Game time vs. Practice time

[Unregistered]

Game time vs. Practice time.
I have heard many times that playtime will be earned and deserved, and will not be equal in club soccer. If you want equal playtime, stay with Town soccer. I get this and understand it. The DAP folk argue that the 'real' benefit is in the many high quality practices that they have, and that is why being a DAP player is a benefit regardless of how much game time you get. This, in my humble opinion is bull****e.
A similar practice goes on in the nonDAP teams, or at least at each clubs top tier team in each age group. It is clear that the 'win' is very important. It is also likely that those who play significantly less are being given the message about the chances of making the team next year as about 25% get replaced.

All that said, I disagree with any statement that minimizes the value of game time. It is one thing to have high quality practices, but it is a whole other thing to play under the pressure of game time. Ultimately the game is practice and practice is not different than the game, but you have to get the kids to that point. It is my opinion that this is what parents pay for and this is the obligation of the club to make happen. Sitting on the bench is not developing anything.

.....and, no, my kid gets good play time, so I am looking at this unbiased.

[Unregistered]

Game time vs. Practice time.
I have heard many times that playtime will be earned and deserved, and will not be equal in club soccer. If you want equal playtime, stay with Town soccer. I get this and understand it. The DAP folk argue that the 'real' benefit is in the many high quality practices that they have, and that is why being a DAP player is a benefit regardless of how much game time you get. This, in my humble opinion is bull****e.
A similar practice goes on in the nonDAP teams, or at least at each clubs top tier team in each age group. It is clear that the 'win' is very important. It is also likely that those who play significantly less are being given the message about the chances of making the team next year as about 25% get replaced.

All that said, I disagree with any statement that minimizes the value of game time. It is one thing to have high quality practices, but it is a whole other thing to play under the pressure of game time. Ultimately the game is practice and practice is not different than the game, but you have to get the kids to that point. It is my opinion that this is what parents pay for and this is the obligation of the club to make happen. Sitting on the bench is not developing anything.

.....and, no, my kid gets good play time, so I am looking at this unbiased.

Well, it is even worse when they repeat the same thing at practice over and over again and then the chosen ones cannot even reproduce a few accurate passes on the field.

[Unregistered]

Game time vs. Practice time.
I have heard many times that playtime will be earned and deserved, and will not be equal in club soccer. If you want equal playtime, stay with Town soccer. I get this and understand it. The DAP folk argue that the 'real' benefit is in the many high quality practices that they have, and that is why being a DAP player is a benefit regardless of how much game time you get. This, in my humble opinion is bull****e.
A similar practice goes on in the nonDAP teams, or at least at each clubs top tier team in each age group. It is clear that the 'win' is very important. It is also likely that those who play significantly less are being given the message about the chances of making the team next year as about 25% get replaced.

All that said, I disagree with any statement that minimizes the value of game time. It is one thing to have high quality practices, but it is a whole other thing to play under the pressure of game time. Ultimately the game is practice and practice is not different than the game, but you have to get the kids to that point. It is my opinion that this is what parents pay for and this is the obligation of the club to make happen. Sitting on the bench is not developing anything.

.....and, no, my kid gets good play time, so I am looking at this unbiased.

Not true. Your kid is not getting good playing time!

If the kid is failing math then he has to work harder to get a better grade. If his game time is down then he has to work harder to get on the field. If a kid has the aptitude for math but not writing then you should continue to nurture his growth in his strong area and work on improving in the weaker area. You do not blame the teacher for that do you? Not very difficult unless you think that you pay money so the club has an obligation to make your kid into the talented player that he is not. Some things must be earned and can not be bought.

[Unregistered]

I agree with you. ALL the players should have at least 1 quality match every week no matter what.
I agree that more game time does not mean better development. Quality game time does. But less than 90mins game time every week is definitely a disaster for the development.

DAP parents should be aware of that.

Game time vs. Practice time.
I have heard many times that playtime will be earned and deserved, and will not be equal in club soccer. If you want equal playtime, stay with Town soccer. I get this and understand it. The DAP folk argue that the 'real' benefit is in the many high quality practices that they have, and that is why being a DAP player is a benefit regardless of how much game time you get. This, in my humble opinion is bull****e.
A similar practice goes on in the nonDAP teams, or at least at each clubs top tier team in each age group. It is clear that the 'win' is very important. It is also likely that those who play significantly less are being given the message about the chances of making the team next year as about 25% get replaced.

