Agreed - and that's all I am saying. Two schools in the area are playing their freshman - all games so far and nearly all the game. In that case there is a benefit. In these cases however - better off to play JV. As I mentioned - parents were confused. That did later lead to frustration which they kept amongst themselves in the parking lot after this last game. What I don't think they understand is something which you mentioned and that is the cycle that the coaches need to maintain over 4 years. I believe they feel that high school is about winning - and frankly IMO that's more often what it boils down to. So when they pull off their first 2 games with wins - playing their daughters great. But then when those same girls get less than 30 minutes for each of the next 3 games and they lose to less skilled teams, I think that's where it gets confusing for both the parents and the players. They are very good - I don't profess to have coached them - I did not and my daughter is not on this team so I am not showboating as a parent. The team they come from is ranked in the top 10 of region II so they know how to play soccer. I sympathize with the parents - I think the messaging may not be clear - as it's often not even in club. Perhaps their expectations were different but at the end of the day - they need play time and they need to be where they will get the most - win/lose/tie or whatever it may be.
Sorry, but you keep changing the scenario… What you just described above is not what I would call riding the bench…I have seen kids (including my own daughter) who have actually ridden the bench on teams…and what you just described ain’t it…ain’t even close… You are now saying they are, in fact, getting playtime, just not enough playtime in the eyes of their parents…that is a subtle, yet important difference imo… Once again, it now sounds like typical parents just bitchin’ about playtime and coaching decisions…do these parents really want their kids playing JV…or do they really just want them clocking more minutes on Varsity? Honestly, don’t we really think it’s the latter? Call me a cynic (or worse), but I don’t believe these parents really want their elite club players playing lowly JV…I think what they really want is for their daughter’s soccer resume to read 4 Year Varsity Starter…
As a HS coach I deal with this dillema every summer. Many times there is a Freshman who I would prefer over a Junior/Senior but I will always take the Junior on Varsity. At the JV level they'll play 15-20 games at 80 minutes a game and once their season is over I will take 2-3 JV players onto Varsity for the playoffs. My rule of thumb is if you can start on Varsity as a Freshman, you will be on Varsity. If I think you are the 12th best player, even though you'd still probably play 40-50 minutes a game, you'll be on JV to start off (Injuries happen a lot in HS) You'll hear it from the parents about which clubs they play for and what trainers said what but in reality you have to look at it as a 4 year process and yes, a social club too. As a Freshman, their friends will also probably be on JV and they can enjoy the entire HS experience. When the time is right, they'll be called up and still get 1,2, or 3 years of Varsity soccer. As a GK it is very tough and the easiest solution is to play each GK for a half which I have seen a lot of coaches start to do but no decision at the HS level is easy because you're dealing with parents, your students that you have in class, and players who range from little 14 year olds to grown 18 year olds.
Just to add a couple pennies to this interesting thread. There are far more variables from the coach's perspective that come into play here. Depending on the state of the program, the coach's decision can change from year to year. Is your team competing for some sort of championship (league, division, state, etc.) or is it expected to? Do you have a steady stream of players feeding into the program year after year or do number of players rise and fall? What residual impact does the loss of one player, older or younger, have? As a coach, I'm with coachd24. If you can start on varsity (at whatever grade), you make varsity. However, I change after that. I would normally use my #12-#16 players 15-20 minutes a game and I would prefer to use a player that will benefit me for more years rather than fewer. Therefore, a sophomore with 3 years left is more valuable to me that a senior. UNLESS that senior is best friends with 2 other girls that start on varsity and her being upset would impact my starters. In our case, JV games are just about as bad as middle school games and putting the 3-4 borderline varsity underclassmen there would a) not challenge them and b) frustrate them with lesser teammates, because there is normally a big drop off. Under no circumstances would I want to be held hostage about player choices by a parent. That's a cancer that has no cure.
