Running up the score is important

[Unregistered]

We talked with the other coach. There was no "condition"--but we had an understanding and we trusted him enough.

My view is that when things aren't going in a direction that's working well for your kid, try to have a respectful conversation. If that doesn't work, move on between seasons. Trying to force a fit usually won't be worth the trouble, since it's unlikely to succeed. Most coaches who have had some success are going to stay their course, regardless of whether the parent has a point.

Thanks for the response.

This is our 2nd year of club and we're at the same club. We stay with the notion that the grass is not always greener on the other side. We also have a good deal in that he can play keeper 50%. Seems clubs are pushing specialization in that position at an early age. Lastly, my son plays 100% of all games. Not sure that's likely to happen elsewhere.

But yes. It might be time for a new fit if talking with the coach doesn't help.

[Unregistered]

My son still plays travel, district select in the Summer, indoor in the Winter, and is doing RDS. So I'm probably making more of a big deal about it then necessary.

Slow this freight train down. You're doing the same thing the coach is doing, but with sports specialization rather than positional specialization.

Your son is playing too much soccer.

He needs some cross training. He may like lacrosse or basketball more than soccer. Drop indoor and districts at the very least.

[Unregistered]

Not the person you asked but the person who asked the question to begin with.

At 11 I believe my son should be playing all positions. Left side, right side, front, and back. I believe that is best for his development as an overall player. However, it seems that most coaches are placing kids based on where they fit to help the team win.

For example, one of the weakest kids on my son's team plays Striker. He never plays back. He's placed where he will do the least damage. He's rarely successful and hasn't grown. He only plays club soccer.

My son still plays travel, district select in the Summer, indoor in the Winter, and is doing RDS. So I'm probably making more of a big deal about it then necessary.

However, at young ages, I think it's best for development to play in all positions.

I think you are spot on...i believe a coach is doing a dis-service to a young player if he allows or encourages him or her to focus on one position before age 13 or so. I saw a very talented young player on my sons town team play for a few years strictly on defense, where he excelled and that was his favorite. He then started playing club, where the coach had him play all positions. what he quickly saw is that the player was very strong when everything was in front of him, but when he played mid or forward he struggled. He has since been splitting his time more and has developed a broader range of skills and his game awareness is improving. I think they should be "soccer players" first, and then settle on a position of focus a bit later on once their fundamentals have been more firmly established. Just my opinion.

[Unregistered]

Slow this freight train down. You're doing the same thing the coach is doing, but with sports specialization rather than positional specialization.

Your son is playing too much soccer.

He needs some cross training. He may like lacrosse or basketball more than soccer. Drop indoor and districts at the very least.

This isn't as cut and dry as you make it out to be. I was clued into a fascinating discussion from two different sides. Both had very valid points.

One one hand, someone I play with emigrated from Holland and was on the board of the club team in town. He is of the opinion that the reason why the US will never get up to par with the rest of the world is because we spread ourselves around too much. If you want to succeed in soccer...stick will soccer all the time. Of course, Holland doesn't have much else to take their attention away, but I digress..

On the other hand, my brother, also on the board (who's daughter is a three-sport star at a private school, and will play two in college) believes as you do: It's way too early to pigeon-hole someone. If he did that with my niece, she would've missed out on a lot.

I heard the argument, which got pretty heated, from both sides and just nodded. I couldn't disagree with either of them.

[Unregistered]

This isn't as cut and dry as you make it out to be. I was clued into a fascinating discussion from two different sides. Both had very valid points.

One one hand, someone I play with emigrated from Holland and was on the board of the club team in town. He is of the opinion that the reason why the US will never get up to par with the rest of the world is because we spread ourselves around too much. If you want to succeed in soccer...stick will soccer all the time. Of course, Holland doesn't have much else to take their attention away, but I digress..

On the other hand, my brother, also on the board (who's daughter is a three-sport star at a private school, and will play two in college) believes as you do: It's way too early to pigeon-hole someone. If he did that with my niece, she would've missed out on a lot.

I heard the argument, which got pretty heated, from both sides and just nodded. I couldn't disagree with either of them.

