Idaho Rosters for odp?

[Unregistered]

when do they come out for the girls?

[Unregistered]

June 6th

[Unregistered]

when do they come out for the girls?

98's were done after the first practice I'm Salem!! The coach had all the kids line up from tallest to shortest. He took the 18 tallest players and then added the shortest most skilled player and that's done. Wow great coaching Oregon!! Add zero coaching during the friendship cup or scrimmages and no thought on rotations or adjustments during the games. Hello this is ODP!!! The kids should be getting great coaching!! This guy is laughable.

[Unregistered]

98's were done after the first practice I'm Salem!! The coach had all the kids line up from tallest to shortest. He took the 18 tallest players and then added the shortest most skilled player and that's done. Wow great coaching Oregon!! Add zero coaching during the friendship cup or scrimmages and no thought on rotations or adjustments during the games. Hello this is ODP!!! The kids should be getting great coaching!! This guy is laughable.

Someone sounds bitter........

[Unregistered]

98's were done after the first practice I'm Salem!! The coach had all the kids line up from tallest to shortest. He took the 18 tallest players and then added the shortest most skilled player and that's done. Wow great coaching Oregon!! Add zero coaching during the friendship cup or scrimmages and no thought on rotations or adjustments during the games. Hello this is ODP!!! The kids should be getting great coaching!! This guy is laughable.

Do you mean he added the smallest player from usonians?

[Unregistered]

Do you mean he added the smallest player from usonians?

Or from thusc?

[Unregistered]

Someone sounds bitter........

Yes I am for every kid out there!! In the past our experience has been great!! This year is sad for all the kids. In the past we always received great coaching and it is not even close this year at this age group.

[Unregistered]

Yes I am for every kid out there!! In the past our experience has been great!! This year is sad for all the kids. In the past we always received great coaching and it is not even close this year at this age group.

And I thought last year the G97 age group was a mess. The 98s have turned into an even bigger joke. What an embarrassment. And Idaho won't be pretty.

[Unregistered]

Do you mean he added the smallest player from usonians?

Yes, Usonians.

[Unregistered]

98's were done after the first practice I'm Salem!! The coach had all the kids line up from tallest to shortest. He took the 18 tallest players and then added the shortest most skilled player and that's done. Wow great coaching Oregon!! Add zero coaching during the friendship cup or scrimmages and no thought on rotations or adjustments during the games. Hello this is ODP!!! The kids should be getting great coaching!! This guy is laughable.

Sadly this is actually true. I don't think anyone is bitter, just disappointed. At his last training session he didn't even work with the B team. They had to do all the drills on there own on the opposite end of the field. When they scrimmaged the '97 team they had no coach at all evaluating them or subbing them in. He coached the A team during both games and left the B team with no coach.

[Unregistered]

The way I saw it ...

Sadly this is actually true. I don't think anyone is bitter, just disappointed. At his last training session he didn't even work with the B team. They had to do all the drills on there own on the opposite end of the field. When they scrimmaged the '97 team they had no coach at all evaluating them or subbing them in. He coached the A team during both games and left the B team with no coach.

At the last training session, there was only the one coach for around 38 players. He probably deserves a little break under those circumstances.

For the free kick training, the coach had half the team watch as he worked with the other half setting the wall and taking shots. If the girls were paying attention, they were receiving coaching. He then sent the "observing" half to another goal to practice their free kicks. For the rest of the hour-long session, including a lengthy meeting, all the girls were together.

During the two simultaneous matches - the A team in one, the B team in the other - he was between the two pitches and definitely spent more time observing the A team match. But, he did not totally ignore the B team match and the B team subs were put in during each half (although rather late in the second). He also switched some girls between teams at halftime. Yes, it would have been better to have an assistant coach, or non-simulaneous games. He did talk with the other squad's coach after the scrimmage, and maybe got some input that way.

The circumstances were not ideal for coaching or evaluating players, and I bet the coach felt the same way about them. He did manage to make it so my daughter (a B-team sub) came away not feeling she was ignored or "uncoached".

[Unregistered]

At the last training session, there was only the one coach for around 38 players. He probably deserves a little break under those circumstances.

For the free kick training, the coach had half the team watch as he worked with the other half setting the wall and taking shots. If the girls were paying attention, they were receiving coaching. He then sent the "observing" half to another goal to practice their free kicks. For the rest of the hour-long session, including a lengthy meeting, all the girls were together.

