Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Playing time

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

    Playing time

    Why is it that if a child tries out for and makes a team, why the coach finds them fit for the team but then doesn’t play them much in a game? I thought that most of the coaches are here to teach the game and help kids learn and grow. How is the possible with kids sitting on the bench? Do they just take kids for money? Do coaches only care about winning? If my child isn’t good enough, why not just cut him from the team? It’s very frustrating for a child to keep interest in a sport and have fun when they aren’t playing. This is probably why a lot of kids quit sports. I would like to just put it out there that if you are a coach and reading this, if you are the type of coach that puts winning over developing kids, don’t give kids a chance, make kids feel like crap about themselves, etc you shouldn’t be a coach. You may know the game, but you don’t know how to teach and bring out the best in kids. With that said, if anyone knows of any club in CT who genuinely, truly cares about development over wins and records and doesn’t have coaches with big egos, please share. I would love to take my son to that kind of club.

    #2
    OP here, sorry I meant to say mass, not CT but willing to go to CT if there is such a club as mentioned in OP.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
      OP here, sorry I meant to say mass, not CT but willing to go to CT if there is such a club as mentioned in OP.
      Biggest factors are age and levels. If you are talking about little U, run for the hills if your child is not playing at least half the game. If it’s u15/16+, well, the stakes are suppposedly a little higher but it should even out a bit in showcases.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        OP here, sorry I meant to say mass, not CT but willing to go to CT if there is such a club as mentioned in OP.
        What age are we talking about? Big difference between high school ages and ulittle ages in terms of quality and quantity of play time. Older players get, play time becomes a function of ability and hard work. At ulittle ages, everyone should be getting equal play time as long as effort is put into training. Unfortunately, many coaches would rather win games then risk losing by putting weak players on the field. It's why scores shouldn't even be kept at U10 and under.

        Anyway, it's all coach dependent, not club. Every club says they are focussed on development. Pick some teams that are convenient and playing at a level that puts your player in the middle of the pack and go watch the games. Watch the subbing and game coaching, then ask to attend a few practices.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          OP here, sorry I meant to say mass, not CT but willing to go to CT if there is such a club as mentioned in OP.
          It can happen at any club, good and bad, but a club that does care about development will have a philosophy of good PT for all players U14 and under. But also parents need to be realistic finding teams for their kids. I know it isn't always easy because it's hard to be frank about your own kid and many parents never played the game. But if you even have an inkling your kid might struggle on a team, go with your gut and walk away.

          I agree that coaches and clubs shouldn't take players just to fill rosters but the unfortunately reality is they do. It's a business with too many clubs and not enough talent. Do some research ahead of time, get your kid to practices (not mass tryouts) to see how well they fit, ask around about coaches who do it well and you've greatly improved the likelihood of finding the right fit.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
            Why is it that if a child tries out for and makes a team, why the coach finds them fit for the team but then doesn’t play them much in a game? I thought that most of the coaches are here to teach the game and help kids learn and grow. How is the possible with kids sitting on the bench? Do they just take kids for money? Do coaches only care about winning? If my child isn’t good enough, why not just cut him from the team? It’s very frustrating for a child to keep interest in a sport and have fun when they aren’t playing. This is probably why a lot of kids quit sports. I would like to just put it out there that if you are a coach and reading this, if you are the type of coach that puts winning over developing kids, don’t give kids a chance, make kids feel like crap about themselves, etc you shouldn’t be a coach. You may know the game, but you don’t know how to teach and bring out the best in kids. With that said, if anyone knows of any club in CT who genuinely, truly cares about development over wins and records and doesn’t have coaches with big egos, please share. I would love to take my son to that kind of club.
            Those clubs have all folded.
            You are now considered a unicorn.
            Play town

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              Why is it that if a child tries out for and makes a team, why the coach finds them fit for the team but then doesn’t play them much in a game? I thought that most of the coaches are here to teach the game and help kids learn and grow. How is the possible with kids sitting on the bench? Do they just take kids for money? Do coaches only care about winning? If my child isn’t good enough, why not just cut him from the team? It’s very frustrating for a child to keep interest in a sport and have fun when they aren’t playing. This is probably why a lot of kids quit sports. I would like to just put it out there that if you are a coach and reading this, if you are the type of coach that puts winning over developing kids, don’t give kids a chance, make kids feel like crap about themselves, etc you shouldn’t be a coach. You may know the game, but you don’t know how to teach and bring out the best in kids. With that said, if anyone knows of any club in CT who genuinely, truly cares about development over wins and records and doesn’t have coaches with big egos, please share. I would love to take my son to that kind of club.
              Parents care about winning; coaches and clubs will do what the parents want.
              Developmental only clubs business models have failed.
              Soccer is also one of very few sports where there is a home for all level of player. Baseball, football, basketball, etc all winnow down the numbers by cutting at all ages.
              There needs to be a concerted effort by the soccer community to let the elite players go off on their own and to have recreational leagues reemerge as the go to place for all remaining players who enjoy the game.
              Parental ignorance, however, is the driving force.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                … let the elite players go off on their own and have recreational leagues reemerge as the go to place for all remaining players ...
                +1 on this!
                This is exactly what should happen. You are really smart, can you share more like:
                When do you think this will occur?
                Who or what board will decide which players are chosen for Elite pathway?
                Elite should mean truly Elite right? Wo we are talking small numbers - Awesome! - but I bet you have already thought about sustainability, so who will pay to provide revenue stream?

                What can I do right now> I want to help?

                This is great, best thing on TS in weeks. Let's get going

                Comment


                  #9
                  > I thought that most of the coaches are here to teach the game and help kids learn and grow. How is the possible with kids sitting on the bench?

