U11,u12,u13 playing time

[Unregistered]

Nice try FCP parent. You are just trying to change the subject because you know your club is making poor choices in order to bump up their numbers. It's not enough for you to have an A team towards the top, so you bring in extras to elevate your B team, all the while, your true B team players are left to sit the bench. Where's their time to develop and show what they can do?

[Unregistered]

roster size

What's the general feeling on roster size for 11v11 teams? My kid's U12 A team is caring 17 and 5-6 subs per game seems pretty excessive. The seem to have trouble finding rhythm with players being sub'd out every 10 mins and it's a bummer to spend 10 minutes a half on the bench even when you are a starter. There are definitely 2-3 kids that can't play at the same level and should be on the B team. Also, IMHO, a smaller A team roster gives incentive and opportunity for B players to move up, with 17 on the A, there is no chance in guesting.

What kind of numbers does your club carry?

[Unregistered]

Saw FC PDX do this exact same thing , this last weekend.
FC brought down 2-3 of their ECNL girls to play with the FC Navy team. One of their ECNL girls scored the goal and they won.
I asked my daughter about this and she said "Whatever, if that's the way they feel that they have to beat us, then that's what they will do."

Just frustrating that they do bring their better girls down, or their "A" girls down, to help the weaker teams, just for sake of a win or the victory. That's their Academy system or style. Just seems like a cheap way to get that victory.

Oh well....

At U14 the plan has been all along to have some of the girls that won't be travelling play on Navy. It's not a surprise to any of the parents at FCP and has been happening every weekend. No one is getting "bumped" as there are no fixed rosters anyway. FC kids and their parents don't need the security blanket of fixed rosters that most others do.

[Unregistered]

What's the general feeling on roster size for 11v11 teams? My kid's U12 A team is caring 17 and 5-6 subs per game seems pretty excessive. The seem to have trouble finding rhythm with players being sub'd out every 10 mins and it's a bummer to spend 10 minutes a half on the bench even when you are a starter. There are definitely 2-3 kids that can't play at the same level and should be on the B team. Also, IMHO, a smaller A team roster gives incentive and opportunity for B players to move up, with 17 on the A, there is no chance in guesting.

What kind of numbers does your club carry?

14-15 for most games, maybe bring 16 or 17 for tournaments or important games against "agressive" opponents. Having a deep pool and flexibility to move players is key.

[Unregistered]

Nice try FCP parent. You are just trying to change the subject because you know your club is making poor choices in order to bump up their numbers. It's not enough for you to have an A team towards the top, so you bring in extras to elevate your B team, all the while, your true B team players are left to sit the bench. Where's their time to develop and show what they can do?

You probably don't realize that the kids moving down from "A" to "B" each weekend aren't the top 10 players on "A". And that for every kid moving down there is one moving up from "B" to "A" that weekend. It works well, the kids love the challenge, the parents are fine with it (except for the ones that delusionally think their "C" kid is really "A+"), and it promotes quicker development.

There is no need for FCP to "bump up their numbers". Fact is that as the kids get older, many quit soccer. At most clubs, especially Timbers clubs, this means that the age group gets wiped out, or at least that there is no "A" team (think Wash Timbers for a prime example). Some of the kids that start out at FCP also quit soccer. But for some reason kids from other clubs keep flocking to FCP to play. Why is that? If FCP was so bad wouldn't the kids be moving the other way? We all know why this is (and it's not politics), it's just that the the loser clubs don't want to admit their deficiencies.

[Unregistered]

At U14 the plan has been all along to have some of the girls that won't be travelling play on Navy. It's not a surprise to any of the parents at FCP and has been happening every weekend. No one is getting "bumped" as there are no fixed rosters anyway. FC kids and their parents don't need the security blanket of fixed rosters that most others do.

Might want to check with the parents of the bubble players. Often they arent as thrilled with it as you are.

[Unregistered]

Might want to check with the parents of the bubble players. Often they arent as thrilled with it as you are.