During the two simultaneous matches - the A team in one, the B team in the other - he was between the two pitches and definitely spent more time observing the A team match. But, he did not totally ignore the B team match and the B team subs were put in during each half (although rather late in the second). He also switched some girls between teams at halftime. Yes, it would have been better to have an assistant coach, or non-simulaneous games. He did talk with the other squad's coach after the scrimmage, and maybe got some input that way.

The circumstances were not ideal for coaching or evaluating players, and I bet the coach felt the same way about them. He did manage to make it so my daughter (a B-team sub) came away not feeling she was ignored or "uncoached".

If there was only 1 coach for two teams then why didn't he coach the A team for one game and the B team for the other game? That would make a lot more sense. As far as the training goes why didn't he spend half his time with each group? Did he really expect the other group to just know how to do everything without any help? I'm sorry but that is just wrong and if my child was in that age group I'd be writing a nice letter to Erik. We pay lots of money for training and if you have no coach then you receive no training.

[Unregistered]

At the last training session, there was only the one coach for around 38 players. He probably deserves a little break under those circumstances.

For the free kick training, the coach had half the team watch as he worked with the other half setting the wall and taking shots. If the girls were paying attention, they were receiving coaching. He then sent the "observing" half to another goal to practice their free kicks. For the rest of the hour-long session, including a lengthy meeting, all the girls were together.

So if the girls on the A team were paying attention for the short time that all the girls were together then they shouldn't of needed further coaching. Yet after the B team was sent away I saw the A team get continued coaching on how to effectively clear the wall on a free kick and where to put the wall. Did the B team get any of that while they were off on their own? No. They had to try to figure it out themselves. Can you really call that good coaching or a coach doing the best he can? Why would it have been so hard to spend half his time with each team?

As far as the scrimmage goes he apologized to the B team players for not being able to spend any time with them and for forgetting to sub them in. He easily could of spent time with them by coaching them for 1 game but chose to ignore them for both. I give that team great credit for being able to hold off the '97 mix team (which contained both Regional players for '97) and only lose 2-1 without ANY coaching.

He had his players picked from the beginning and could of cared less about the rest. Sadly, his coaching is not as great as he seems to think as Rochelle out coached him and was able to draw 1-1 at the Friendship cup.

[Unregistered]

Try re-reading the comments

If there was only 1 coach for two teams then why didn't he coach the A team for one game and the B team for the other game? That would make a lot more sense. As far as the training goes why didn't he spend half his time with each group? Did he really expect the other group to just know how to do everything without any help? I'm sorry but that is just wrong and if my child was in that age group I'd be writing a nice letter to Erik. We pay lots of money for training and if you have no coach then you receive no training.

I did try to write my comments so that others could understand, but I'll restate.
The games were simultaneous, so there wasn't "one game" then "the other game". He could have split his time more evenly between the two games.

Most of the training session was with all girls together. I don't think he expected the one group to "know how to do everything" and I presume that is why he had them all together for the first part of the free-kick training. The free-kick training was a relatively small part of the weekend of training.

Like I said, my child IS in that age group and IS on the current B team. She feels she is getting good coaching and I feel she is getting good training for the money.

[Unregistered]

Yes, but ...

So if the girls on the A team were paying attention for the short time that all the girls were together then they shouldn't of needed further coaching. Yet after the B team was sent away I saw the A team get continued coaching on how to effectively clear the wall on a free kick and where to put the wall. Did the B team get any of that while they were off on their own? No. They had to try to figure it out themselves. Can you really call that good coaching or a coach doing the best he can? Why would it have been so hard to spend half his time with each team?

Ideally, there would have been a second coach present. I do see benefit for the half that didn't get direct coaching. Two points that come to mind are 1) it forced a couple of potential on-field leaders to step up and 2) the girls have to learn to set up effective walls in matches on their own.

As far as the scrimmage goes he apologized to the B team players for not being able to spend any time with them and for forgetting to sub them in. He easily could of spent time with them by coaching them for 1 game but chose to ignore them for both. I give that team great credit for being able to hold off the '97 mix team (which contained both Regional players for '97) and only lose 2-1 without ANY coaching.

I'm glad he apologized for the late substitutions. I don't think he totally ignored the B team. Either did my daughter or her mate - both of whom were in the "ignored" group.

He had his players picked from the beginning and could of cared less about the rest. Sadly, his coaching is not as great as he seems to think as Rochelle out coached him and was able to draw 1-1 at the Friendship cup.

Not the way I see it. And it wouldn't explain why the composition of the two teams has changed a little the past two weekends. I think the 1-1 draw has more to do with the relatively high quality of players on both teams than which team had which coach.