Why your kid is not playing

[Unregistered]

My kid didn't even have to try out. That being said I know several parents on our team that could care less if their child plays as long as they have the team's accomplishments on their soccer resume. To each his own.

You know parents that could care less if their child plays as long as they have the team accomplishments on their soccer resume? Um, what? No you don't. Sorry but your team isn't so great that the parents of the kids who ride the bench game after game after game are happy about "just being on the team". Are you for real?

[Unregistered]

Agree. I do think there is wide disparity of thought on when winning should matter. For some it is never. At the older ages many HS coaches will refuse to cut a Junior who shows up out of shape or has been beaten out by an underclassmen.

At the younger ages, if there are tryouts and cuts, one should expect the best should play more and that playing time is earned not given. Even on competitive club teams I have heard parents bemoan that someone should be playing more because "they have been on the team for 3 years". Never easy to realize that you might not be as good as you thought. The universal thing I have seen thought is that coaches are really bad about communicating expectations re: playing time. They avoid the conversation and it usually becomes an issue.

Some time parents need to realize that there are sling shot effects in sports where situations happen and have impacts that go beyond the immediate player.

Some times there are positional needs that need to be band aided. The solution doesn't always mean the next guy steps up. Sometimes it means robbing Peter to pay Paul and other times it means using an entirely different system of play where different players fit needs differently.

Another thing parents never seem to grasp is while they think their child is busting their butt, a lot of times there are other kids that are busting theirs harder and deserve to play more.

[Unregistered]

The issue is real for 30 to 40 percent of the kids on your kids team. I am sure your kid is so awesome that they can play 11v11 with 6 kids. You show up at a tryout and get PLACED on a team. As far as I know you can't buy your way onto the top team. For God's sake tell the kids why they are not playing and earn your money not just hope some other kid comes along to replace him because you are #1 in the state.

My high school basketball coach historically only played 7-8 guys even though we typically had 12 on the team. He would sit down each of the "bench" guys during tryouts and tell them exactly what to expect and gave them the option of taking the roster spot. Guys took the spot because they had as much fun practicing and they loved being on the team. We were a very successful and more important cohesive team. In today's world, that guy would get run out of town by the angry parents of those bench players.

[Unregistered]

The issue is real for 30 to 40 percent of the kids on your kids team. I am sure your kid is so awesome that they can play 11v11 with 6 kids. You show up at a tryout and get PLACED on a team. As far as I know you can't buy your way onto the top team. For God's sake tell the kids why they are not playing and earn your money not just hope some other kid comes along to replace him because you are #1 in the state.

Part of the problem is there are so many teams just about any kid can make one. I will say that if you child has to sweat making a team that should be your first clue that you should probably look for another team because that defines them as a bubble player. The kids that a coach is going to play the coach will chase. It goes back to the whole buyer/seller mentality they were talking about a couple of weeks ago here.

[Unregistered]

Decent article and I agree with most of it. I have had some tough talks with my older son who doesn't have the size or the drive to really compete at the high school level in division 1. It's difficult... However, I do want to bring up two points that the author mentioned.

1) "My son earned a starting spot senior year on his varsity football team. When it became evident he wasn't going to play much after the first few weeks of the season, he made the difficult decision to leave the team."

-- Ok, your son quit on his team. What does that teach the team/ your son?

2) "Their coach wasn't very good, and would be fired before my son graduated. This taught my son another important life-lesson: All your bosses aren't going to be great. Sometimes, leadership is going fail and take everyone down with it."

-- Typical parent who under the guise of this enlightened article, the message is loud and clear: The coach was awful. So, my son quit.

These 2 points show that the author of the article is a "what's in it for ME" jerk, and so is his kid. I've been on both sides of this: I quit a HS team because I didn't like the game (and wasn't very good at it). To this day I'm not proud of doing that. On the other hand, I lost "my" starting job in another sport as a senior to a kid who was twice the athlete I was (and half the player I was, so the math shows we were about equal!) I brought a fire and passion to every practice the rest of that year with a positive energy that I am still proud of 30 years later.

[Unregistered]

You know parents that could care less if their child plays as long as they have the team accomplishments on their soccer resume? Um, what? No you don't. Sorry but your team isn't so great that the parents of the kids who ride the bench game after game after game are happy about "just being on the team". Are you for real?

Unfortunately, you are wrong. Especially on the top teams in the area, there are players who would develop more by getting bigger minutes and being a key contributor on a lower level team, but they love being on a top, winning team. Whether this is driven more by the kid's desire to identify with the team or the parents' need to have something to brag about is a worthy debate. I know parents that might prefer to see their kid play more, but are willing to accept that the kid is really happy being part of a big time winner. I know others that have memorized the team's record and ranking while their kid struggles to get meaningful minutes. Also, we can't ignore the social aspect of being part of a group, especially with young girls (sometimes a hard thing for adult males to really understand).

[Unregistered]

That’s all true but the system itself is the problem at younger ages. Look at the Valeo threads about 12 and 13 year olds and 11 and 12 last year. The points system is driving the insanity, clubs are a business and they want money. Top teams in the state and region draw in players and thus money. If your kid is a bubble player on that #1 in the state/region/national team expect reduced playing time in games where the almighty point is at stake. It is pretty apparent from watching these top teams that coaches think players that have been playing an entire game and are exhausted are better than the bottom third of the team. Whether or not that is true is open for debate but it doesn’t really matter as only the coach’s decision is relevant. Hopefully these coaches try to work it out during the tournament games against weaker teams or in season play.

This is ridiculous. Every player has played in every game for the u12s, even when 18 players showed up. If it's a close game it's at the coaches discretion but your kid does play. Much more time in blowouts which happens. And no it's not really up for debate, that's what is called town soccer. Hope you are a troll and not a Valeo parent. You might wNt to retread the article.