All that said, I disagree with any statement that minimizes the value of game time. It is one thing to have high quality practices, but it is a whole other thing to play under the pressure of game time. Ultimately the game is practice and practice is not different than the game, but you have to get the kids to that point. It is my opinion that this is what parents pay for and this is the obligation of the club to make happen. Sitting on the bench is not developing anything.

.....and, no, my kid gets good play time, so I am looking at this unbiased.

[Unregistered]

Not true. Your kid is not getting good playing time!

If the kid is failing math then he has to work harder to get a better grade. If his game time is down then he has to work harder to get on the field. If a kid has the aptitude for math but not writing then you should continue to nurture his growth in his strong area and work on improving in the weaker area. You do not blame the teacher for that do you? Not very difficult unless you think that you pay money so the club has an obligation to make your kid into the talented player that he is not. Some things must be earned and can not be bought.

Well said!

[Unregistered]

Game time vs. Practice time.
I have heard many times that playtime will be earned and deserved, and will not be equal in club soccer. If you want equal playtime, stay with Town soccer. I get this and understand it. The DAP folk argue that the 'real' benefit is in the many high quality practices that they have, and that is why being a DAP player is a benefit regardless of how much game time you get. This, in my humble opinion is bull****e.
A similar practice goes on in the nonDAP teams, or at least at each clubs top tier team in each age group. It is clear that the 'win' is very important. It is also likely that those who play significantly less are being given the message about the chances of making the team next year as about 25% get replaced.

All that said, I disagree with any statement that minimizes the value of game time. It is one thing to have high quality practices, but it is a whole other thing to play under the pressure of game time. Ultimately the game is practice and practice is not different than the game, but you have to get the kids to that point. It is my opinion that this is what parents pay for and this is the obligation of the club to make happen. Sitting on the bench is not developing anything.

.....and, no, my kid gets good play time, so I am looking at this unbiased.

The solution is simple- especially for pay to play clubs like the Bolts- For DAP they should only take 15-16 players. Of course that hurts their revenue model but that's the price to pay if they want the team to improve.

[Unregistered]

Not true. Your kid is not getting good playing time!

If the kid is failing math then he has to work harder to get a better grade. If his game time is down then he has to work harder to get on the field. If a kid has the aptitude for math but not writing then you should continue to nurture his growth in his strong area and work on improving in the weaker area. You do not blame the teacher for that do you? Not very difficult unless you think that you pay money so the club has an obligation to make your kid into the talented player that he is not. Some things must be earned and can not be bought.

And how does a coach grade his/her players? SATs PSATs GREs??
Here is the problem: Bolts players (except *very few* cases) are at similar levels. It is usually the partial observation of one coach. In school students are exposed to different teachers and different evaluations, and maybe not even then is the GPA a good indication of a student's ability. But you have other tests etc etc.
It is even worse if you are stuck with the same coach throughout the years: this should not be allowed. On top of that, add the nepotism, the parents who have influence on the system, and you keep going.
You cannot earn what is systematically taken away from you for whatever reason.

[Unregistered]

If your kid is in a school where only top 11 math students get to participate a really helpful special math clinic every weekend while others can only sit home even if they really could use this clinic. Yes, I would agree with you.

Not true. Your kid is not getting good playing time!

If the kid is failing math then he has to work harder to get a better grade. If his game time is down then he has to work harder to get on the field. If a kid has the aptitude for math but not writing then you should continue to nurture his growth in his strong area and work on improving in the weaker area. You do not blame the teacher for that do you? Not very difficult unless you think that you pay money so the club has an obligation to make your kid into the talented player that he is not. Some things must be earned and can not be bought.

[Unregistered]

Especially the top students are questionable "top" students and the clinic are paid by the parents of the every students.

If your kid is in a school where only top 11 math students get to participate a really helpful special math clinic every weekend while others can only sit home even if they really could use this clinic. Yes, I would agree with you.

