Player Time -Select Soccer v. Rec - girls age 11-14

What do you think about this? Recently someone posted on our soccer association soccer blog that it was okay to let a girl age 11 only play 5 minutes of a game because "select" soccer goals were to win.. The coach (supposeably licensed) went onto say that the parents were to blame for wanting their child to play select and not rec where the goals are different. I personally think that all coaches, no matter what type of soccer club it is should be trying to develop the age 11-13 child and allow them to play! What was so disturbing about this post was that it was also brought up that clubs allow children that don't have skills to play at a higher level on high level teams just to get $.... wow and then don't let them play but a very small amount in games! So much for the quality of soccer clubs in Ohio South!

i think we as parents should put our children into situations where they can be successful and develop at the same time. we also have to be realistic about our child's abilities.

no coach should ever take a kid just to fill a roster spot $$$$. if the parent/child still wants the spot for the training then the coach should be honest about the amount of playing time their child is going to see.

This is a touchy subject...having been thru club soccer, I do believe in development, however, select soccer is not about 50-50 playing time. TMom is correct, parents have to be realistic (which I think is the biggest problem in club soccer). I think every coach should coach to develop first then to win afterwards. U-11/14 I do not think winning should be number 1 priorty, however, if you win, then you get more players into the club which means more $. Should winning State Cup at U11/14 really matter?? Heck No. Should players be taught development at these ages so when they hit 15/18they will have the fundamentals so they can start the recruiting process. Heck Yes. I know, its alot of $ to travel only to play a few mins of a game. The club we were with at the younger ages DOC told us all at tryouts, all players will play in every bracket game of a tournament, however, when and if we advance out of bracket, then he is going to coach to win. I didnt have a problem with that. Now, the key to this was, he did not say how much time each player would play during bracket play. Like I said, its a touchy subject.

I have also seen where good players sit during games because other players who don't attend practices or have poor practice habits gotten playing time because that is the only time the coach has to instruct them. The playing time situation negatively affects all level of players in some way when there is a large disparity in talent and commitment level between the best and worst players on the team.

I've seen coaches double their game schedules because players manage to keep their game commitment to the team, but not the practice-dedication commitment.

i agree with everyone who posted. its a touchy subject. I think if the child misses practice or has behavioral issues I can see it. I can even see if the coach plays some players the whole game and some just 50% but I cannot see a 5 minute play time for a 1 game! Our coach is really good about trying to play everyone but is also out to win so he does on hard teams use the same players in some positions. Also in tournaments I totally understand if some children don't play that much in select soccer. I think the problem is that a lot of clubs dont have enough kids to play so they get desperate and take children that don't play at a certain level and put them in their higher teams just to fill the roster. I think that is sad... and it seems to me that the coaches/clubs priorities are out of wack.

There are a lot of variables that play into this. How old are the kids? Is this a premier/select team? How big is the club? What other options do the kids have in that area? Were the parents given advance warning about playing time? Does the player come to practice? Does the player have a good attitude?

In my opinion, one of the biggest variables is the game itself. If it is a league game, it's more like practice. You aren't playing for additional games. Things should be somewhat more flexible. (I understand league games are very important at the higher levels, like MRL, but not at U11.)
If it's a tournament, you are often playing for more games. If little Mary gets 15 fewer minutes in the semi-finals than she normally gets, but her team makes the finals and she gets 20 minutes on the field in the finals, she came out 5 minutes ahead. And the other players on the team get the benefit of the extra game too.

I think it's very fair for kids to slowly understand that playing time isn't free, it's earned. And it isn't necessarily earned just by being a good player. It can be earned with good attitude, effort, work ethic, etc. Playing time should be a function of attitude, ability, work ethic, attendance, unselfishness, etc.
Five minutes at U11 is very harsh.

Ok 6, I agree with your post, but lets put this out there. Lets just say there is a steller player on the team, comes to each training session, goes to xtra sessions etc, is the real deal at U11, however, you have a player that is on the team that really shouldnt have any business being on the SELECT team at all, and you take away playing mins from the real deal to only put in the player that has zero playing ability. Whos at fault? Select is not 50-50 playing time. I know its a youth sport, but there is also rec leagues for this type of player. Im not saying this is how it works, just putting it out there for some debate. This is a good thread so far.

what i have discovered in my many years of youth soccer(this statement is a joke, please take it as such). they are not neccessarily fair.

