2013-2014 Boys U11 Top Teams (MA)

[Unregistered]

Different poster. I do think that the parents of kid on a team that constantly loses will welcome a better player or two to help elevate the level of play. Those parents are paying a lot of money and will want to validate their spending. Do they really care that their little Johnny is "developing"? Maybe, maybe not. At this age, if your child is relegated to a low team, you pretty much know that he is not going to excel at soccer. Might as well win some games since you wrote the check.

From the club's perspective, of course they will want to increase their wins. Those lower team members are not going to stay another year losing badly in every game. Bad for business. The multiple clubs with one U11 team in Maple will have to suck it up for this year.

There is going to be a lot of "false positives" on the score board as well. Think Maple will sort the teams for Spring based on penciled-in-roster-rate?

[Unregistered]

Different poster. I do think that the parents of kid on a team that constantly loses will welcome a better player or two to help elevate the level of play. Those parents are paying a lot of money and will want to validate their spending. Do they really care that their little Johnny is "developing"? Maybe, maybe not. At this age, if your child is relegated to a low team, you pretty much know that he is not going to excel at soccer. Might as well win some games since you wrote the check.

From the club's perspective, of course they will want to increase their wins. Those lower team members are not going to stay another year losing badly in every game. Bad for business. The multiple clubs with one U11 team in Maple will have to suck it up for this year.

We are in a pretty small club. Our coach is friends with the DOC of another small club. Sometimes both of the teams are short. They asked Maple if the club pass could be used between clubs for situations like this. They said no.

[Unregistered]

We are in a pretty small club. Our coach is friends with the DOC of another small club. Sometimes both of the teams are short. They asked Maple if the club pass could be used between clubs for situations like this. They said no.

So neither you nor your DOC bothered to look on the Maple site to understand the rule It's only a few sentences. Try googling Maple club pass.

[Unregistered]

I'm sorry, but your post doesn't make a lot of sense to me. You believe that lower level team parents will be just happy " with a win" ( no matter the cost) AND being shown that there child is not developing?

Yes and no. Parents on lower level teams are generally not the Type A malcontents that congregate here. They have hopes for their kids, and they want the best for them, but they are more realistic than the "elites." So, yes, they will appreciate the wins. It will probably keep them from leaving club soccer as well. That's good for business.

As to being shown that their child isn't developing, that won't be the way it will be framed. Most parents will be shown "the potential" their child could reach. Coaches will explain that the "elite" player has been with the program for 3-4 years. Look at what we can develop over time, blah, blah, blah. Only the parents with wildly disproportionate expectations for their child will be slapped with the reality that their kid is a long way from making the best team.

[Unregistered]

How long has NEP had club pass? If wins mean everything, why do the same clubs (big clubs) get blown out? Can't they find better players to score some goals? If wins are everything I'm surprised. Maybe some clubs understand the proper use of the pass .

[Unregistered]

Reality is that the best players are diluted amongst many clubs. It is what it is.

What I want to know is will Valeo pencil in players for the Valeo vs Newton United game this weekend? Will the best of Valeo be able to stop the Newton United freight train? Or will they not bother knowing it is fruitless effort? LOL :)

[Unregistered]

Reality is that the best players are diluted amongst many clubs. It is what it is.

What I want to know is will Valeo pencil in players for the Valeo vs Newton United game this weekend? Will the best of Valeo be able to stop the Newton United freight train? Or will they not bother knowing it is fruitless effort? LOL :)

It's Division 2 MAPLE. Who cares?

[Unregistered]

Yes and no. Parents on lower level teams are generally not the Type A malcontents that congregate here. They have hopes for their kids, and they want the best for them, but they are more realistic than the "elites." So, yes, they will appreciate the wins. It will probably keep them from leaving club soccer as well. That's good for business.

As to being shown that their child isn't developing, that won't be the way it will be framed. Most parents will be shown "the potential" their child could reach. Coaches will explain that the "elite" player has been with the program for 3-4 years. Look at what we can develop over time, blah, blah, blah. Only the parents with wildly disproportionate expectations for their child will be slapped with the reality that their kid is a long way from making the best team.

Development is about training, an approach over a long period of time, and it is very much what you put in impacts what you get out, factors under one's control (time, curriculum and repetition for example, natural ability not so much).

Any given Sunday, is a limited reflection of development. The result certainly tells virtually no part of the story. A team doesn't schedule their opponents nor does it affect the placement of those teams who would be its opponents.