[Unregistered]

That’s all true but the system itself is the problem at younger ages. Look at the Valeo threads about 12 and 13 year olds and 11 and 12 last year. The points system is driving the insanity, clubs are a business and they want money. Top teams in the state and region draw in players and thus money. If your kid is a bubble player on that #1 in the state/region/national team expect reduced playing time in games where the almighty point is at stake. It is pretty apparent from watching these top teams that coaches think players that have been playing an entire game and are exhausted are better than the bottom third of the team. Whether or not that is true is open for debate but it doesn’t really matter as only the coach’s decision is relevant. Hopefully these coaches try to work it out during the tournament games against weaker teams or in season play.

There are kids who have the energy, stamina, endurance to play the entire 70 minutes at U12 and the more opportunities they have to practice this, the better they become. Pretty sure DAP operates this way. The trade-off is you get to practice with the top players, work to develop to their level, but play very minimally or you transfer to a lower team where you will have a bigger impact but not have these guys for mates. Pretty clear unless you're on the border or its just nepotism.

[Unregistered]

The universal thing I have seen thought is that coaches are really bad about communicating expectations re: playing time. They avoid the conversation and it usually becomes an issue.

Completely agree, this is rule rather than exception and it's a problem far too often when it doesn't need to be.

[Unregistered]

There are kids who have the energy, stamina, endurance to play the entire 70 minutes at U12 and the more opportunities they have to practice this, the better they become. Pretty sure DAP operates this way. The trade-off is you get to practice with the top players, work to develop to their level, but play very minimally or you transfer to a lower team where you will have a bigger impact but not have these guys for mates. Pretty clear unless you're on the border or its just nepotism.

I haven't seen many - if any. Those kids with their tongues dragging on the ground can't be as effective as the kids on the bench. Even if you took them out for 3 minutes for some water and to catch their breath it would be acceptable. There is no 12 year old or younger that should be playing a whole game while teammates sit on the bench. But chase those points and dollars because in reality that is what it is all about. How many kids from MA are on the WNT or NT? Right, not that many.

[Unregistered]

Completely agree, this is rule rather than exception and it's a problem far too often when it doesn't need to be.

They don't want to talk about it because no matter what they do there will be a group of unhappy parents. Play everyone in the name of development and parents of the "superstars" will be pissed Johnny didn't play the whole game. Better yet, if the team loses because of those "bench players" then competitive families will leave looking for the "winning team" with the best record. Flip that - if they don't play a set of players, obviously those parents and kids get dis-satisfied and will also probably leave. Since those players are likely not caliber for that team that would be the preferred route. Clubs want to keep their better players and discretely push the weaker ones out the door. I can't blame them - they need to win to keep customers coming through the door. Coaches need to win to keep their jobs. It's a business.

Net/net, as others have said, it's up to the parents to guide their child to a level that is appropriate for the player. Who doesn't want to play on the prestige team with the cool uniforms? But if they find it isn't working then they need to have a frank discussion with the coach. Better to cut bait and move on quickly then continue to struggle and get more frustrated, possibly even quit the sport all together. We were lucky enough to have a coach a few years back who was very honest with one of our kids. We dropped her down a level and it was the absolute right thing to do. She's still playing and having fun. Ultimately that's what every parent SHOULD hope for, but too many times they want much more than what their child can realistically attain

[Unregistered]

Unfortunately, you are wrong. Especially on the top teams in the area, there are players who would develop more by getting bigger minutes and being a key contributor on a lower level team, but they love being on a top, winning team. Whether this is driven more by the kid's desire to identify with the team or the parents' need to have something to brag about is a worthy debate. I know parents that might prefer to see their kid play more, but are willing to accept that the kid is really happy being part of a big time winner. I know others that have memorized the team's record and ranking while their kid struggles to get meaningful minutes. Also, we can't ignore the social aspect of being part of a group, especially with young girls (sometimes a hard thing for adult males to really understand).

This is very true on the boys side too. You can't convince a parent to have his child play on a B team the entire game instead of sitting on the bench for 90% of a top team game. CRAZY!

[Unregistered]

That’s all true but the system itself is the problem at younger ages. Look at the Valeo threads about 12 and 13 year olds and 11 and 12 last year. The points system is driving the insanity, clubs are a business and they want money. Top teams in the state and region draw in players and thus money. If your kid is a bubble player on that #1 in the state/region/national team expect reduced playing time in games where the almighty point is at stake. It is pretty apparent from watching these top teams that coaches think players that have been playing an entire game and are exhausted are better than the bottom third of the team. Whether or not that is true is open for debate but it doesn’t really matter as only the coach’s decision is relevant. Hopefully these coaches try to work it out during the tournament games against weaker teams or in season play.

As usual it's all Valeo's fault. They just came on the GS scene, literally in the past month and all their development, playing time, and parent satisfaction has been obscured sudddenly. Wrongo, Sporto.

[Unregistered]

Saw a great article on Boston.com . All I could think of was Some (not all) parents here on TS. Great read. Ask your self the same question and then read this article. Imagine if coaches could be honest?

http://www.boston.com/sports/blogs/o..._month_or.html

I'm just glad all of my kids are in the upper tier for their sports. Lots of playing time and surely all will be Div 1 players, and maybe one or two will go pro.

[Unregistered]

As usual it's all Valeo's fault. They just came on the GS scene, literally in the past month and all their development, playing time, and parent satisfaction has been obscured sudddenly. Wrongo, Sporto.

Really don't get the complaint at all. Every player has played every game they attended, many blowouts in which every player played 30 minutes or more. Plus bench players were encouraged to also play on the second team to get additional time. Over 20 u12 players have been played some tournament or EDP games. What exactly is the complaint here against Valeo?