Competitive players seek out more competitive teams and better competition. if they are not getting that from their current team, they will find another. it doesn't matter if they play Premier or Flight 6. skill level is irrelevant. they want to improve. can they all play select? probably not.

select coaches don't want to lose their best players to the competition. giving playing time to players that are below the general skill level sends a message that they are not serious about being as competitive as possible.

select requires more comittment from everyone (players, coaches and parents). even if a player has the physical ability to play select, they may not have the mental toughness. just as a player without the physical ability might be more than capable mentally.

playing time is earned but the better players get more time just because they are better unless the coach is willing to lose to stand by that rule.

reasons a player might want to stay on a team they are not skilled enough to be on:
it's the player's town team. they don't want to leave town and there is only one team.
they want to play with their friends/schoolmates.
they have been on the team since U3.
mom and dad don't want to drive any further than they have too.
mom and dad want their child to be there.
there are nothing wrong with these reasons as long as the entire team is of the same mindset. if not, the better players will leave.

i counted 46 U11G teams in our local league (basically 2 counties of NJ). there are 7 flights. in my area there is a team out there for every level of player. this does not include rec.

i knew my daughter was ready to move on when her Flight 2 team lost (badly) games to 3 Premier teams in a tournament last year. we had already committed to the new team but she came off the field crying/frustrated after the last game that when she crossed the ball no one was there. when she was center, no one could cross the ball. the players on the premier teams were just better than 80% of her flight 2 team. even on this team there were players that only saw a few minutes of playing time in every game. one of these girls moved to the B team(flight 6) and is a star. a much better fit for her.

In a perfect world, if each kid was playing at an appropriate level, there wouldn't be a huge disparity in ability (and thus the "need" for a huge disparity in playing time). But we've all seen many examples of kids who simply don't belong at a certain level. There are two ways for a coach to "move" a player to a more appropriate level. First, the coach could inform the parents that their child needs to move. Second, the coach could play that child 5 minutes per game. I've seen it happen both ways. The more responsible way is for the coach to talk with the parents. If the parents don't agree or refuse to change, then playing that child significantly less than the others is reasonable - again assuming a highly competitive team.

However, I still say that 5 minutes per game at U11 is very harsh. If the player is that much worse than the others, she will know it, and so will her teammates. Often, a sort of "Darwinism" kicks in after a bit.

Again I agree with everyone, however, these are children and I think its the league coach fault for placing a child in the wrong level. It only hurts them, because they don't get playing time (therefore no development occurs) and they feel bad about themselves. I know its the parents responsibility too but what about the coach and league? Don't you think this club/coach is coaching for the wrong reason if they are not there for all children who participate? Don't you think its all about money if they are so desparate that they take children who don't play the level and put them on a team just for that money?

My daughter is in select soccer, not on the highest team (which is fine) because she is placed appropriately by our professionally run team. Everyone gets to play every position maybe not the entire game but 50% or a little less for tournaments or if we are struggling. We are an A division team and our other teams are buckeye league. I am fairly sure our buckeye league teams the girls play 50% because they are placed appropriately too. I think the coaches/teams should put there foot down with parents who insist their children be on a higher team for the sake of the childs self esteem.

I know I am going to sound harsh and blunt, but here is what I know based on our club situation which based on the little bit I know about the situation you mention sounds strangely familiar.

The borderline players or 'B' team players-families subsidize the 'A' team players. The cost of the 'A' team coaches and team expenses cannot be covered by the 'A' team fees charged per player. The 'B' team gets a less expensive coach, goes to fewer or cheaper events, plays less games, etc. Even the rec clubs associated with the premier club kick in money to support them.

The club I am familiar with will adjust the number of u11 and u12 teams and players based on the number of older kids-teams to keep the income stream at a steady level for the club. Most people either don't realize this because they are focused on their own child's age group or just want their child to be included in the premier club regardless of their skill level. Is that ethical or not? Not sure. It keeps kids playing who want to play, it allows the better coaches to work in a more stable, financial environment, it gives marginal kids more access to better coaching until they decide at what level they want to compete at.

