Bench Warming

[Arsenal_U14G_Fan]

I posted the thread what happens when a new super stud comes to your team and I would like to follow that with another question that is somewhat related.

Is it better for a player to be with the best team and win alot but not play very often, or to be on a good team and play frequently? When a player wins state cup and didn't even step on the field through most of the games do they have the same sense of accomplishment (not including injury)?

I think soccer players develop from actually playing and not so much from watching others play. Other thoughts?

[Unregistered]

YES! Players need to play in the game. If you have practice to teach, then when do you apply it at? Well let me tell you, in a game!
It is smarter for that player to either leave the team or to find out what they are missing and step it up, get extra trainings in, doing things on their own or what not. If they are just simply lableled and will continue to get little to none play time then it is time to pack up and leave. But I would look at extra options as above mentioned or possibly a B team to fall down on if you like the coach, club, parents, whatever it is. The player can work hard and maybe work back on to the A team or maybe it is a better fit for that player to simply be a B player. Nothing wrong in that.

But if you are speaking about an A player not getting play time, then there are way too many top top top players and it is too squished on the team, then time to talk to the coach and see what is what and then maybe think about packing up and leaving. Either too many top dogs on team or politics or both!

I will add you are a smart cookie my dear. You are a very good salesperson. I enjoyed your pitch. Don't take offense, but rather a compliment on how savy you are.

[Unregistered]

Agreed, it's better to get the minutes then get the win. I know one of the Sodium girls dropped herself down to the B team because she wasn't getting the minutes. She trained hard and when try outs came around again she was ready. She made Sodium and I believe she scored 2 goals in the State Cup final this year.

[Unregistered]

having been

at a college showcase this past weekend and talking shop with other parents/coaches...it's much, much more important to actually PLAY on an average team than to be a non-factor on a very good team. College coaches DO NOT CARE how good your team is...or how many times you won state....they care if you are a good player or not. And while being on a great team with great players may give you good practice competition...you HAVE to play significant time in games to apply what you practice and to improve. isn't the end all to this rat race of youth soccer getting our girls into college and/or beyond? 10 years from now what's going to be more important?....that your daughter played in college...or...your daughter won 4 state titles at u112-u18. parents: do your daughters a favor and let's do away with the short term thinking please :)

[Unregistered]

this is a tricky question.
I think it depends on the goals of the player. Does the player want to get better and get experience? then playing is needed.

Does the player just want to have team experience and win state cups; then sitting on the bench of a top team would be the way to go. My guess is going to be that no one wants to sit on a bench so you either go to another team and possibly not win championships or you work your butt off and earn more playing time.

[SodiumFan[2]]

Agreed, it's better to get the minutes then get the win. I know one of the Sodium girls dropped herself down to the B team because she wasn't getting the minutes. She trained hard and when try outs came around again she was ready. She made Sodium and I believe she scored 2 goals in the State Cup final this year.

You are exactly right. I believe she is one of, if the THE hardest working players we have. A great kid and an outstanding athlete.

This is a great topic for me since it applies to my daughter and to me. My daughter played for the "B" team her first year and grew tremendously! She played every minute of every game since the team could barely field 11 players most of the time. They actually went through qualifiers with 10. The experience was invaluable in her development and it would have never happened if she would have accepted the invitation to play on the "A" squad due to their overwhelming talent at that time. I won't bore you with my story, but I will say I am a staunch believer in playing time over prestige when it comes to development.

Thanks Arsenal_U14G_Fan for starting this thread! :)

[Unregistered]

Bench Warming

Train with the best players and coach you can find. Get into the best game you can actually play in. Someone on the fence should train with the A's and play some games with the B's if that's what it takes to see the field. Training is the classroom work and the games are the tests. A player training with the A's will be able to take that work to the B team game. It doesn't work the other way around.

[Arsenal_U14G_Fan]

When speaking to parents of youth soccer players I have noticed that some seem to focus on the development side while others seem to only notice the winning side. Personally I want my child to develop and play. Winning is important to feeling successful so sure, we definately need to have some wins!! At the end of the day, I cannot imagine my daughter enjoying sitting on the bench all the time. It would seem that it would be time to look at other options.

It is not my intent to pick on any one team, but having said that "Sodium" is a good team to use as an example simply because it is such a good team and does attract a high quantity of quality players.