First of all Holland does not have any other sports of import. This changes the perspective of that country. Secondly there are a myriad of other factors that allow for them to be superior at the sport such as a focus on development as opposed to win at all costs at an early age. If the myriad sports available to US youth is the reason we are failing then wouldn't we be failing at other sports as well? We are still dominant at youth level in baseball where town all star teams (small towns!!) can beat all star teams from entire countries. Why because LL has mandatory play policy, limits overuse of pitchers, but more importantly keeps kids together for four years during development. Until we stop players from moving to a new team every year we are going suck.

[Unregistered]

Why do you assume that one position in soccer is better than the other? If your son happens to be the best defender on the team, there is nothing wrong with him helping the team that way.

I'm assuming nothing. I'm talking about my kid's talents and preferences, and club soccer for which we pay a significant amount.

We weren't interested in being sold on the equal virtues of playing dedicated center back rather than forward: that's not what my kid wanted to play and be, and our priority wasn't "helping the team that way." But the coach responded to us with your kind of attitude (maybe you're him). No, thanks. We'll pass--and not worth arguing about, when we could move to another good team, with another good coach, within the same strong club. Looking like the right move, in all respects, a few years later.

[Unregistered]

I'm assuming nothing. I'm talking about my kid's talents and preferences, and club soccer for which we pay a significant amount.

We weren't interested in being sold on the equal virtues of playing dedicated center back rather than forward: that's not what my kid wanted to play and be, and our priority wasn't "helping the team that way." But the coach responded to us with your kind of attitude (maybe you're him). No, thanks. We'll pass--and not worth arguing about, when we could move to another good team, with another good coach, within the same strong club. Looking like the right move, in all respects, a few years later.

What will you do if you go to another club and the coach plays him defense? Move again.
Here is what you and a lot of parents are missing: Games are great but not the only thing that helps the kids develop as soccer players. You should be worried about the training which is way more time that the players play with coach.

[Unregistered]

First of all Holland does not have any other sports of import. This changes the perspective of that country. Secondly there are a myriad of other factors that allow for them to be superior at the sport such as a focus on development as opposed to win at all costs at an early age. If the myriad sports available to US youth is the reason we are failing then wouldn't we be failing at other sports as well? We are still dominant at youth level in baseball where town all star teams (small towns!!) can beat all star teams from entire countries. Why because LL has mandatory play policy, limits overuse of pitchers, but more importantly keeps kids together for four years during development. Until we stop players from moving to a new team every year we are going suck.

First, yes, I acknowledged that Holland doesn't have a lot of other sports vying for kids attention.

Not sure where the "win at all costs" factors come into play. Wasn't part of what I said.

You can believe what you want about LL, but we rarely win the World Series any longer. Trying to understand what the rest of what you say means, but I gave up.

[Unregistered]

What will you do if you go to another club and the coach plays him defense? Move again.
Here is what you and a lot of parents are missing: Games are great but not the only thing that helps the kids develop as soccer players. You should be worried about the training which is way more time that the players play with coach.

You have a reading comprehension problem. The "move" I referred to was within the same club. (But I'd also have been willing to change clubs under those circumstances, since I think it's absurd to make oneself hostage to a particular club, coach, and team situation.) That move worked very well.

In any case, what you're "missing" (set aside your faulty assumption that parents have no relevant experience with the sport) is my agreement that game experience, especially at younger ages, can be overrated--that developing and demonstrating basic competence in practices is far more important. So, no, I'm not "worried about" your soapbox issues. We're good.

[Unregistered]

First of all Holland does not have any other sports of import. This changes the perspective of that country. Secondly there are a myriad of other factors that allow for them to be superior at the sport such as a focus on development as opposed to win at all costs at an early age. If the myriad sports available to US youth is the reason we are failing then wouldn't we be failing at other sports as well? We are still dominant at youth level in baseball where town all star teams (small towns!!) can beat all star teams from entire countries. Why because LL has mandatory play policy, limits overuse of pitchers, but more importantly keeps kids together for four years during development. Until we stop players from moving to a new team every year we are going suck.