Only the one's that don't want to believe the truth that their kids is actually a "bubble" player. The realistic parents are fine with it. The others just move to THUSC so they can play on a "C" team that calls itself "A".

[Unregistered]

Nice try FCP parent. You are just trying to change the subject because you know your club is making poor choices in order to bump up their numbers. It's not enough for you to have an A team towards the top, so you bring in extras to elevate your B team, all the while, your true B team players are left to sit the bench. Where's their time to develop and show what they can do?

Probably were short handed. So they brought some girls at 1/2 time from there 'A' game match. Probably also why some of the dd's not traveling this weekend were at the thusc match. Not a shocker, FC is a 'pool' system. They move kids up and down depending on need. If you bring a couple of girls in to cover a roster, you can't really expect them to drive to a match and not to play. I doubt anyone at FC cares about the score at a b team match.

[Unregistered]

What's the general feeling on roster size for 11v11 teams? My kid's U12 A team is caring 17 and 5-6 subs per game seems pretty excessive. The seem to have trouble finding rhythm with players being sub'd out every 10 mins and it's a bummer to spend 10 minutes a half on the bench even when you are a starter. There are definitely 2-3 kids that can't play at the same level and should be on the B team. Also, IMHO, a smaller A team roster gives incentive and opportunity for B players to move up, with 17 on the A, there is no chance in guesting.

What kind of numbers does your club carry?

We carry 17 as well but all 17 should be right where they are, and there isn't a noticeable difference when subs are made. It puts the coach in a hard spot. It would be hard for 2-3 to go to our b team, there is a pretty huge drop between them.

[Unregistered]

14-15 for most games, maybe bring 16 or 17 for tournaments or important games against "agressive" opponents. Having a deep pool and flexibility to move players is key.

Yeah ,key to win games, not to develop players

[Unregistered]

At U14 the plan has been all along to have some of the girls that won't be travelling play on Navy. It's not a surprise to any of the parents at FCP and has been happening every weekend. No one is getting "bumped" as there are no fixed rosters anyway. FC kids and their parents don't need the security blanket of fixed rosters that most others do.

So what you're saying is all of the good players from the a-team get plenty of extra playing time, but what about those pool players that are supposedly on the White team that never get to play because they get bumped for the good players? sounds like good development for some to get all that extra playing time at the expense of the other pool players. sounds morally corrupt to me

[Unregistered]

There are rules against this in RCL (You can play players up, but not down) ... looks like OPL and OYSA should take a look at the same thing in order to protect those 'B' team players from getting benched. The message this is sending to those players is pretty sad ... mainly that they aren't good enough to win those games on their own.

In all honesty, the coach should know better ... shame on him if he is doing this just to win games. As a 'B' team coach myself, I would flatly refuse to roster these 'A' team players if they weren't needed for numbers. If they were needed, they would be role players exclusively, not start, and likely play in positions they are least comfortable in (the best way to further their personal development).

That is the only way it should be done.

[Unregistered]

?

Only the one's that don't want to believe the truth that their kids is actually a "bubble" player. The realistic parents are fine with it. The others just move to THUSC so they can play on a "C" team that calls itself "A".

Lots of big talk for a group not currently leading any OPL division on the girls side.

[Unregistered]

Lots of big talk for a group not currently leading any OPL division on the girls side.

Yep, THUSC is known for "big talking". Kinda like the "big lying" up in Vancouver.

[Unregistered]

Same thing happens at our club with the U12 girls teams. Every game they can, about 5 A-team players play with the B-team. Score a bunch of goals and get wins for the B team. Great for the A players to get 2 games in but bum deal for the B team players. Our club only really cares about developing the A players. Wouldn't mind as much if the B players weren't paying the same $ to develop our kids.

Funny, they do the same thing in Eugene. And it's usually the top A players too...but the B team doesn't have many subs so I guess that's the reasoning. although the A team doesn't have many subs either & they sure don't bring up 5 of our B team players to play in the A games... sounds like many clubs focus on wins and only really care about the A team players development. maybe that's just the way all club soccer is. In Eugene, there's nowhere to really switch to so you're stuck with what you get.