Gotsoccer obsession and its negative effect

[Unregistered]

Good article
http://www.soccerwire.com/blog-posts...ccer-progress/

[Unregistered]

Good article
http://www.soccerwire.com/blog-posts...ccer-progress/

amen!

[Unregistered]

We all know it's flawed. So what are the solutions? Reality is

1) tournaments legitimately need some way to balance brackets. Large events can't possibly know the strength of all the different teams and where they should be placed

2) parents, clubs and coaches will still obsess about wins. Most tend to limit their obsessions to how their kids' team is doing within their own leagues. If you know anything about youth soccer you know the proliferation of leagues makes ranking across all of them useless. It's usually the youngest parents who go aflutter that their kids' team is "#1 in the state." By U13 they have a better understanding of how it all works.

3) GS has cornered the market and no one has been able to crack it with an improved system.

4) related to #2 - the # of similar-yet-different leagues, especially at the state level, makes it impossible to compare apples to apples. Without a consistent structure to youth soccer across all states man of these issues will continue to exist. So you're #1 in a crap league in a small state. Is the # team from NH better than the #15 team from NY?

[Unregistered]

Good article
http://www.soccerwire.com/blog-posts...ccer-progress/

You have clubs like SUSA that chase points and even bought a team for their GotSoccer points. The bottom line is all that matters.

[Unregistered]

I look at GS, I admit. Not for the rankings, but to see how we may match up for common opponents. We play tournaments outside our Region, and curiosity gets the better of me at times. So, I'll look over and come up with a "we played a team who played a team that we beat" or something. That's it. Gives a window for the most part. Not always accurate, but there's enough common opponents out there that it's pretty close.

As for rankings themselves, I don't give them one lick of thought. We have a lower team in our club, but their posts were almost double what ours were until recently. That team plays in a Division 4 steps below, has gone winless this fall, yet they were still higher. How? Accumulated points from previous year, and players who gathered those points are now on our team. I know in time it will shake itself out, but it just goes to show at any given moment they cannot be trusted...so why bother?

I'd be happy if they kept the history and did away with the rankings.

-Advising from another State

[Unregistered]

I lovev the fact that a team can play in an EDP Division 1 bracket, be 0-1-5 with 2 GF and 15 GA and get 1800 points.

I also love that the league cup standings for my son's team actually links to our clubs B team, so the parents of the #5 team in NYE played us, they thought they'd blow us out. They didn't.

[Unregistered]

I look at GS, I admit. Not for the rankings, but to see how we may match up for common opponents. We play tournaments outside our Region, and curiosity gets the better of me at times. So, I'll look over and come up with a "we played a team who played a team that we beat" or something. That's it. Gives a window for the most part. Not always accurate, but there's enough common opponents out there that it's pretty close.

As for rankings themselves, I don't give them one lick of thought. We have a lower team in our club, but their posts were almost double what ours were until recently. That team plays in a Division 4 steps below, has gone winless this fall, yet they were still higher. How? Accumulated points from previous year, and players who gathered those points are now on our team. I know in time it will shake itself out, but it just goes to show at any given moment they cannot be trusted...so why bother?

I'd be happy if they kept the history and did away with the rankings.

-Advising from another State

Same here, really just at tourneys when you have teams yo've never played before. The rankings do get better as teams get older. There shouldn't be any rankings until U15+, just history. If they need rankings for tourney placement then make them available only to tourney organizers.

[Unregistered]

A surface scratching article on a far bigger issue. TDS player rankings are worse imo. but the culture in the US IS to rank everything. To make winning the only goal at every level. The success these publications have is based on parents subscribing and they do so becasue it provides ( in theory) third party validation of the ridiculous spending that goes on in youth sports.

[Unregistered]

A surface scratching article on a far bigger issue. TDS player rankings are worse imo. but the culture in the US IS to rank everything. To make winning the only goal at every level. The success these publications have is based on parents subscribing and they do so becasue it provides ( in theory) third party validation of the ridiculous spending that goes on in youth sports.

Why do you care where I spend my money?

[Unregistered]

Why do you care where I spend my money?

I dont and i never said i did. The cost of youth sports is ridiculous.

[Unregistered]

I dont and i never said i did. The cost of youth sports is ridiculous.

Of course you do, otherwise why would you bring it up?

On a time-on-the-field vs. other activities, it's less. Other pursuits cost a ton more. Works out to be about $10/hr. Pretty good bargain if you ask me.

[Unregistered]

Of course you do, otherwise why would you bring it up?

On a time-on-the-field vs. other activities, it's less. Other pursuits cost a ton more. Works out to be about $10/hr. Pretty good bargain if you ask me.

Good point. I've always managed my son's town teams and told parents that our budget worked out to $12/hr per kid. Cost-wise it worked out to the cost of a supervised playdate somewhere.

$10 for an hour of soccer practice versus $70/hr for a violin lesson ... Ain't gonna be a professional at either, me thinks.

[Unregistered]

Of course you do, otherwise why would you bring it up?

On a time-on-the-field vs. other activities, it's less. Other pursuits cost a ton more. Works out to be about $10/hr. Pretty good bargain if you ask me.

I doubt your numbers are accurate for a kid playing ECNL of GDA soccer. Travel, hotels and car rental alone is 5k+

[Unregistered]

I doubt your numbers are accurate for a kid playing ECNL of GDA soccer. Travel, hotels and car rental alone is 5k+

This is why the whole focus on "pay to play" is absurd. It is not the team fees that is the problem really. It is the amount of travel, the commitment that requires from entire families and cost for spending weekends away so often. A $2,500 team fee is tough but not awful, especially when so many teams give scholarships. It is the $5k+ and the amount of time away that makes it prohibitive for families of lower income, single parents, multiple kids playing, etc.

[Unregistered]

This is why the whole focus on "pay to play" is absurd. It is not the team fees that is the problem really. It is the amount of travel, the commitment that requires from entire families and cost for spending weekends away so often. A $2,500 team fee is tough but not awful, especially when so many teams give scholarships. It is the $5k+ and the amount of time away that makes it prohibitive for families of lower income, single parents, multiple kids playing, etc.

granted this family is over the top but it demonstrates much of what you're talking about. I know many working class families, both parents working that had to limit their participation and turn down some opportunities because of cost, time and strain on the entire family.

http://time.com/money/4037391/soccer...family-budget/