[Unregistered]

The solution is simple- especially for pay to play clubs like the Bolts- For DAP they should only take 15-16 players. Of course that hurts their revenue model but that's the price to pay if they want the team to improve.

A smaller roster would be better. At a minimum they should take a smaller number of players to out of state/country games. It is not fun to pay to have your kid go out of town and then not play. Bus fares, hotels and shares of the coaches' expenses add up.

[Unregistered]

A smaller roster would be better. At a minimum they should take a smaller number of players to out of state/country games. It is not fun to pay to have your kid go out of town and then not play. Bus fares, hotels and shares of the coaches' expenses add up.

But again, this is not the model of a business that works for them.
Wouldn't it be better if they evaluated players after a full season or throughout tryouts and let the players/parents know where they are standing vs. the rest of the team? At least everyone would know what to expect and/or what they are paying for.

[Unregistered]

If your kid is in a school where only top 11 math students get to participate a really helpful special math clinic every weekend while others can only sit home even if they really could use this clinic. Yes, I would agree with you.

A game is not a clinic - it is a test.

[Unregistered]

There's play time and then there is equal play time.

My son gets 80-100% of play every game. He has peers that get 30-50%. Yes, I feel bad for those kids. However, my son attends every practice, is early or on time, and works his butt off.

Less play time could be because of a number of reasons. Practice participation, skill level, or poor attitude to name a few.

You have to take it seriously and work hard. Paying doesn't and shouldn't equal you a spot on the team or a certain amount of play time above say 20-30%.

[Unregistered]

There's play time and then there is equal play time.

My son gets 80-100% of play every game. He has peers that get 30-50%. Yes, I feel bad for those kids. However, my son attends every practice, is early or on time, and works his butt off.

Less play time could be because of a number of reasons. Practice participation, skill level, or poor attitude to name a few.

You have to take it seriously and work hard. Paying doesn't and shouldn't equal you a spot on the team or a certain amount of play time above say 20-30%.

Inflated rosters are killing the game. As an earlier poster stated, they should be limited and allow for equal playing time.
In soccer, historically, 13 players were carried with 1 keeper. There is nothing wrong with that paradigm. You played and you did not come out of a match. Today's soft parameters for standards have allowed for the expansion of rosters for two reasons: 1- kids are horribly out of shape and cannot play a full match and 2- clubs have realized this and now sell spots to fill potential substituting requirements.
An 18 squad roster is nothing more than a money grab and an equally bone-headed move by a parent to allow their kid to be #18

[Unregistered]

Not true. Your kid is not getting good playing time!

If the kid is failing math then he has to work harder to get a better grade. If his game time is down then he has to work harder to get on the field. If a kid has the aptitude for math but not writing then you should continue to nurture his growth in his strong area and work on improving in the weaker area. You do not blame the teacher for that do you? Not very difficult unless you think that you pay money so the club has an obligation to make your kid into the talented player that he is not. Some things must be earned and can not be bought.

Here is where you logic and application to youth soccer fails. When a coach selects your child for a team that is saying that your child has earned the right to be there. Thereafter, it is the coach's job to develop, and developing absoluting includes practice (studying) and playtime (testing). If, at the end of year (perhaps sooner for clubs with multiple tier teams), if it is clear that your child should not not be on the particular team, then a change should be made. This is no different than not doing well in an honors class and changing to a lower tier class.
So, yes, the child needs to work hard and earn the right just the same way that the child needs to study hard and take a test. In the same way, the coach is responsible for developing/teaching just the same way that the teacher is.

Now this is the 'kicker': In school every child is allowed to take the test (actually is required to). The test is the arena to see how you developed and what you learned. It is also a time to see how well your child does under pressure. The soccer equivilent is getting playtime. Playtime is the arena to see what your child learned and how they have developed. It is a chance to perform under pressure. So we agree that school and soccer have similarities. However, in your world, you feel that the coach can give different tests to the players that he/she has selected for the team, while I feel that it is best to 'give the same test' to all the kids on the team.......the same way that the teacher administers the same test. Some kids perform better and others not. At the end of the semester or year, you can decide where kids should be placed based on their performance.