A vs B team players

[Unregistered]

One thing I have noticed after 5 years in the same club watching many of the same kids practice and play is that the best aged 9 are still the best aged 14. True for middle and bottom too with a very few exceptions. Good coaching has improved everyone, ,but innate qualities are by far the most important.

I'm enjoying this thread, and agree with what's been written. But my experience has not been that the best stay the best over time. Some of the best kids do stay best but have seen star players going from playing every minute of every game to getting less than average playing time the next year, and being dropped down to the B team the 3rd year. I don't know if the kid is getting worse, or if everyone else is getting better while they are stagnant.

I've also seen kids move up over the years through hard work and drive.

[Unregistered]

What decision making is not readily apparent?
Is it because your child, just for example, did not make the A team and you can't figure out why?
I feel that if parents from b teams watch A teams train or play, how can they not see the difference.
That is always readily apparent.

OP here. Both my kids werr on A teams at the same club. No the decision making was not apparent, even to those of us on the A team. It seemed to be driven by the quantity to parental bitching more than anything else; it certainly wasn't skill. We left that club for many reasons but the doc was subsequently fired and the club scaled back it's A and B team operations. Next club - much better run- has A and B and it is more clear. Much less B team parent bitching too I believebecause of the clarity.

[Unregistered]

A few years back, my son was on a B team for a year. The following year the town went down to just one team.
6 of the kids that were on the roster of the B team are still playing, now on the A team.

1) The best player from the B team, took a year and a half off from soccer, before coming back, and is now the least skilled player on the A team.
2) The second best player from the B team is now the best player on the A team. The best player from the original A team had moved onto Premier only.
3) Top third player on the B team, was not taken by the A team. Played premier and eventually came back and was picked up by the A team the following year. Is a top third player in the A team.
4) Middle of the pack on the B team is now in the top third on the A team.
5) Middle of the pack on the B team is now middle of the pack on the A team.
6) One of the worse players from the B team, worked really hard and is now the primary goalie on the A Team.

In the case of #2, that player should have been on the A team from the start.
In the case of #3, not sure what happened, sweet kid and sweet parents. Got the impression that somehow the A Team coach was playing politics.

In just about all cases, what I see the top players do this year, I see the next grouping of skilled kids do the following year.
The top players seem to generally start playing at an early age and have siblings that also play.
They have a passion for the game and maintain their training, so they do not fall below the top spots.
However as all the kids get older, the top kids skill advantage gets smaller and smaller.
Genetics also play allot into it, some kids develop early, some will remain small, and some will become huge.
So just because a kid is great at an early age, does not mean they will be great in High School.

[Unregistered]

There is one kid on our A team who is painfully slow, uncoordinated and downright sloppy but parents are wealthy and have other kids in so no need to ruffle any feathers. I'd rather my kid the top of the B team then bottom of A all day long. In the long run, they are better off.

[Unregistered]

There is definitely significant changes between the top 5 A teamers at u9 and the top kids at u16. Many of the 'top" kids fade away when they are no longer the top kids. My tiny, technical, quick, bottom half A teamer at u9 went to bottom A teamer at u13-14 when all the kids went through puberty except her. Now at u16 she is much taller than average and has had to move to a top league and is one of the best there. None of her club A team top teammates have made it to this level. It was very hard, but she never gave up. I think in another country her extraordinary technical skills would have been better appreciated. Here at u13-14 when her teammates were not playing to feet she was required to win constant 50-50s to get on the ball. Generally conceding 50 pounds (70lb versus 120lb) to opposition did not end well for her. we are glad she didnt quit and kept her chin up during rough times.

[Unregistered]

What do you all think are some of the major differences between a and b team players.
Let's assume they have the same coach who knows what he/she is doing.
Thoughts?

Bob Bradley proved that there are no Americans that know what they are doing...

[Unregistered]

There is one kid on our A team who is painfully slow, uncoordinated and downright sloppy but parents are wealthy and have other kids in so no need to ruffle any feathers. I'd rather my kid the top of the B team then bottom of A all day long. In the long run, they are better off.

This is not always good advice. My kid was top B teamer, but the B team was so bad that (s)he got nothing out of the season. The town loaded the best players on the A team (and I agree my kid wasn't necessarily one of the top group, though the final positions were debatable) and then put both the A&B teams in the same division of our league. Result? The "A" team got a lot of blowout wins, "B" team got a lot of blowout losses, and both teams suffered wasted seasons. (Oh, yeah, "wasted" except to the coaches of the A team who got to brag about "results". Another example of adults ruining BOTH development AND fun.) Be careful what you wish for--especially in Townie soccer where the training opportunities can be limited and the egos tend to get in the way.

[Unregistered]

This is not always good advice. My kid was top B teamer, but the B team was so bad that (s)he got nothing out of the season. The town loaded the best players on the A team (and I agree my kid wasn't necessarily one of the top group, though the final positions were debatable) and then put both the A&B teams in the same division of our league. Result? The "A" team got a lot of blowout wins, "B" team got a lot of blowout losses, and both teams suffered wasted seasons. (Oh, yeah, "wasted" except to the coaches of the A team who got to brag about "results". Another example of adults ruining BOTH development AND fun.) Be careful what you wish for--especially in Townie soccer where the training opportunities can be limited and the egos tend to get in the way.

Yeah only we aren't talking town soccer here.

