or a chance to touch the ball if you are in for only 5-15 minutes.
There is also the concept of quality minutes. Development occurs when you are part of the game. If you are just running around and not getting any or many touches on the ball then you are not gaining much development. In fact, the one, especially at the younger ages, who developes most, while annoying everyone else, is the ball hog. This is the one who ultimately has the best skill.
Quality playtime is a must. Any coach/club who tells you otherwise and practices otherwise is a con-man...or woman. Rosters that have 20-23 for a 11 v 11 game is a joke unless they are playing 30+ games and there is a guarantee that your kid will start more than 30-40% and play more than 40% of any given game. The rules of the DAP are stupid!! 'Minimum starts of 20% and once you are subbed out you are out'. To hide behind the guise that they are readying the players for professional play is a cop-out. For 99% of the players college is the highest level they reach and subbing is pretty liberal.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostThe club advertises that they offer the best development and the contract says that the club will develop. If you take that to a court, the verdict would be based on the definition of development and a coach would be hard pressed to ever say that playtime in games was not a significant part of development.
Yes...keep the stopwatch out and make sure your kid, or, if you are the coach, the kids get significant playing time.
Yes...the OP did highlight a younger age where this is an absolute necessity.
However, this applies to all ages. Unless you can tell me that physical, mental, and skill development plateau at age 12 then playtime has to be go until at least age 15/16. Personally, I would even go beyond since development goes beyond that. As important, at this age is, assuming that the kid might want to play college ball, that coaches won't see you if you are on the bench and you don't get much of a rhythm or a chance to touch the ball if you are in for only 5-15 minutes.
There is also the concept of quality minutes. Development occurs when you are part of the game. If you are just running around and not getting any or many touches on the ball then you are not gaining much development. In fact, the one, especially at the younger ages, who developes most, while annoying everyone else, is the ball hog. This is the one who ultimately has the best skill.
Quality playtime is a must. Any coach/club who tells you otherwise and practices otherwise is a con-man...or woman. Rosters that have 20-23 for a 11 v 11 game is a joke unless they are playing 30+ games and there is a guarantee that your kid will start more than 30-40% and play more than 40% of any given game. The rules of the DAP are stupid!! 'Minimum starts of 20% and once you are subbed out you are out'. To hide behind the guise that they are readying the players for professional play is a cop-out. For 99% of the players college is the highest level they reach and subbing is pretty liberal.
Short of violating those terms you're going to have a hard time taking a club to court for "lack of development." Beyond the issue of trying to prove a vague and subjective term, the contracts are intentionally vague to protect the clubs from just such an accusation. Best thing you can do if your kid isn't developing is walk away and then trash them on TS :)
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostThe club advertises that they offer the best development and the contract says that the club will develop. If you take that to a court, the verdict would be based on the definition of development and a coach would be hard pressed to ever say that playtime in games was not a significant part of development.
Yes...keep the stopwatch out and make sure your kid, or, if you are the coach, the kids get significant playing time.
Yes...the OP did highlight a younger age where this is an absolute necessity.
However, this applies to all ages. Unless you can tell me that physical, mental, and skill development plateau at age 12 then playtime has to be go until at least age 15/16. Personally, I would even go beyond since development goes beyond that. As important, at this age is, assuming that the kid might want to play college ball, that coaches won't see you if you are on the bench and you don't get much of a rhythm or a chance to touch the ball if you are in for only 5-15 minutes.
There is also the concept of quality minutes. Development occurs when you are part of the game. If you are just running around and not getting any or many touches on the ball then you are not gaining much development. In fact, the one, especially at the younger ages, who developes most, while annoying everyone else, is the ball hog. This is the one who ultimately has the best skill.