Hypothetically let's say that you are a player on a team like Sodium that could have anywhere from 18 - 20+ players on the roster. I am guessing that the players at the bottom of this pool do not get much playing time compared to the obvious stand outs. This may only be a state cup thing but I did witness a couple of state cup games where I could not help but notice that some girls did not even get to play....at all!

I can't help but wonder if these players would be better served by moving to a different club. In my hypothetical example I will use FC Portland where development is the primary goal. FC Portland likely has smaller roster sizes and the need for additional skilled players. Would it be more fun for the player to enjoy playing time while making it to the quarter finals? Or, does the does the big win at the end make it worth sticking around in spite of the fact that he or she don't get to play much?

I will admit that I was actually sort of jealous that other teams can bench pretty good players while our team has to get creative by the end of the season to make things work with injury and all. I was also somewhat struck by the notion that I know my daughter would not want to play on team where she did not get significant playing time. I can honestly say that while she would have loved to take home the championship and travelled to New Mexico she is not the type that would want to travel to a regional championship only to sit on the bench!

[Unregistered]

I can't help but wonder if these players would be better served by moving to a different club. In my hypothetical example I will use FC Portland where development is the primary goal. FC Portland likely has smaller roster sizes and the need for additional skilled players.

When my kids played FC Portland (younger age groups U11, U12 and U13) this past season Fc had large roster sizes. Their U11 girls at one point had 22 kids playing on one team. I heard most teams this year will have 17-18 players at U14 and below. Again, I only heard this so I can't confirm if this is the truth.

I agree that it's better to get the time on the field. Sitting on the bench does no good at all and I would never allow my kids to be in that situation. If they aren't getting the playing time then we'd either be practicing harder, dropping to the B team, or changing clubs.

[Unregistered]

With my kids (boy and girl), training with the best possible youth teams made a huge difference in their development as soccer players. In each case, from U11-14 they were rostered on top teams, but rarely started and played fewer minutes than teammates. They both became very strong players by high school age because of the years of training with top quality players and coaches. Parents should worry less about games and appreciate the bigger picture. By U15-16, my kids caught up with the elite players on their teams in spite of many, many minutes on the bench. I doubt this growth would happen if they were superstars on mediocre teams during their youth years. Good luck... and be patient.

[Unregistered]

isn't the end all to this rat race of youth soccer getting our girls into college and/or beyond?

No, it's for them to have fun and learn to play this beautiful game at a high level. The odds of gettnig a free ride are impossibly small. If that's your objective, you'd be better investing the large sums it costs to play competitive soccer in a college fund.

[SodiumFan[2]]

When speaking to parents of youth soccer players I have noticed that some seem to focus on the development side while others seem to only notice the winning side. Personally I want my child to develop and play. Winning is important to feeling successful so sure, we definately need to have some wins!! At the end of the day, I cannot imagine my daughter enjoying sitting on the bench all the time. It would seem that it would be time to look at other options.

It is not my intent to pick on any one team, but having said that "Sodium" is a good team to use as an example simply because it is such a good team and does attract a high quantity of quality players.

Hypothetically let's say that you are a player on a team like Sodium that could have anywhere from 18 - 20+ players on the roster. I am guessing that the players at the bottom of this pool do not get much playing time compared to the obvious stand outs. This may only be a state cup thing but I did witness a couple of state cup games where I could not help but notice that some girls did not even get to play....at all!

I can't help but wonder if these players would be better served by moving to a different club. In my hypothetical example I will use FC Portland where development is the primary goal. FC Portland likely has smaller roster sizes and the need for additional skilled players. Would it be more fun for the player to enjoy playing time while making it to the quarter finals? Or, does the does the big win at the end make it worth sticking around in spite of the fact that he or she don't get to play much?

I will admit that I was actually sort of jealous that other teams can bench pretty good players while our team has to get creative by the end of the season to make things work with injury and all. I was also somewhat struck by the notion that I know my daughter would not want to play on team where she did not get significant playing time. I can honestly say that while she would have loved to take home the championship and travelled to New Mexico she is not the type that would want to travel to a regional championship only to sit on the bench!

Hey Arsenal Fan, great team site btw.

