Guest player question

[Unregistered]

What a ridiculous stretch. I have 2 kids in club soccer. Neither of their teams has used a guest player from outside the club at any point in the last 3 years. Several times over the past 2 years, injuries and scheduling conflicts have forced them to pull up members from the 2nd team through club pass. It's not nearly as fluid as you're implying.

I did not mention outside or the club. If your club can not put enough kids on a team and play at an appropriate level they should not be there.

[Unregistered]

OK, say your kid is on a very strong team in his/her bracket. You're going to travel an hour to play the weakest team in the bracket. Would you rather come home with a 12-0 win, having restrictions put on the kids in order to score in the second half, or would you rather have a few higher level kids (still on age, of course) from your opponent's club added to the weak team to make the competition decent. I would personally rather have the latter, preferring my kid plays a good competitive game and possibly losing against an altered roster, rather than winning in a blow out.

If parent's are so worried about the standings over playing good competitive soccer games, I say we get rid of posting scores publicly altogether. Coaches and clubs should have the information, as they need to make sure their teams are adjusted appropriately for the next season if placed incorrectly. No need for the parents to be worrying about it. They can see if their kids are developing if they are paying attention at practices and games.

Give 'em all a trophy!
It's called competition for a reason and there has to be a measure to sort out the good from the not so good. People need to stop trying to fix something that isn't broken. If your team plays a lopsided game every now an then, hopefully the clubs will correct it for the following season.

There is so much that can be learned/taught from playing as a cohesive team. When you have players coming and going during the season, it just causes confusion and interferes with a team concept.

[Unregistered]

I did not mention outside or the club. If your club can not put enough kids on a team and play at an appropriate level they should not be there.

I'm in favor of having two teams with tight rosters and players able to funnel between if necessary vs. having one team with a ridiculously deep roster and playing time gets cut down.

Club gets more money. Players play a lot more.

[Unregistered]

I'm in favor of having two teams with tight rosters and players able to funnel between if necessary vs. having one team with a ridiculously deep roster and playing time gets cut down.

Club gets more money. Players play a lot more.

Not that long ago clubs had 1 team per league and 50 kids tried out with only the 20 best making the team others were cut. Now 120 try out everyone makes a team then clubs make 8 teams of 15.
All about the money

[Unregistered]

I think we are battling over semantics. In our case, every player that gets shuffled around all plays for the same organization.

This is my point. I mean that you should be able to play up kids (or latteral move) from WITHIN your club, but should not be able to add kids from totally different clubs. There will always be schedule conflicts that could require additional subs. For instance, during that awful Memorial Day heat/humidity we had 2 of the U11 kids come up to sub in to give the girls a break. We had a small team so it helped.

[Unregistered]

We've never brought a player in that wasn't on our roster. To go further, we've never had a player play a tournament game that hasn't played during the season.

I won't speak for any other club, but we pull players around and it's the way it should be. GS points and records be damned.

OK this is a from a Valeo person. What they will do is to roster kids from another club prior to any roster deadline. Then, when needed, or in the tournaments, they will bring that kid on...who has not played or practiced with the team....but has been rostered...and now displaces kids who were playing the team the season.....

All within the rules, but not very ethical

[Unregistered]

Not that long ago clubs had 1 team per league and 50 kids tried out with only the 20 best making the team others were cut. Now 120 try out everyone makes a team then clubs make 8 teams of 15.
All about the money

Not defending the clubs...but...so? More kids get to play competitive soccer. Maybe you have a kid like my daughter, who in your scenario would've been cut and moved on from the sport after 1-2 years. She was awful for club, but a pretty good rec player.

Now, 4 years deep, she's improved greatly and is one of the top 2-3 players on the top team.

I think it's good for teams to "dump" players still developing into a lower environment while they catch up.

[Unregistered]

Not defending the clubs...but...so? More kids get to play competitive soccer. Maybe you have a kid like my daughter, who in your scenario would've been cut and moved on from the sport after 1-2 years. She was awful for club, but a pretty good rec player.

Now, 4 years deep, she's improved greatly and is one of the top 2-3 players on the top team.

I think it's good for teams to "dump" players still developing into a lower environment while they catch up.

Yep, this. There are plenty of kids out there who don't decide to focus on soccer until U10/11 (or even, gasp, U12). Once they decide they are all in, they are going to be a bit behind those that were soccer only since U7/U8. They are still looking for the same intense training and kids with similar commitment (i.e. not a rec environment), but just can't yet compete with those top kids. They may end up catching up in skill eventually, may end up getting on a top roster when a few of those soccer only kids burn out, or they may never quite catch up. But in all cases, as long as they are committed players, they still deserve the quality training the top kids are getting so they can reach their potential.

[Unregistered]

Not that long ago clubs had 1 team per league and 50 kids tried out with only the 20 best making the team others were cut. Now 120 try out everyone makes a team then clubs make 8 teams of 15.
All about the money

It didn't take a genius to figure out that you add a B team, practice at the same time at the same field with the same coach and guess what, you doubled your revenue without much more expense. Can't fault capitalism.

[Unregistered]

OK this is a from a Valeo person. What they will do is to roster kids from another club prior to any roster deadline. Then, when needed, or in the tournaments, they will bring that kid on...who has not played or practiced with the team....but has been rostered...and now displaces kids who were playing the team the season.....

All within the rules, but not very ethical

Not ethical for sure since they technically aren't on the team or any team for that matter. Just throwing a few kids on last minute to improve the team for a tourney. I don't think this should be allowed.

[Unregistered]

Not ethical for sure since they technically aren't on the team or any team for that matter. Just throwing a few kids on last minute to improve the team for a tourney. I don't think this should be allowed.

But how can you even track that? You can't. Clubs will do it as long as they think it will help them win (and collect more GS points). If you're at a club that does it, leave.

[Unregistered]

My daughter is playing for another team within the club this weekend. More playing time the better chance you have to improve is the way I see it. Plus I pay a crap load of money for this.