Talked to a lot of "B Team parents", it doesn't seem like kids moved to U13 A Teams

[Guest]

This is a very interesting topic, wish coaches, or better yet, club "owners" chimed in. On one hand I understand that the A team wants to win, so bringing in strongest players from outside to fill in the open slots makes sense. On the other hand, isn't there a need to show that if you work hard on the B team you get promoted? Granted you need to be good enough to be at least in the bottom quarter of the roster. This also gives more play time to players previously riding the bench. From a business stand point (and clubs are business regardless of them being registered as a non profits), don't you want to keep parents paying as they can reasonably believe that their kid has a chance to move up?

This same topic was discussed on ESPN College just yesterday in relation to the transfer portal. When a player does everything right and is ready to start after being a backup for 2-3 years, but the coach brings in a transfer player instead, what message does this send to the team?

[Guest]

I am not sure what you mean by a club owner, but as a coach and evaluator I have never been prompted by board members or any other leadership to not promote B team kids (I have been at 3 clubs total over my coaching career so can't speak for everyone of course). When we determine who is on an A team we are projecting especially for those from outside the club whereas we have a lot more info and evaluation on kids who have been at the club which can work against current players for sure. Say I am taking 18 kids, I might have a kid who is currently in my top 18 but I have seen them play enough that their peak is in that 15-18 range no matter how much harder they work, things change whatever. I might have an outside kid who I have seen but not as much that could be anywhere from a top 5-10 player or could be a 15-25 player (which would put them on more likely on B). In that case we'll take that outsider to be on the team as we hope for the upside and to develop them into a starter vs. a kid we are confident only ever be an A team reserve. Once the outsider is here for a year, if they end up a 15-25 then we move them to B and try and find another outsider with upside. This is a fairly standard approach amonst clubs as far as I know. You aren't taking the best 18 boys today, you are taking what you think and hope are the best 18 by season's end. This is very frustrating for the fringe A/B player and I understand that, but it is reality.

[Guest]

How so?

My kid was always a B-teamer. First, strictly B-teamer and one of the worst players. Eventually moved to occasionally practicing with the A-team, moved into playing the occasional game with them, until finally becoming a perm member. As she finished club, she never came off the pitch and is now playing and succeeding in a competitive college D1 environment.

She was intentionally kept on the B-team initially, and moved gradually, as the club felt it was the best way for HER to develop. For some of that time, she was clearly "better" than some other players, but she needed more time to sort herself out without the pressure.

Kids develop at different speeds and those who are an A-teamer early on may not be there later. Heck, some quit the game altogether by mid-teens.

[Guest]

My kid was always a B-teamer. First, strictly B-teamer and one of the worst players. Eventually moved to occasionally practicing with the A-team, moved into playing the occasional game with them, until finally becoming a perm member. As she finished club, she never came off the pitch and is now playing and succeeding in a competitive college D1 environment.

She was intentionally kept on the B-team initially, and moved gradually, as the club felt it was the best way for HER to develop. For some of that time, she was clearly "better" than some other players, but she needed more time to sort herself out without the pressure.

Kids develop at different speeds and those who are an A-teamer early on may not be there later. Heck, some quit the game altogether by mid-teens.

first of congrats to you kid for the hard work and determination, stories like this are great to hear. this is definitely a hige exception to the standard path, but good to know it is possible. i think this actually ties to the previous post of not moving to A until you have a shot at being a starter vs. moving up to be a bottom 2 or 3 player. best of luck with the rest of her college career and please keep sharing this story with other parents who complain about being stuck on B.

[Guest]

first of congrats to you kid for the hard work and determination, stories like this are great to hear. this is definitely a hige exception to the standard path, but good to know it is possible. i think this actually ties to the previous post of not moving to A until you have a shot at being a starter vs. moving up to be a bottom 2 or 3 player. best of luck with the rest of her college career and please keep sharing this story with other parents who complain about being stuck on B.

I agree far more start down a path and stay there. Lots of factors to consider. I can be honest, I wasn't always happy as a parent during those 'transition' years, but I did appreciate the WHY and I did reach back out to the coach at that time and thanked him. He did it right.

I 100% agree it's about playing. I tell everyone to get your minutes, as often as you can and as much as you can. At some point, though, they will need to test themselves if they want to play at a higher level.

[Guest]

I am not sure what you mean by a club owner, but as a coach and evaluator I have never been prompted by board members or any other leadership to not promote B team kids (I have been at 3 clubs total over my coaching career so can't speak for everyone of course). When we determine who is on an A team we are projecting especially for those from outside the club whereas we have a lot more info and evaluation on kids who have been at the club which can work against current players for sure. Say I am taking 18 kids, I might have a kid who is currently in my top 18 but I have seen them play enough that their peak is in that 15-18 range no matter how much harder they work, things change whatever. I might have an outside kid who I have seen but not as much that could be anywhere from a top 5-10 player or could be a 15-25 player (which would put them on more likely on B). In that case we'll take that outsider to be on the team as we hope for the upside and to develop them into a starter vs. a kid we are confident only ever be an A team reserve. Once the outsider is here for a year, if they end up a 15-25 then we move them to B and try and find another outsider with upside. This is a fairly standard approach amonst clubs as far as I know. You aren't taking the best 18 boys today, you are taking what you think and hope are the best 18 by season's end. This is very frustrating for the fringe A/B player and I understand that, but it is reality.

