Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dap 16

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
    Coaches want to win. They are competitive by nature and their jobs depend on their records. They will fill their squads with the players they think will get them there. Club politics might muddy the waters on spots 16-20, but players 1-15 will be top talent. No process is 100% fair and no coach is 100% perfect in spotting talent. Sometimes life isn't fair. Jilted parents need to help their kids learn to accept that fact or their kids will turn into bitter adults just like them. Learn from it. Work on your skills if you really want it and try again next year. Or move on and make the best of the situation you are in.
    Amen, but most of it is the parents ego's. They need to feel superior.

    Comment


      #32
      Style of play means everything at the dap level and if he picked the kids that are big and fast over technically strong his problems will be numerous.

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        Style of play means everything at the dap level and if he picked the kids that are big and fast over technically strong his problems will be numerous.
        Meaning your kid is slow and small. Maybe can juggle to 500, but that is it

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          Coaches want to win. They are competitive by nature and their jobs depend on their records. They will fill their squads with the players they think will get them there. Club politics might muddy the waters on spots 16-20, but players 1-15 will be top talent. No process is 100% fair and no coach is 100% perfect in spotting talent. Sometimes life isn't fair. Jilted parents need to help their kids learn to accept that fact or their kids will turn into bitter adults just like them. Learn from it. Work on your skills if you really want it and try again next year. Or move on and make the best of the situation you are in.
          This may be true for teams as Revs, where some players are still there based on connections etc, but just a few. Bolts has teams that are on average at the far end of the group. Several players who are the "top 10" are not always selected based on talent (sons of coaches, BODs, connected parents), so you cannot say coaches really want to win, and this shows in the performance of most of their teams. Perhaps this time BA decided he wanted to try a different thing with this new U16, who knows.

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
            This may be true for teams as Revs, where some players are still there based on connections etc, but just a few. Bolts has teams that are on average at the far end of the group. Several players who are the "top 10" are not always selected based on talent (sons of coaches, BODs, connected parents), so you cannot say coaches really want to win, and this shows in the performance of most of their teams. Perhaps this time BA decided he wanted to try a different thing with this new U16, who knows.
            Just because they don't have a strong record doesn't mean they don't WANT to win. Sorry but no team at that level is going to fill their rosters with connected kids. As another said they might take a few to fill the bench but that's it.

            Comment


              #36
              what amazes me is how irritated parents get when their kids aren't chosen to be those 4-5 benchwarmers. If that's where your kid was going to be, then you, your kid and the team are all better off. The other option is that your kid sits, you spend your year bad mouthing the coach for not recognizing your son's remarkable talent, your kid can't help but feed off your attitude and has an equally miserable year and you leave the club next year just as, or likely even more, irritated than you currently are. You aren't serving your kid well by telling him the reason he wasn't picked was just political. The truth of it is that politics or no, if your son was THAT good they wouldn't have let him go. If a coach has to choose between two roughly equivalent players, one he knows and one he doesn't, choosing the one he knows isn't politics, it's common sense.

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                Just because they don't have a strong record doesn't mean they don't WANT to win. Sorry but no team at that level is going to fill their rosters with connected kids. As another said they might take a few to fill the bench but that's it.
                Two players on last years Bolts u14 dap team would have trouble making any of the weaker GPS or NEFC teams but the made the starting lineup because of their parents- very wealthy and connected. Many scoring and defensive opportunities missed by these players . Coach didn't care. Money and perks trump winning for the bolts.

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  what amazes me is how irritated parents get when their kids aren't chosen to be those 4-5 benchwarmers. If that's where your kid was going to be, then you, your kid and the team are all better off. The other option is that your kid sits, you spend your year bad mouthing the coach for not recognizing your son's remarkable talent, your kid can't help but feed off your attitude and has an equally miserable year and you leave the club next year just as, or likely even more, irritated than you currently are. You aren't serving your kid well by telling him the reason he wasn't picked was just political. The truth of it is that politics or no, if your son was THAT good they wouldn't have let him go. If a coach has to choose between two roughly equivalent players, one he knows and one he doesn't, choosing the one he knows isn't politics, it's common sense.
                  So you can also probably explain why the coaches' sons (some truly mediocre players by any standard) get prime playing time. OK, let me guess, it's common sense.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    I wasn't aware that DC had a kid on this or any team. Sounds to me like you have a lot of pent up frustration about this club. Probably better for your health you left.

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      Two players on last years Bolts u14 dap team would have trouble making any of the weaker GPS or NEFC teams but the made the starting lineup because of their parents- very wealthy and connected. Many scoring and defensive opportunities missed by these players . Coach didn't care. Money and perks trump winning for the bolts.
                      I know which players you are referring to. Almost always on the starting lineup. Very inconsistent average players. But parents had the connections...

                      Comment


                        #41
                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        Two players on last years Bolts u14 dap team would have trouble making any of the weaker GPS or NEFC teams but the made the starting lineup because of their parents- very wealthy and connected. Many scoring and defensive opportunities missed by these players . Coach didn't care. Money and perks trump winning for the bolts.
                        Players are required 25% starts. Looks to me from the stats that on that team there were 8 kids that started about 30% or less (injury or left), 4 kids that started about half the time and the rest (9) with about 70%. Are you trying to tell me that some that started 30% were the unconnected but supremely talented game-changers that should have been starting over those with 70%? or are you saying that among those with 70% there are those that should have had 30%, 50%? Seems a pretty reasonable distribution to me. I didn't dee a coach'd son on this roster either.

                        Comment


                          #42
                          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                          I know which players you are referring to. Almost always on the starting lineup. Very inconsistent average players. But parents had the connections...
                          So you're saying 2 of those with 70% should have been on the bench. Meaning that two of the 4 with 50% should have had more in your view but lacked "connections".

                          Comment


                            #43
                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            So you're saying 2 of those with 70% should have been on the bench. Meaning that two of the 4 with 50% should have had more in your view but lacked "connections".
                            Don't bother trying to argue with facts. Disgruntled/jilted parents will always look for excuses when in fact they can't admit their kids aren't as good as they think

                            Comment


                              #44
                              Aside from the fact that it has nothing to do with this year's U16 DAP squad.

                              Comment


                                #45
                                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                                The u15 preacademy playoffs are not the same level as U16 DAP, case in point the 98 preacademy team made playoffs a couple years back and they were 7-14-8 last year, 8th place in the Northeast only above Albertson and Seacoast. Every parent always wants the best players on a team until it means their kid gets cut or sees reduced playing time. If the players or parents were loyal to the club they would have stuck around for the NPL or NEP teams and try to earn back a spot.

                                Why people think that club history should trump current level of play is remarkable. Also there weren't even that many long-time bolts players on the 99 preacademy team. Many long-time bolts were cut between the 99's first preacademy and academy years as well.
                                98 pre-academy had some really strong players on it. That's why they did well. Once that team feel apart and its top tier players left, Bolts never fully recovered.

                                Comment

                                Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                                Auto-Saved
                                x
                                Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                                x
                                Working...
                                X