You hit it on the money with every point. Going into the season you'll know the expectations of your team going in and a rebuilding year that you know you are 2 years away may have my mind switch about taking the top 11 regardless of age to the top 15 like ScottyMU suggested. In addition, the JV quality is really key. Fortunately in a bigger division, the JV teams still play pretty decent soccer but I know the lower divisions it is just people they pick up off the hallways and kids who are just doing it to put on their college resumes. All of this has to be taken into consideration and a good coach will know his program inside and out. Another thing that I have started doing as I spend more time in the HS game is knowing the opponents in the area. If I know I'm going to win a game 5-0 or lose a game 5-0, I'll call up a few JV players to the Varsity. Down or Up by 5, they can get some valuable Varsity experience in a no pressure situation. Even if they make a mistake and give up a goal or 2, you can correct it on the sideline and still win by 3-4 instead of 6 or lose by 7 instead of 5, in both situations there's no difference and you are taking care of the future of your program. Every program is unique in it's own way and there's no one blueprint for success. If the coach has been successful or you have seen an improvement in the program, trust him/her and leave it alone. They're building the program up and in many cases it takes 5-10 years to fully see a HS program change. I have seen 3 year JV players come up Senior year and earn scholarships and I've seen 4 year Varsity starters struggling to find a place to play in college so in reality, it doesn't make much of a difference in the long run. It's not like club where the coach is only focused on 5-6 months at a time, it's a 4 year process and you have to make the most of it. If they're the best player on the field at JV, the Varsity coach will notice and figure it out sooner rather than later but you have to make the most of it. Even though skillwise you're the top on the team, challenge yourself to become more of a vocal leader on/off the field and make your teammates better regardless of their ability and parents should support things like that rather than focusing on the "4 year starter" resume as someone mentioned before.
Well, personally I would find it annoying if I saw decisions being made that were obviously not in the best interest of the team doing well. Reminds me of when I was a freshman in high school, tried out for the team and the only freshmen who made it were two guys with older brothers in varsity (one of whom had never played before) and one whose dad was a high level ref but sucked as a player. Soured me to the whole experience and I never bothered trying out again. I would think anybody who wanted the team to succeed would be annoyed at seeing inferior players win out simply because of age or other non-playing factors. I know damn well that would never happen in sports that get more attention like football or basketball, at least not in the town I grew up in or the one I live in now.
Interesting topic all round. I coach at a local high school and always play the best 11 regardless of size or age. I tell the kids "I don't pick the line-up...you do...based on your performances in practice and in the games'....two years ago I started 4 freshmen (all ECNL players) over 4 senior girls who had started the previous season when they were juniors. The older girls could see, every day in practice that the younger ones were better than them. I did not have a single complaint from any player or parent. Starting 4 freshmen and 4 sophomores we won the state title in our conference. Our team repeated the feat this season with the same kids (now sophomores and juniors) and are one of the very top hs teams in Texas. Just because you are older does not in any way mean you are better. Play the best players. It really is as simple as that.
Update on this: My HS aged daughter was a freshman last year, started every game, led the team in assists and was 3rd in goals. The team had it's first winning season ever (it's a developing program). There were 26 players total including 9 seniors, 5 of whom were contributors and 2 that shouldn't have ever seen the field, but were usually in games for 4-5 minute spells to earn their letter. There were 5 juniors, 6 sophomores and 6 freshmen. Honestly, there were 4 in each of those classes that could play and 4 (total) that had potential. Because seniors had first substitute priority, only 4 of the underclassmen (2 soph, 2 frosh) earned varsity letters. Normally, that's not a big deal. There were only 4 JV games scheduled and they were mostly a joke. Fast forward to this summer and the first 3 weeks of "voluntary" workouts. The 9 seniors graduated, 4 of the 5 juniors came back, 3 of the 6 sophomores came back and 3 of the 6 freshmen came back. Excluding incoming freshmen, there's not even enough players to field a starting lineup. Of the 7 players that aren't back, 4 are really no loss, but 3 hurt and 2 of the 3 have stated playing time (and a varsity letter) was the determining factor. The one saving grace is a strong freshman class, both in number and skill (8 total, 5 can contribute). Varsity should still be decent, but with only 18 players total, there realistically isn't a JV squad which means the cycle will likely continue with players losing patience over not playing and potentially leaving. So, in one year's time, the program goes from 26 girls to 18, even though the graduating class was almost exactly replaced (numbers wise) with the incoming frosh class. I get the whole "your play dictates the lineup" and "the best should play regardless of class" argument, but I'm seeing a real-life example of how the allocation of those precious varsity sub minutes vs. playing more JV can have a major negative impact on future years. If talent levels are relatively equal, I still play the younger player that can benefit me down the road.