I am not a coach, just a parent, but have been told pretty much this same thing at our club. My son was moved to B and the coach said he wasn't toally sure the new kids he brought in were better than my son but he was 100% sure my son was a better fit on B for now. It was hard the first year as one new player was much worse than my son and the other boy who moved to B, but I get the logic.

[Guest]

My kid was always a B-teamer. First, strictly B-teamer and one of the worst players. Eventually moved to occasionally practicing with the A-team, moved into playing the occasional game with them, until finally becoming a perm member. As she finished club, she never came off the pitch and is now playing and succeeding in a competitive college D1 environment.

She was intentionally kept on the B-team initially, and moved gradually, as the club felt it was the best way for HER to develop. For some of that time, she was clearly "better" than some other players, but she needed more time to sort herself out without the pressure.

Kids develop at different speeds and those who are an A-teamer early on may not be there later. Heck, some quit the game altogether by mid-teens.

Yes definitely an exception in that the club/coach did right by her/had her best interests in mind. That often is not the case which is why parents have to look out for their kids and not always take what a club tells you at face value. In fact sometimes they want to keep a top B teamer on B to help win those precious games

HOWEVER, it is also true that some kids simply aren't A team material or would play so infrequently it wouldn't be good for them in the long term and could possibly ruin their confidence and enthusiasm.

Every player is different in terms of skills, determination etc as is their options for teams. If your kid seems to be a bubble lowA/high B player, take them to some practices at other clubs and ASK your club if they can at least do a few practices with the A team. It costs them nothing to check your kid out against the current players.

[Guest]

Once she could handle it being on the pitch with an A-teamer, she grew exponentially. She learned how to act (nobody else was goofing around), she learned that every action needs to be as perfect as can be. It's a lot easier to look better when a pass is at your feet, vs. your waist. That you need to pass and move like the others, or you stand out. She looked the part. Goes back to the B-team, and it fell apart again. In summary: players play better when they play with better players. Coach at the time needed to be sure she could handle it, so he held her back. Again, it was the right move, not sure I totally trusted it, but shut my mouth and let it happen.

Some of her then B-teamers remained B-teamers all through HS and will end up playing in college programs, so their path worked out for them. Some A-teamers quit by HS or the end of HS, and some played through HS and that was it.

My word of caution to anyone who cares is the "best" players at U-8, 9, 11 very well may not be that come U-15 and above. Each kid's path is different, and That path is for your steps alone

[Guest]

This same topic was discussed on ESPN College just yesterday in relation to the transfer portal. When a player does everything right and is ready to start after being a backup for 2-3 years, but the coach brings in a transfer player instead, what message does this send to the team?

It very clearly says winning is what's important and they think the new kid is better than you. That's fine at the college and pro level. At u14 it's where we go wrong..

[Guest]

It very clearly says winning is what's important and they think the new kid is better than you. That's fine at the college and pro level. At u14 it's where we go wrong..

So what if that kid really is better? The coach is supposed to take the worse player just because it’s the “right” thing to do

[Guest]

So what if that kid really is better? The coach is supposed to take the worse player just because it’s the “right” thing to do

Different poster and of course they shouldn't. All teams build to improve. Just because a kid has been a top B team player doesn't mean the club owes them something if theyrr not A team material. Sometimes a B player really is on the right team. It's also why when they add from the outside they take impact players, top starters. Not only will that new #1-6 player improve the team but when it's obvious why they were added the lower player's families are more like to shut up.

[Guest]

Kids develop at different speeds and those who are an A-teamer early on may not be there later. Heck, some quit the game altogether by mid-teens.

Unfortunately, for a lot of kids the system doesn't factor this into the equation and actually works against a lot of kids. So often those bubble kids get the short end of the stick in terms of quality of coaching and training time. MLSNXT, ECNL and R all training 3-4 days a week while most other teams, specifically B teams only practice twice a week. Winter practices are often limited to one practice a week. Tactics hardly get covered at all. Almost no B kid gets to see video of their self playing along with a critique of their play. Bubble kids get stuck with players who either aren't committed or are teetering on the idea of quitting since. Practice and game attendance for those get worse and worse as the players get older and the gap between A team and B team grows. So it should be no surprise when kids stop playing. Hell, no one is saying, "Hey, stick with it. We've seen your improvement and we are going to help you get over the hump." Clubs don't seem to want to identify and invest time in those committed kids who are close.