It's better to be a top player on a lower team and get a lot of playing time then bottom of an upper team and ride the pine is what I think the poster meant.

[Unregistered]

Yeah only we aren't talking town soccer here.

It's better to be a top player on a lower team and get a lot of playing time then bottom of an upper team and ride the pine is what I think the poster meant.

Dealing with this now. Kid didn't get much play time in the Fall and now they are splitting the team into an A and a B team. Kid is probably number 6-9 on the roster technical skill wise and is quick, but it is clear he has been relegated to the B team based on practice drill groupings, scrimmages, etc. Big drop off in skill and athleticism on the bottom of the roster that will become the B team. Trying to decide if we should stick around and get lots of play time for a really bad team or continue to not get much play time with a very strong team. This is ulittle, which makes it even more aggrevating. Play time should have been equal. He is a stronger player than many of those who have been selected above him so it's likely politics.

[Unregistered]

My kid can't boot the ball up the field and catch up to it as well as those elite players.
I chalk it up to natural talent.

[Unregistered]

My kid can't boot the ball up the field and catch up to it as well as those elite players.
I chalk it up to natural talent.

The top 5 or 6 on the roster are very good players, creative, fast, etc. My kid has explosiveness and quickness to change direction on a dime as well as the skills to dribble through opponents. S/He has a pretty good first touch and vision and is just as likely to pass to a teammate as s/he is to take on a defender. The kid is not a complete player, but works hard to address weaknesses. On the smaller side, but isn't afraid to defend or attack larger players.

Honestly I don't get it, given where s/he is now and the potential for development over the next few years. My kid should be a valued member of the team, but instead is treated like a bottom player with no skill or potential. What drives me nuts is watching scrimmages where s/he will defend and win balls against the strongest players on the team and then dribble through those same players and make a good pass to a teammate, who inevitably screws up their first touch and loses possession. Definitely regretting the choice we made in clubs given we had multiple offers.

[Unregistered]

The top 5 or 6 on the roster are very good players, creative, fast, etc. My kid has explosiveness and quickness to change direction on a dime as well as the skills to dribble through opponents. S/He has a pretty good first touch and vision and is just as likely to pass to a teammate as s/he is to take on a defender. The kid is not a complete player, but works hard to address weaknesses. On the smaller side, but isn't afraid to defend or attack larger players.

Honestly I don't get it, given where s/he is now and the potential for development over the next few years. My kid should be a valued member of the team, but instead is treated like a bottom player with no skill or potential. What drives me nuts is watching scrimmages where s/he will defend and win balls against the strongest players on the team and then dribble through those same players and make a good pass to a teammate, who inevitably screws up their first touch and loses possession. Definitely regretting the choice we made in clubs given we had multiple offers.

=====
pick me, pick me, I have the answer: Your kid does not have the explosive speed and quickness you think he/she does. You are jaded and you will jump around from club to club until you find one that is as nuts as you are.

[Unregistered]

- Top A players *should* standout from the bottom half of the A team and the entire B team
- Mid-bottom of A team is more prone to coach biases.
- On any given day/game some of the mid-bottom A team players could be switched up with any of the top B team players.
- Sometimes A players are on the team due to parent influence, sibling influence, size influence, or from another standpoint... are known to be motivators, work hard, etc.
- Sometimes B team players could be on A team but they are known whatever as less desirable for whatever reason (miss practices, don't give it their all, negativity, other sports).
- Position comes into play too... A possible A team player may not have the skills it would take to be solid a solid defensive player (i.e. striker only type player). Team may already have 2 players that are better than that player at that particular position. B team may be a better fit so the player can actually getting playing time (instead of off the bench).

Those are a few thoughts from the top of my head.

I like this breakdown. I'll also add that A team players are simply more consistent. While some of the B team players may have near the same skill potential as many on the A team the ability for the A team player to play at their potential regularly while the B team player does not reach their potential on as a regular basis.

[Unregistered]

You may not want to hear this, but the only way your kid is really guaranteed to be treated fairly and placed on the correct team is if they are undoubtedly within the top 3-4 players in their age group at their club. For players in that 5th spot on down, so many other factors come into play in deciding who is on what team (size, position, parents, siblings, multi vs single sport, etc.), that there are always going to be parents who feel their child was not properly placed, and they are probably right half the time.

If it bothers your kid (which in most cases it probably doesn't), tell them to work that much harder to become one of those top 4 players, so there will be no question as to where to place them. If the kid rises to the challenge, great, see How far they can get. If not, they are probably placed correctly on the B team.

[Unregistered]

The top 5 or 6 on the roster are very good players, creative, fast, etc. My kid has explosiveness and quickness to change direction on a dime as well as the skills to dribble through opponents. S/He has a pretty good first touch and vision and is just as likely to pass to a teammate as s/he is to take on a defender. The kid is not a complete player, but works hard to address weaknesses. On the smaller side, but isn't afraid to defend or attack larger players.

Honestly I don't get it, given where s/he is now and the potential for development over the next few years. My kid should be a valued member of the team, but instead is treated like a bottom player with no skill or potential. What drives me nuts is watching scrimmages where s/he will defend and win balls against the strongest players on the team and then dribble through those same players and make a good pass to a teammate, who inevitably screws up their first touch and loses possession. Definitely regretting the choice we made in clubs given we had multiple offers.

The problem is she passes. The top teams want players that would rather try and dribble through 4 defenders than make a pass to an open teammate or two. It's just the way it is.