Let me address this. Sodium had a roster of 18. One rostered player was from out of town so it was logical to carry that number. As with most teams you have to account for players being gone, vacations, ODP & id2, injuries or what ever. We were lucky and only had to have a guest player I think twice this year. And we will only have guest player if we fall to 13 or below and they are used to rest the rostered players.
As far as playing time; we only have 3 true defenders, so those girls start. Every other position has to be earned by game day. It also has to do with our opponent and how well certain players match up. The players who you noticed "did not even get to play...at all" may have played most of the game before. If the situation warrants he will move players to different positions to give them exposure and see what they can do. I truly believe that is one of our strong points is our bench strength. I think the coach does a pretty good job at rotation really.
There is always going to be attrition. It was true when I was playing and it is true of most teams/sports now. Some will choose not to play next year, some will choose other sports, some move away and there are some who move to a different club or team within the club. It is very difficult to please all the people all the all the time, it's a fact of life. That's why everyone has tryouts. Does that contribute to the thread? Hope so. Got a little off track, sorry.

Best of luck to the players entering high school and hope everyone's tryouts were packed! :D

[Unregistered]

I cannot imagine rostering over 18 players at any age under U19. I realize it happens a lot at older ages, even U18, but I also know in talking to my older daughter's friends, they certainly feel the warmed bench under them as the coach often tries to get everyone in for a decent amount of time.

I have seen better players sit, when they should not, because a coach wants to get in number 16, 17 and 18 so they don't go an entire game with no minutes. Unfair to the better players who worked hard and deserve that time?

What about the players who work hard but never "beat out" players 1-11, and don't ever get a good amount of time? Better to sit the better players to give them the time? Or is that unfair to the better players?

Tough balance for sure. I am sure having only 3 defenders on a team means 100% playing time for those 3 defenders, but wonder what those players, and parents, would think if 3-4 starting level defenders came over and made the team; big change to go from 100% playing time to, oh say, 60-70%. Not sure people would have the same opinion after experiencing it themselves. It is easy to say "Oh, it happens, it's all fine, everyone needs time", and yes, it is just as easy for others to say "Screw those bench players! My kid earned that spot and deserves 100% time!"

Bottom line, until you have had a player on both sides, it's tough to really comment. Since I have had a player on each side, and even the same player on one side one year, and the other side the next year? I feel rosters should be kept small to allow for max playing time. I think if you are a bubble player and could be a top B team player or a bottom A team player, you need to decide whether training or games matter more to you. Many clubs are now doing the pools where A and B players mix for training, and rosters for games are decided on game to game, after evaluating kids are training constantly. Like ODP really.

[Unregistered]

Rosters could be as big as 22 starting with U17 (I think?) in OYSA, but only 18 can play during any game. My son was on a team playing U18 with 21 players. Each Friday night the manager sent out an email telling everyone who the 18 players were for the weekend games. My son was always on the 18 so he was lucky, but he does work hard to keep his spot. This was during their Senior year of High School and it seemed like everyone has various activities on weekends -- SAT's, college tours, and various other activities so they were not all available every weekend. If you get a lot of injuries with a roster that size then it will leave a core of healthy players for the games. Some coaches use the large roster as a way to motivate a team. There was one coach who had Friday night trainings just to see who would show up. These were boys teams and the Friday night trainings did become quite motivating for the team.

I have not researched the roster size allowed for OPL. Maybe we all will have 20+ players on our rosters -- provided the clubs get the draw to tryouts?

[Unregistered]

Rosters could be as big as 22 starting with U17 (I think?) in OYSA, but only 18 can play during any game. My son was on a team playing U18 with 21 players. Each Friday night the manager sent out an email telling everyone who the 18 players were for the weekend games. My son was always on the 18 so he was lucky, but he does work hard to keep his spot. This was during their Senior year of High School and it seemed like everyone has various activities on weekends -- SAT's, college tours, and various other activities so they were not all available every weekend. If you get a lot of injuries with a roster that size then it will leave a core of healthy players for the games. Some coaches use the large roster as a way to motivate a team. There was one coach who had Friday night trainings just to see who would show up. These were boys teams and the Friday night trainings did become quite motivating for the team.

I have not researched the roster size allowed for OPL. Maybe we all will have 20+ players on our rosters -- provided the clubs get the draw to tryouts?

26 Players - see the Rosters thread