                  Practice is where kids should be learning the game and growing. Even in clubs where development comes first, if the club is a competitive club then playing time should be earned through a combination of attendance, attitude, ability and fitness.

                  Rec soccer is available for players/parents who are looking for equal playing time no matter what.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                    Why is it that if a child tries out for and makes a team, why the coach finds them fit for the team but then doesn’t play them much in a game? I thought that most of the coaches are here to teach the game and help kids learn and grow. How is the possible with kids sitting on the bench? Do they just take kids for money? Do coaches only care about winning? If my child isn’t good enough, why not just cut him from the team? It’s very frustrating for a child to keep interest in a sport and have fun when they aren’t playing. This is probably why a lot of kids quit sports. I would like to just put it out there that if you are a coach and reading this, if you are the type of coach that puts winning over developing kids, don’t give kids a chance, make kids feel like crap about themselves, etc you shouldn’t be a coach. You may know the game, but you don’t know how to teach and bring out the best in kids. With that said, if anyone knows of any club in CT who genuinely, truly cares about development over wins and records and doesn’t have coaches with big egos, please share. I would love to take my son to that kind of club.

                    Sometimes clubs/coaches take players on their team that they wouldn't normally take because if they didn't, they wouldn't be able to field a team, and therefore would lose a lot of money.

                    Sometimes they take players that are on the bubble thinking they can coach them up, but it just doesn't work out.

                    Sometimes there is a glut at a position a player plays, and the coach doesn't trust them at other spots.

                    Sometimes the coach is too concerned about winning, and the lesser player suffers.

                    Sometimes coaches play favorites.

                    Sometimes coaches are too busy or too lazy to be able to focus on individual player development, so they just play the best players and sit back and relax.

                    There are a whole lot of reasons for why kids don't play and it's often a combination of things. You are paying them to develop your player, and the kids develop by playing. If your child isn't getting enough playing time, find another coach and team that is a better fit.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      Parents care about winning; coaches and clubs will do what the parents want.
                      Developmental only clubs business models have failed.
                      Soccer is also one of very few sports where there is a home for all level of player. Baseball, football, basketball, etc all winnow down the numbers by cutting at all ages.
                      There needs to be a concerted effort by the soccer community to let the elite players go off on their own and to have recreational leagues reemerge as the go to place for all remaining players who enjoy the game.
                      Parental ignorance, however, is the driving force.
                      Is it still ignorant if your crappy kid is hindering my kids development? My D played on a club with a few lesser skilled players that shouldn't have made the team. They couldn't win balls, make correct passes, etc....

                      Comment


                        #12
                        There are no guarantees in club soccer and really you should simply switch teams. It is a "fee based" system and not free - and if my kid was sitting on bench - I'd move him.

                        We had a coach who would constantly swap out offense players every 5 minutes - ridiculous! How can a kid adjust to the game if yanked every 5 minutes - while some at other positions stayed in most if not all of game - unreal.

                        I also think clubs simply have to many kids on team $$ Really no more than 4 subs are necessary - maybe 5. If you have 8 or more on bench - that is likely part of the reason your kids sitting. It wouldn't take much favoritism in terms of playing time to cause significant sitting time for other players if this is the case.

                        New Team for sure....

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Roster size depends on the team and the league. The higher the league usually means the more players on the roster. Also the older the team means more players on the roster. It is not uncommon for DA/ECNL or NPL teams at u15 and up to take 20-22 players. DA/ECNL and Northeast play more games than the New England NPL so even if you sit a few games or play less minutes in one vs the other you are still getting more minutes than the other local leagues.

                          I agree 100% that kids need to play in games and playing 5 minutes and getting sub at any level is not ok. Players need to play at least 15 minutes a half and more if playing well that day. This is where coaches need to make good decisions on player development. Is the game to hard for player and. It going to develop in this game or is this a game they can compete at and need to get them more minutes and sit the better players a bit more. The problem with this is parents don’t get it. They only see their child not playing and do not understand that playing above their level is not good. They would rather also be on a team that is better and not playing than be on a team that is right for their development/level and playing more.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            They would rather also be on a team that is better and not playing than be on a team that is right for their development/level and playing more.
                            Well, sometimes this actually might be the better option. If I had a choice of having my kid be the best player on a team or moving up to a higher level team (with most likely the better coach), but being at the bottom of the roster, I'd say more development is probably going to happen with the latter scenario. Yes, less playing time in games, but faster speed of play, more physicality, better soccer IQ from teammates, better coaching 3 days per week training for two seasons, plus winter training, if offered, I would think would put even a bench player ahead of the top kid on the lower level team.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                              There are no guarantees in club soccer and really you should simply switch teams. It is a "fee based" system and not free - and if my kid was sitting on bench - I'd move him.

                              We had a coach who would constantly swap out offense players every 5 minutes - ridiculous! How can a kid adjust to the game if yanked every 5 minutes - while some at other positions stayed in most if not all of game - unreal.

                              I also think clubs simply have to many kids on team $$ Really no more than 4 subs are necessary - maybe 5. If you have 8 or more on bench - that is likely part of the reason your kids sitting. It wouldn't take much favoritism in terms of playing time to cause significant sitting time for other players if this is the case.

                              New Team for sure....
                              Rotating too much does break the flow. However, a mass-sub can be worse as if you drop 5-6 new players out there, it's a totally different game.

                              I've always tried to do a "3 for 2" with wing-mids (who sub first), center-mids, wing-backs, and forwards (assuming a 4-4-2 alignment). Centerbacks never come out, and if I was short I'd leave wingbacks in as well. Exceptions always exist (i.e. some/many center mids can run all game)

                              So, for me, 4 subs is perfect.

                              Comment

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