Will any of these marginal kids ever develop into a pretty good soccer player? Probably not. You rarely see marginal players become a dominant type player, especially in soccer and probably even worse on the girls side.

Is playing time worth anything? I'm not sure. How many times do you see a game where kids won't pass another player the ball if they think that kid will lose possession, then the good player will have to win it back again. Just being on the field doesn't mean that much if you aren't being included in the action on the field. It's frustrating for good kids to play with kids who haven't earned their playing time.

If I was the parent of the child in question, I would attend the team practices and see what is going on there. Is the child getting enough touches, instruction from the coach happening, paying attention to the coach, trying to use what is taught, are there extra training opportunities available, in-season player evaluation, child working on things outside of practice? If the player is behind on things, they won't catch up if they only do the same amount as everyone else. If the player is doing all the necessary things, then their play will develop and they probably are in a good situation for them.

From what I understand from listening to people who know more than I do, as you continue to move up you will find that it is not a big love fest, cumbaya, team sport. Lot of individuals competing for limited spots, opportunities and dollars, so the player-family better expect to have to earn what they want. Select-premier-competitive are not names that were randomly picked to describe what is going on with these clubs in any sport.

It is a shame that it has reached down to the u11 levels, and I wish that was different, but once you start down the select-premier-competitive path, you have to adjust your expectations accordingly and it is the situation we are all faced with. Maybe the marginal kids are being 'handicapped' when coaches allow them equal playing time when it is not earned. Does that really prepare them for the other parts of their later life?

What do I think about this? It makes my blood boil and I think the coach mentioned has no business coaching children this age if that is his philosophy. "Select" soccer is not professional soccer, where players get paid to sit the bench, but a whole lot of adults certainly act like it is. Children at this age learn by doing. They do not learn by watching others do the doing. It's time people get some education as to how children learn to play sports. The information is certainly out there if one has the desire to look for it.

You do not sacrifice the playing time of the other kids on the team for the "real deal". I'm not sure who really can determine the "real deal" at U11, but if the kid is that good at that age, then the "real deal" would be better served playing up.

Not only is it harsh, it's inadequate for development. And then we wonder why these kids don't improve. A coach can not adequately evaluate a player unless he or she sees that player in a game situation and if a player can't be evaluated, then how can that coach do his or her job which is to make that player a better player? Five minutes of playing time, doesn't even give a player time to warm up and get into the flow of the game, never mind be evaluated. Coaches who are really concerned with developing their players are going to attempt to give all their players at least half a game and ideally in large blocks of playing time. That doesn't necessarily translate to equal playing time, but it does translate to quality playing time.

Actually you are wrong. my daughter is in a big enough club that they actually can seed players at the right level. Did I mention that my daughter was on the state ODP team... why did you post such a negative rude response?

How do you define "earned" for a U11 that is essentially just learning the game and is dependent on others to get them to practice and games?

Who ae you responding to?

actually I re-read your post.... okay. I think you are probably being honest in your opinion. I hope what you wrote is not true but I think unfortunately it is an accurate picture of some of the substandard clubs in Columbus philosophy about select soccer and what it is suppose to be. ITs all about winning and its not about the children.... I hope that if you are a coach that you believe in all the children and know that not all great athletes started at the top. Some children develop at a later age and I totally disagree about your opinion that A or B level children won't grow up to one day play college or professional soccer.

actually I re-read your post.... okay. I think you are probably being honest in your opinion. I hope what you wrote is not true but I think unfortunately it is an accurate picture of the philosopy of some of the substandard clubs in Columbus. They believe its all about winning and not about the children. I hope that if you are a coach that you believe in all the children and know that not all great athletes started at the top. Some children develop at a later age and I totally disagree about your opinion that A or B level children won't grow up to one day play college or professional soccer.

Ameil and Irishtriple, I can assure you that there have been many kids that were written off for one reason or another that have done very well for themselves once they have enter puberty. The issues we have here are often the results of coaches that can only see the here and now and not the potential of a player down the road. Just read the thread in the youth section about early and late developing players.

