Quote:
Originally posted by kejj1212
Great article. My daughters' premiere team was facing the same dilemma..... ( my cut ).... In the future hopefully, a compromise could be reached where, players could receive the benefits of both opportunities without the risk of burnout, or overextending the kids.
|
Sorry about the cut, but posters can read your post for themselves.
There is a lot to discuss here. While I know many of the players and coaches involved in and around this team, I am not knowlegable of the facts surrounding it. I want to say that my comments are not aimed specifically at any person involved. The players are nice people, the trainer is well respected by all his players and has a well documented record of success. The H.S coaches are good people also. My post concerns questions about where our sport is headed and the professionalism of sport in general.
1. What are we trying to do? Are we about developing NT players, college athletes, or paying someone's way to school? What are players being told about reaching their goal?
Most of the supporters of club-only play seem to have a college scholarship as their only goal. At least that's the first thing we hear in any discussion. What is not being said is that many of these parents will spend an amount on youth soccer equivalent to four years tuition. Are we focused on playing in college or getting paid to play?
Further, players are told that more work equals more success. This concept ignores the concept of diminishing returns by ignoring young people's need for rest. Players willingly run themselves into use injuries in both hs and club. If a coach has had 100 days of practice in a year, what else does one have to teach without time for reflection? Why is missing a single practice so critical? Instead we are told " "Playing high school soccer wasn't going to help me," Taylor said. "I think most of the things in high school are more short-term. This is more long-term. I view it as a mature decision to give up all the short-term stuff for the long-term stuff." ". Why is a seventeen year old driving the process? What is the source of his information?
All this effort may not even matter. Best quote in the article: " "If it's a good enough player, we'll recruit him whether he's playing high school or club or both," Georgetown Coach Keith Tabatznik said. ". Think about it. All that time and energy and you're beaten out by Le Bron. Bummer. Given the odds, even with maybe 2500 scholarships available for the hundreds of thousands of female players, is this the best path to pursue? Maybe, but I'm only hearing and seeing "common knowledge" and the opinions of coaches who have a financial stake in this issue. Why isn't there a policy by respected organizations to guide these people. The NSCAA, NCAA, and US Soccer need to study this question and have the guts to post a considered opinion so parents/players have better information on which to base their decisions.
2. Professionalism. Is this the way to go?
From the article: " Said Todd West, a former Lake Braddock High coach who is the head men's coach at American University: "From a soccer standpoint, I absolutely agree with being with better players, better tournaments, against better teams on better fields. What Todd Hitt is doing is professionalizing the game, which is a good thing." ".
How will he feel if college soccer is marginalized for professional farm teams? How will all these college assistants, who recruit by ripping on HS coaches, feel when the pro coaches start commenting on their skills?
I do considerable reading, but I have yet to see any sort of scholarly comparison of your youth sports programs with those of other countries. What we have is a whole bunch of people making factual statements based on little more than ancedotal information or intuition. Maybe what we are doing is allowing players and their parents to have their way. There is nothing wrong with this, but I think that it is wrong to imply that this is the best path for everyone. We need to think carefully about what is best for all levels of sport.
3. Who's in charge?
Most of these club coaches are not covered by any organizing body. Leagues now have vetting processes, but many of these clubs do not participate in leagues. We are beginning to have coaches who can earn a professional living in youth soccer. I think that this could be a very good thing, but I also believe that we need to consider some safeguards for the comsumers - players and their parents. Coaches need this too. It is only a matter of time before coach malpractice lawsuits begin.
4. Will we have " country club " soccer?
$8-10,000 per year??? Wow. I wish I were a better coach.
Second best quote: " And families pay between $8,000 to $10,000 per year to play, one parent said.
"That's the downside," said Bob Chaves, whose son, Chris, is an RFC '85 midfielder and a junior at Loudoun County High. "It's just one of those things we fell into. It wasn't so expensive before. Todd came up with some big plans." ".
If spending money mattered, the NFL and NBA would be mostly white. Can we really tell players that more money, more training, more time really can make up for athletic talent? We need to study the financial aspects of youth sports and come up with recomendations for policy.
5. Can they play both?
Good question. You're a coach, do you want a part time player? How do their teammates feel about it - especially the kid who practices but doesn't get to play when the " stars " show up?
Intuitively, I don't like it, but dual play was not available when I coached in Ohio. It would be good to hear from coaches in states that allow it.
Although I seem to have some strong opinions, I really don't have a dog in this fight. I believe that Ohio will have to go through this process just to find out what is really best for the players. It is unfortunate that we must experiment with players, but we have no alternative. The challenge is on the professional organizations to study the issue and promulgate reccomendations so players and parents will have more considered advice.