When my kids were younger, the state started an 'Academy' (not to be confused with DA) program for U8 & U9. In that program, there was no A or B team. In fact, the roster was supposed to be mixed up each "play date" (they had play dates of double headers against other Academy teams 3-4 times each season). Kids got to play with different kids every game. My wife and I liked it. We figured the kids would learn to play with others (good and bad). Most other parents hated it. Once the kids got to U10, it was a set team for the year, with possibly some dual rosters (small club) to make up numbers. Now my son is in the top club in the state with an A/B set up. Each year there are 2-3 kids who get bumped from the A team to the B team and 2-3 who have shown themselves on the B and get bumped to the A. IMO, at younger ages, it's fine to blur the line at younger ages, but as the kids get older (U12-U13+), I don't see anything wrong with A/B. If a club decides to have a Red/Blue (two equal teams), that's ok also, but I think you dilute the product and will frustrate parents & players. Let's say you have 30 players ranked 1-30. In A/B, 1-15 are on the same roster and you likely won't see much of a skill drop off when subs come in. However, in a Red/Blue arrangement, in theory, all the odds are on Red and evens on Blue. So your top player is also playing with the second to worst player. Do you think that top player is going to rely on #29 (pass them the ball, support them, etc). Now, this is a good arrangement for players 16-30. They get to practice and play with better players (in theory making them better), but is it detrimental to players 1-15?
My recent A/B team story…second hand… I have a neighbor who’s younger kid (06 Boy) plays at the same club as my older son. His kid has been playing on the A Team at his age group for the last 2 years with the same coach. Decent player; a little physically underdeveloped, but that will change in due time. In any case, the relationship between Dad/kid and the coach has soured over the years. The Dad disagrees with some of the coaching methods and incidents that have occurred, especially last season…and from I am hearing, I don’t blame him…think winning over development, recruitment over development, sucking the fun out soccer, etc…a lot of the red flags we talk about around here… So, going into tryouts last month, this Dad decides it time for change; he wants his son to play for the B team. Part of the rational for this move, beyond disagreement with the A team coach, is that the B team coach is equally well known and respected in these parts…this move was not a downgrade in coaching by any means. Needless to say, the A team coach was pissed. I think he was mostly embarrassed that someone would voluntarily want to leave his A team to play for the “lesser” B Team…the parent and coach had had conversations regarding their disappointment recently and prior to this, but it still seemed to come as a shock to him… Club administrators were equally confused and somewhat defiant…they couldn’t seem to understand why someone would want to do this and comments like “this ain’t how it works” were thrown around…everything 2nd hand mind you, but tend to believe this parent…basically they had to threaten to leave the club in order to be allowed to play on the B team… I am actual pretty proud of this parent for sticking to his guns and not getting caught up in the whole A/B status and stigma thing…he’s all about his son’s development and truly believes his son’s development is better served being on the B-team next year…
But the problem is with the A team coach and club admins, NOT the A/B system (IMO). I think you're going to have problems with either system (not every club, but there will be problems somewhere).
Reading between the lines, though, the reaction of the A team coach and club officials seems to show that their talk about "development" is mostly lip-service. And at that young age, that's really unfortunate.
To give the benefit of the doubt, maybe the club just didn't want to set a precedent for parents having a say on placement? No easy defense of the coach, though. One thing I have learned in my son's first year of club is that "development" is the most overused word in youth soccer. Every club and coach swears it's their mission and it's more or less become devoid of meaning. Your team loses every game 6-0? "We don't care about the score, only development." Your team beats everyone 6-0? "Our player development is strong."
Yeah, I am glad everything worked out, but a little disappointed in our club’s initial reaction… And yes, there may be a little more too it… It’s an interesting situation…like I say, the both coaches are very well-known and respected in our area…the A coach has the more established team; while the B coach is relatively new as the B-team coach…as I understand it now, my neighbor ain’t the only parent who sees the B-team as a good or even better option then the A team…could get very interesting in the coming months/years between these two teams/coaches and what constitutes an A team vs a B Team…
But shouldn't parents/kids have a say in who they let coach them? Now, I don't think parents should get carte blanc (did I spell that right?), but they should be allowed to say "I'd rather play for Coach 'X'". If Coach X doesn't want them, then they don't play.
Sure. It was poorly worded on my part. Ideally, the club, coach, parents and player will all be on the same page as to what is best for the player and all will weigh in thoughtfully before a final decision is made. I also don't know this club's policy on placement. I was thinking more of setting a precedent where the parents have a lot of influence or can dictate placement. This particular instance (request to move from A to B) is probably rare, but I can see hesitancy to grant the request for fear that they may get a ton of requests to make the opposite move and you can't please everyone.
Agreed…this is probably a rare request…and given the mindset of many, a bit perplexing …wait, what, you want your kid to move down to the B team???? Also agreed, I don’t think parents should be allowed to run the roost (and I don’t think anyone is suggesting as such), but they should have some say, especially when moving or leaving their kid down the ladder, so to speak…such as my story above…or another example would be playing a kid up an age bracket; the club/coach may think it’s a good idea, but parent(s) should really have the final say… But absolutely, you can’t have parents demanding their kids play up, whether it’s a team or an age group….
On age group, I knew of one situation where both the coach and the parents on the older team wanted the kid to play up (in part so he could play with his brother and make it logistically easier for the parents and in part because the kid was absolutely dominating at the lower age group), but the Technical Director of the club blocked it. It appeared that he did so because it would leave the younger age group team thin on talent. What made it worse was that an MLS academy team scouted this kid for their older age group team (the entry point for DA) and asked him to train with them, so you had an impartial, objective, third party observer effectively confirming that he could play up. At that point, you question whether the club is looking out for your kid or the club, although you can imagine an across-the-board bar on playing up might avoid having the parents of less worthy kids angling for it every year.
I can see why the technical director did it, but he hurt the player by doing it. You never ever do anything to hurt a player. So I disagree with him. Once a dominant player leaves the team it helps the rest become more dominant players then they were before.
I've seen it done multiple ways at different clubs and many of the pitfalls mentioned in the posts above apply. Communication and expectation setting are vital. If the teams are both of good caliber then periodic group practices can be helpful. Coaches should bring kids up from B team for some training and make sure there is enough B team 'call ups' for the A team games to keep the kids motivated and aware there can be movement. and vice versa Conversely, if the club or coaches are trying to be 'efficient' and have them all train together then complaints will follow. Each team should spend some time training on what they need to do...if they were all equal caliber they wouldn't be on two different teams. You will also hear complaints from A team parents if they are always training with the B team. There will be legit reasons for some of that...if we say training is more important than games then training should be at a high level and challenge the players...training against the B team will not come across that way to A team parents no matter how philosophical people want to sound. I've posted before that some of the best players on the eventual A team were past B team players...maturity strikes at different times. So, having them train together periodically, pulling kids up/and down as needed and clear communication are going to reduce some of the friction but nothing will eliminate 100%...there are too many parents and coaches out there for them all to agree all the time. Lastly, the hardest part for coaches is cutting kids or moving them down, so they try to avoid it...the club should support coaches by making it clear they will do so and the DOC should earn their pay by being involved and not making it a personal 1:1 thing between the coach and the family.