I can assure you that there have been many kids that were written off for one reason or another that have done very well for themselves once they have enter puberty. The issues we have here are often the results of coaches that can only see the here and now and not the potential of a player down the road. Just read the thread in the youth section about early and late developing players.



true and i think it also depends on the coach. one kid might do great with a coach while another kid doesn't.

micheal jordon didn't make his high school team. what if he had just given up? coaches can be wrong.

find the right fit for your kid.

I was talking to Irish Triple.. sorry bird 1812. my blood was boiling too when I read his message. Irish Triple. I also apologize if my post was rude... I just believe so strongly that those who teach/coach should be role models and to here you say the things you said (however true) about the selfish way select soccer clubs are run just upsets me to no end! Why would anyone write off a childs potential?

Im not saying to write off anyones child, but wouldnt it be easier if your unhappy with your club or team, then leave and go to another club/team. The same thing works for a more competitive team, if your on a team (TMom) that does not push your child enough, then you leave right?? Well, if your on a team that is too competitive, then one should leave to a lower division team. No?

Im wondering, if any of these parents are complaining to the coach? Nothing is being said about parents being realistic?

its easier... but why can't a coach/club do the right thing and place the children in the right level of team after tryouts. After all is it not the coaches/clubs who are experts on where they should play. Plus, its us parents shelling out the money for the club so I think we expect the coaches to be professional and place our children appropriately in the right level. In some towns in the ohio area and in some neighborhoods there is little choice of clubs, especially select soccer. A lot of the small towns have one select team for each age level

we can hope that these people are "professionals" but in many town clubs, especially in areas where you don't have many choices, i'd bet these folks are not professionals. they are just involved parents. some know what they are doing, others do not. bottom line it is up to us as parents. we need to do our research. we need to be realistic about our child's ability and desires. we need to step up to make changes when neccessary.

i know nothing about soccer except what i have learned in the going on 6 years my daughter has been playing. my buddies here at BS have been a huge help! i have a ton to learn and a great deal i will never understand because i never played. my job is to be the parent and to make sure she is happy where ever she plays. she started with rec, then to travel and now to academy. with every step i checked out several teams and options. i asked about coaches, parents, players, commute and just about anything else you can think of. did i do the right thing in allowing her to make her own choice on this? some days i say "yes", some days "no". i've been told by several people she is where she belongs.it was her choice and i know she is playing the best teams in her age group, it is a whole lot more fun to watch than that tournament from my earlier post!

i too am paying alot of money and hope it is worth it but it is my money. if she is not happy come June, she may make another move just as if they are not happy with her, she may not be asked back. there will always be other teams. i want her to play at the highest level SHE is comfortable with. if that means being a starter on a lower level team as opposed to a benchwarmers on an academy team then so be it.

would i allow my child to be on a team where she plays 5 minutes a game and i pay for that privilege....absolutely NOT!

I have your exact opinion.... sounds like your daughter is a soccer star in the making. I am so glad she has you as a mom. I guess I put up this post for all those children with clueless parents and those children who are stuck in clubs that have potential but will never get there because of they are stuck with coaches/clubs that don't have their best interest at heart. I know its the parents job but since this "lets win at all cost attitude" seems to be super prevalent in coaches based on some of the post.. and that disturbs me so much! You are right, the quality in coaching is very broad from parent coach to A license coach. Believe it or not, some of the post in my other blog have been from licensed coaches and they too think its okay to play a child 5 minutes in a game if it means winning.... its amazing.

My daughter was in rec from 4 to8, then on select since then an now she's 12. She is in my opinion the best club in Columbus. Honestly if it does not work out I have little choices unless I want to drive her to Dayton or Cinti.

what region are you in, does she participate in ODP?

she's not a star. IMO, she's in the bottom half skillwise of a team that has been together for a year. she has some catching up to do but this is where she wanted to be.

because we have so many options for her, it's hard to imagine being stuck somewhere. i guess there are some benefits to living in New Jersey besides not having to pump your own gas!

NJ ODP doesn't start until U13 for girls. she's a 98. she has already said she wants to try out. she is also a december baby so i am not holding my breath.

i can understand those coaches views but it makes me angry too. i don't go to those other boards. blood pressure is high enough thanks! if you don't win, parents take their kids to teams that do. winning is normally job security? i think parents that aren't happy will stay with a winning coach longer than a losing one. they tolerate more when they see wins over loses. i guess you could say that parents cause it to a point too.