Playing time - equal time vs earning it

[Unregistered]

Not trying to be facetious but if a club offers to give a 50% discount on the club fees but your child may only get 5 minutes a game, or no time at all, would you accept it?

So what you are saying is that playing time is 10x more valuable than training time? That doesn't make any sense.
First of all from the club's point of view the cost of training is almost the same as game time so financially it's a no starter. You are asking for a 50% discount because you reduce you participation by 10%. Not to mention training is actually more likely to have a positive impact on your kid's development because they are getting repetition and reinforcement and time in between to process it. Game day is more for the parents not so much for development. It blows my mind when parents skip practices on a regular basis because they are optional. My point is the training is the gold nugget.

[Unregistered]

Solution - US Soccer or whoever makes the rules - CUT MAX TEAM/ROSTER SIZE....11v11 from 30/22 to 16, 9v9 to 12 and 7v7 to 10. Of course with this leagues need to be able to allow players on multiple teams as alternates for absences and injuries. This would also require tracking which really shouldn't be an issue in this day and age....a bar code on cards and a scanner for the head ref would do. You would have parents screaming about kids not being on A teams due to reduced sizes but the ones that see they have more playing time and develop would eventual stop.

[Unregistered]

I don’t agree with the large rosters but I agree that most of the time you know what you’re signing up for and it’s up to you to decide what’s best for your kid. Less playing time on the better team or more playing time on the lesser team. Some kids do better in either situation. Depends on how the kid responds.

1) kid doesn’t get as much playtime as he/she wants and steps up his/her effort
2) kid gets frustrated and discouraged

Either situation is understandable and different kids respond differently.

you forgot

3) parent thinks it's not justified and pulls kid from the club

[Unregistered]

you forgot

3) parent thinks it's not justified and pulls kid from the club

And has every right to without judgement. We all try to make the best decision for our kids (hopefully) and shouldn’t be harassed from other people who don’t agree.

[Unregistered]

Its very age dependent. Up until middle school it should be equal time. In MS the idea of earned PT is used but players still should get some meaningful minutes. Once in HS and certainly FOR HS It's all earned. However for club, kids should still get some meaningful time. Parents are paying a tremendous amount of money and never seeing the field isn't teaching them. That doesn't mean equal, but it's definitely more than 5 minutes. If that is all your player is getting then you are at the wrong place, and the club never should have taken your money. Help avoid this problem by making sure rosters aren't too large. But also be honest about your kids ability and if a team really is a good fit for them. Nothing kills the love of the game like never playing.

[Unregistered]

And has every right to without judgement. We all try to make the best decision for our kids (hopefully) and shouldn’t be harassed from other people who don’t agree.

Totally agree. But before leaving try to figure out if your kid is being overlooked (which can happen intentionally and unintentionally) or if it really isn't the right place for them. Are the player and coach just not clicking? And sometimes a coach is just awful. Finally be realistic - is your kid not putting in the effort


Too many people want the best teams or clubs, but that doesn't mean it's the best place for their players.

[Unregistered]

If they are a shady business they suck. I am an adult but not a soccer expert. That is what the clubs claim to be anf charge a fortune for their expertise.

I don't know my kid does not belong, that is their job. If they are taking money from me and my player is inferior they either stink at talent evaluation or they are sleezy.

The answer is sleezy. My teen player could do the talent assessment...they all can by U 15 or U 16.

The clubs want the money, period. If they say your kid is do great but they leave her or him on the bench all game...wise up. Watch what they do, not what they say. They will take your money till kingdom come if you let them.

[Unregistered]

The answer is sleezy. My teen player could do the talent assessment...they all can by U 15 or U 16.

The clubs want the money, period. If they say your kid is do great but they leave her or him on the bench all game...wise up. Watch what they do, not what they say. They will take your money till kingdom come if you let them.

Unfortunately it’s all about the $$ we have players on the team that do not belong but they bring in the additional revenue for the club to pay the bills and salaries. The worse part is the coaches are telling the kids they are playing in college where that could not be further from the truth. How can you play in college where you barely see the field at the club level?