The push to specialize in a position certainly isn't good for development. Run away from clubs that pigeon hole kids at a young age. They should e playing all over the field and even in net.

There's really two groups of players - for the very top level players to develop and reach their fullest potential then specialization and high level training is critical. Here I'm talking about NT or future pro-level players. I suppose you could argue D1 college as well. That's how to raise the level of the sport in the international arena. that is what DAP is supposed to help address. But for the majority of players early specialization does them a great disservice. Kids miss out on other opportunities to develop other skills and interests just to focus on something they might already be out of by high school. The physical benefits of cross training are well known. But the pressure to focus focus focus is intense. And many parents aren't good judges of their kids' abilities and cave to the pressure.

Baseball isn't a good example - nor is US football - since neither is a true international sport. Basketball is growing internationally but also still lags. To say the US excels at other sports isn't a fair argument. Only soccer is a true international sport. We may never get to the top but at least we are moving up the ladder slowly.

[Unregistered]

I'm assuming nothing. I'm talking about my kid's talents and preferences, and club soccer for which we pay a significant amount.

We weren't interested in being sold on the equal virtues of playing dedicated center back rather than forward:

that's not what my kid wanted to play and be, and our priority wasn't "helping the team that way."

But the coach responded to us with your kind of attitude (maybe you're him). No, thanks. We'll pass--and not worth arguing about, when we could move to another good team, with another good coach, within the same strong club. Looking like the right move, in all respects, a few years later.

Parents new to club soccer would be wise to pay careful attention to this post.

Simple, direct and all too relevant to every player's development.

Are you serving the team's results or is the club serving your development? I'm not arguing whether they are or need to be mutually exclusive. I'm asking a question that makes a clear and distinct observation about priorities.

At 16 years old, the match result of the team has a different and perhaps meaningful impact on the player's (and parents') objectives at a different time in their development as a player; at 12 years old, the circumstances are completely different and the match result of the team does not have that impact, and should never come before or at the expense of the development objectives for the individual players.

Whatever the talk might be, actions speak to the motives of club and coach, whether it's business and/or short-sighted emotions. If more parents were more astute, perhaps cynical, the club soccer landscape wouldn't be the mess that it is.

[Unregistered]

What will you do if you go to another club and the coach plays him defense? Move again.
Here is what you and a lot of parents are missing: Games are great but not the only thing that helps the kids develop as soccer players. You should be worried about the training which is way more time that the players play with coach.

An unenlightened coach in games at ages where individual development should be the priority over the match result is often, based on my experience, still unenlightened when it comes to deploying best practices in training those same developing children. Where there are red flags, don't be surprised to find more elsewhere.

[Unregistered]

First, yes, I acknowledged that Holland doesn't have a lot of other sports vying for kids attention.

Not sure where the "win at all costs" factors come into play. Wasn't part of what I said.

You can believe what you want about LL, but we rarely win the World Series any longer. Trying to understand what the rest of what you say means, but I gave up.

Uhhhh. We pretty much make it to the finals and win every year. Maybe you are thinking of the 1970's when Taiwan was trotting out college students.

Little League is the most successful youth sports organization because they have remained true to their values for 60 years. 1) everybody plays, 2) volunteer organization, 3) limited season with a primary focus on practice time over games.....

[Unregistered]

Uhhhh. We pretty much make it to the finals and win every year. Maybe you are thinking of the 1970's when Taiwan was trotting out college students.

Little League is the most successful youth sports organization because they have remained true to their values for 60 years. 1) everybody plays, 2) volunteer organization, 3) limited season with a primary focus on practice time over games.....

IOW *not* club soccer.

[Unregistered]

Uhhhh. We pretty much make it to the finals and win every year. Maybe you are thinking of the 1970's when Taiwan was trotting out college students.

Little League is the most successful youth sports organization because they have remained true to their values for 60 years. 1) everybody plays, 2) volunteer organization, 3) limited season with a primary focus on practice time over games.....

Uhhhhh, if by "every year" you mean once in the last six, then you'd be correct. Yes, we make it to the finals, since the finals are now US vs. the World.