Despite these realities, I haven't seen parents who are and who are not overly zealous, malcontents, demanding short term results have anything to do with the level of play. Every team I've ever been around from town to club to school from weak to strong has had parents who have shown a reasonable perspective and those who don't.

So you're right, adding a couple of kids on match day (ringers?) to improve the chance of winning is good for business, winning is always good for business in club soccer. But might not have anything to do with the development of the rest of the players being the right or wrong track. And if parents don't understand the difference - or choose not to understand - because they care that much about winning instead of losing, they'll never see the big picture.

[Unregistered]

It's Division 2 MAPLE. Who cares?

You are incorrect. Blue and Green are "division 1" (with a grain of salt for both sections)

[Unregistered]

Development is about training, an approach over a long period of time, and it is very much what you put in impacts what you get out, factors under one's control (time, curriculum and repetition for example, natural ability not so much).

Any given Sunday, is a limited reflection of development. The result certainly tells virtually no part of the story. A team doesn't schedule their opponents nor does it affect the placement of those teams who would be its opponents.

Despite these realities, I haven't seen parents who are and who are not overly zealous, malcontents, demanding short term results have anything to do with the level of play. Every team I've ever been around from town to club to school from weak to strong has had parents who have shown a reasonable perspective and those who don't.

So you're right, adding a couple of kids on match day (ringers?) to improve the chance of winning is good for business, winning is always good for business in club soccer. But might not have anything to do with the development of the rest of the players being the right or wrong track. And if parents don't understand the difference - or choose not to understand - because they care that much about winning instead of losing, they'll never see the big picture.

The second and third teams of clubs are usually players whose parents have seen them play on third or fourth level town teams and feel that their kid is not being challenged enough and much better than the rest (so, it's relative). So, they tryout for a club team and are placed on a lower team. These parents probably see the rest of the lower team as subpar compared to their own kid and definitely welcome a guest player or two for games. After all, this guest player emulates what this parent thinks his or her own kid should be executing.
And why, with the same coaches and programs within a club, they are not executing is the question these parents should be facing. It's the lower level teams that improve without the guest players that are actually developing and this reflects good coaching. This is what parents should be looking at. Winning or losing streaks are not reflective of this because you can't control the order of the teams you play. Hence, the scam with club soccer.

[Unregistered]

You are incorrect. Blue and Green are "division 1" (with a grain of salt for both sections)

Just Blue and Green? Why just those 2?

[Unregistered]

The second and third teams of clubs are usually players whose parents have seen them play on third or fourth level town teams and feel that their kid is not being challenged enough and much better than the rest (so, it's relative). So, they tryout for a club team and are placed on a lower team. These parents probably see the rest of the lower team as subpar compared to their own kid and definitely welcome a guest player or two for games. After all, this guest player emulates what this parent thinks his or her own kid should be executing.
And why, with the same coaches and programs within a club, they are not executing is the question these parents should be facing. It's the lower level teams that improve without the guest players that are actually developing and this reflects good coaching. This is what parents should be looking at. Winning or losing streaks are not reflective of this because you can't control the order of the teams you play. Hence, the scam with club soccer.

I think the view of this parent is optimistic at best, and overly favorable characterization in terms of perception versus reality. I think it's just as easy to suggest many parents, maybe most, respond to roster changes with emotion more than reason and are conflicted with the idea of improved results at the possibility of their kid not getting as many minutes on the pitch.

Otherwise, I think you've hit the nail on the head with your last paragraph and comments about clubs, coaches and training.

[Unregistered]

You are incorrect. Blue and Green are "division 1" (with a grain of salt for both sections)

Umm.. more than a "grain of salt." Unlike last year, MAPLE doesnt have enough good teams to create one good division, let alone two. It already looks like, at best, there might be a total of six decent teams between these two divisions. If they haven't already done so, these teams should be pushing MAPLE to limit the Blue section in Spring to six teams. Better to play some teams twice--home and away--than to have the top division filled out with games that are walkovers. I doubt MAPLE will do it, but that is what should happen.

[Unregistered]

Umm.. more than a "grain of salt." Unlike last year, MAPLE doesnt have enough good teams to create one good division, let alone two. It already looks like, at best, there might be a total of six decent teams between these two divisions. If they haven't already done so, these teams should be pushing MAPLE to limit the Blue section in Spring to six teams. Better to play some teams twice--home and away--than to have the top division filled out with games that are walkovers. I doubt MAPLE will do it, but that is what should happen.

Totally agree with you!

[Unregistered]

The days of MAPLE doing what they "should" are over.