Quality playtime is a must. Any coach/club who tells you otherwise and practices otherwise is a con-man...or woman. Rosters that have 20-23 for a 11 v 11 game is a joke unless they are playing 30+ games and there is a guarantee that your kid will start more than 30-40% and play more than 40% of any given game. The rules of the DAP are stupid!! 'Minimum starts of 20% and once you are subbed out you are out'. To hide behind the guise that they are readying the players for professional play is a cop-out. For 99% of the players college is the highest level they reach and subbing is pretty liberal.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
As someone who lived it for 2 years, I’ll warn other parents to be very careful with a little-or-no-playing-time situation. My kid was an ok town player and absolutely loved the game, but she’s the type of kid who recognizes her weaknesses and that she’s no superstar. She was very enthusiastic about trying out for a premier U14 club in the area, made the club, and then……..sat. She had very good training attendance and she’s not the kind of kid to give a coach any problems or make waves, but was lucky to see 10-15 minutes a game. Some games she never even saw the field. I gently approached the coach on this, and was given a litany of excuses, the main one being that she’s not that good (then why is she on your team???). Against my better judgment, my kid wanted to try a second year of this fiasco. I had a sliver of hope things would get better, but it was even less playing time (the U15 roster was bigger than the previous year, so even less minutes to go around). I think she actually regressed as a player during the 2 years – the trainings were very good and I think her skills got stronger, but due to the complete lack of game experience, she regressed as a field player. By the middle of the U15 season, she told me he’d had enough and I could see she was quite down on herself and the game in general. We doubted she’d even play HS soccer this year, as she was openly saying she wouldn’t right up until about a week before practices started. Anyway, she’s playing HS (JV) and she’s more like his old self, just having fun with it and smiling more. Most importantly, she’s getting real minutes on the field, making mistakes and learning. I think premier has a place for a special child/talent, but it can ruin a kid too, you have to be very careful with these clubs and you also have to be brutally honest with yourself about your child’s abilities. I still rue the day she ever set foot in that tryout. Like others have said, I’ll repeat it: if you’re afraid to go to the restroom because you’re afraid you’ll miss your kid’s 10 minutes of game time, don’t buy the “development” BS they spin, get out of Dodge as quickly as possible. The longer it goes on, the more likely you’ll end up crushing your kid’s love of this game. Been there, Done that.
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View Post... you have to be very careful with these clubs and you also have to be brutally honest with yourself about your child’s abilities. I still rue the day she ever set foot in that tryout. Like others have said, I’ll repeat it: if you’re afraid to go to the restroom because you’re afraid you’ll miss your kid’s 10 minutes of game time, don’t buy the “development” BS they spin, get out of Dodge as quickly as possible. The longer it goes on, the more likely you’ll end up crushing your kid’s love of this game. Been there, Done that.
My mantra is if your gut is telling you it's a bad idea, it's a bad idea. We let one of ours move up a level too far (from good premier to uber premier, but also her team was breaking up and we didn't have many other options) and I had an uneasy feeling going into it. Not only did she not get much PT but the coach was di** and not a good fit for a player struggling to adapt. She nearly quit because of it but we yanked her out (losing some $$ in the process but that's fine) and got her into a much better situation (spot opened up on a team that had been full and the coach remembered her from tryouts and contacted us). You have to look out for your kid
- Quote
Comment
-
Unregistered
Originally posted by Unregistered View PostThe first part is tricky, especially if you're new to the club world. Coaches are slick salesmen and it's easy to get sucked in if you don't do your homework. As for parents being brutally honest? Not many will be (because then they have to be honest with their kids) and not many are very good assessors of talent anyway.
My mantra is if your gut is telling you it's a bad idea, it's a bad idea. We let one of ours move up a level too far (from good premier to uber premier, but also her team was breaking up and we didn't have many other options) and I had an uneasy feeling going into it. Not only did she not get much PT but the coach was di** and not a good fit for a player struggling to adapt. She nearly quit because of it but we yanked her out (losing some $$ in the process but that's fine) and got her into a much better situation (spot opened up on a team that had been full and the coach remembered her from tryouts and contacted us). You have to look out for your kid
- Quote
Comment
Comment