[Unregistered]

Some clubs give roster bonuses to coaches for kids over certain thresholds. 7v7 more than 10, 9v9 more than 12, 11v11 more than 18.

Our current club has posted guidance on playing time...7=50, 9=35, 11=25%. I think it should be at least 50% until full sided otherwise how do you develop? There was a kid I saw playing less than 10% at U12 couldn’t believe his parents put up with it, so many places you can play and be on the field. Parents get sucked into club cache. By HS I totally understand no min playing time on a club’s top team, however parents have to do homework and be realistic about player’s ability while sticking up for their investment and child at same time. Sucks to practice 4-5 hours a week to not see the field.

[Unregistered]

So what you are saying is that playing time is 10x more valuable than training time? That doesn't make any sense.
First of all from the club's point of view the cost of training is almost the same as game time so financially it's a no starter. You are asking for a 50% discount because you reduce you participation by 10%. Not to mention training is actually more likely to have a positive impact on your kid's development because they are getting repetition and reinforcement and time in between to process it. Game day is more for the parents not so much for development. It blows my mind when parents skip practices on a regular basis because they are optional. My point is the training is the gold nugget.

Agree, training is the more important aspect. Actually my point was to see if a club charged less to players whom likely will get little to no playing time, would parents be ok with it.

[Unregistered]

You might be the biggest tool that ever posted on this site. Congrats.

So what you are saying is that playing time is 10x more valuable than training time? That doesn't make any sense.
First of all from the club's point of view the cost of training is almost the same as game time so financially it's a no starter. You are asking for a 50% discount because you reduce you participation by 10%. Not to mention training is actually more likely to have a positive impact on your kid's development because they are getting repetition and reinforcement and time in between to process it. Game day is more for the parents not so much for development. It blows my mind when parents skip practices on a regular basis because they are optional. My point is the training is the gold nugget.

[Unregistered]

Some clubs give roster bonuses to coaches for kids over certain thresholds. 7v7 more than 10, 9v9 more than 12, 11v11 more than 18.

Our current club has posted guidance on playing time...7=50, 9=35, 11=25%. I think it should be at least 50% until full sided otherwise how do you develop? There was a kid I saw playing less than 10% at U12 couldn’t believe his parents put up with it, so many places you can play and be on the field. Parents get sucked into club cache. By HS I totally understand no min playing time on a club’s top team, however parents have to do homework and be realistic about player’s ability while sticking up for their investment and child at same time. Sucks to practice 4-5 hours a week to not see the field.

All good saying that but you know parents sigh and moan when the kid with less ability is subbed in during a tight game. It’s partly about the $ but more in keeping the parents happy. You know usually the parents with the loudest mouth are the ones with the most skilled kid. For some reason that’s just the way it works.

[Unregistered]

All good saying that but you know parents sigh and moan when the kid with less ability is subbed in during a tight game. It’s partly about the $ but more in keeping the parents happy. You know usually the parents with the loudest mouth are the ones with the most skilled kid. For some reason that’s just the way it works.

So true, it’s readily apparent with kids whose mommy or daddy are team managers to earn favor and more playing time whereas they should not be on the field that much at all. Happens all the time.

[Unregistered]

i think PT and even # of match starts should be equal for all players through U12. As of the transition to 11v11 for U13 and U14, it should transition to earned time but no rostered player should get less than 30 minutes. U15 (High School) and up, should be 100% earned time. Parents also need to be mindful of pushing their kids into teams where they dont belong.

I think the 30 minute minimum per player should stick through HS, especially for tournaments that require travel. If a coach is willing to put a kid on his roster, he should play them.

[Unregistered]

Agree, training is the more important aspect. Actually my point was to see if a club charged less to players whom likely will get little to no playing time, would parents be ok with it.

Training is the most important for developing skills. Games are far more important for developing love of the game.