First, what’s the odds of picking up more girls once school/the season officially starts? Second, I think your causation to why there was a decrease in the roster size is a bit sketchy…if your theory is favoring the upperclassmen alienates/upsets the younger players causing them to lose interest and drop out…wouldn’t favoring the younger player cause the older players to do the same thing? Instead of diminishing the number of Freshmen who return as sophomores, don’t you start diminishing the number of juniors who return as seniors… By favoring younger players, your odds of playing actually decrease the longer you are with the team…which kinda seems backwards to me; and it won’t take these kids long to figure out if they aren’t clocking minutes by their sophomore year, they are very unlikely to ever get much playtime… If talent levels are relatively equal, ignoring seniority and paying one’s dues seems like a strange and more risky way to run a program…
Slim odds and even if they picked players back up, they've missed a ton of time. Unfortunately, there's only a handful of these girls that play club the rest of the year. The others move on to other sports seasons. I'm not arguing about playing freshmen/sophomores over juniors, but I am over seniors, all things being equal. Paying your dues is one thing, but just sticking around for 4 years doesn't earn playing time in my book, especially if there are equally (or slightly more) skilled players at a younger age. My argument is that it is a coaches responsibility, in a developing program, to ensure the long term sustainability of the program. In the actual case I'm living, the team lost half of the freshmen, half of the sophomores and only 20% of the juniors. Maybe some other borderline players had washed out in prior years, I don't know. What I do know is that in reference to prior discussions about playing a lot of JV vs. a little varsity, the team this fall won't have that option available, which makes any playing time that much more scarce.
The big problem is that you barely have 50% of the eligible players returning...why is that..? practices are crap and no fun..? the coach is clueless..? something is most definitely wrong about this whole scenario...
Because we do not develop kids in an environment where they grasp a passion for the sport. Our kids (for the most part), play because their friends are on a travel team or the parents want to throw a sticker on the window. Also - too much directing by parents and not enough just being patient and waiting for good coaches to develop confidence, passion and thereby good soccer.
Yeah, this either sounds like a really small school and so one that can be hit hard by slight changes in population, or one with a really crappy soccer program. Or both.
Have fun, productive practices using the soccer ball for just about everything you do and the kids will 'grasp a passion for the sport' right quick....We haven't lost a conference game in the last 22, have dominated the State Tournament (1/4 finals, semi-finals and finals the last two seasons) scoring, in the six games, 22 and conceding 1.....We NEVER do 'fitness training' EVER....and haven't run a single lap (not even in warm-up) EVER....yet are easily the fittest team in our conference....
...Without knowing the details regarding size of school..I vote for the latter option being the reason 50%..!! don't return the next season...( We have a total of 200 girls at a co-ed high school...9th thru 12th grades)
Odds are you probably weren’t winning State either way…not trying to be a smartass…but you said this is a developing program….there’s likely to be lots of growing pains…pains that aren’t really remedied by short term fixes like playing younger players, all things being equal… I get it, you don’t care about seniors who are going to be gone the following year regardless…the problem is what you are suggesting doesn’t end or just impact that senior… So, you have a freshman and senior of equal talent…under your method you play the freshmen and sit the senior…screw the senior; they’re gone next year regardless…the problem is you have sophomores and juniors viewing that situation as well…what do they think? I got think those players are wondering why they are wasting their time playing for a coach who doesn’t value their effort and commitment to the team…because they know if some freshman walks in the next year who is merely just as good as them, their coach will automatically value them more than they do them; that their years of commitment to this coach and team means absolutely nothing to this coach…who would really want to play for someone like that? Are you really telling me you would be ok with your senior daughter, after spending 4 years on this team, being benched in favor of a freshman who is merely just as good as your daughter?
...Still a pitiful return %...1/2 the frosh and 1/2 the soph return along with 4 of 5 juniors....something is very wrong here...
I have been reading this post back since it was started because I knew my daughter was going to go through this. My daughter is a GK on an ECNL team. this past year we have gone back and forth about her even playing HS soccer. She is a young 9th grader, only 13, so her ECNL team doesn't get a break during HS season. (which is in the fall) she is only 1 of 2 girls on her ECNL team going into 9th grade. She has said that she wanted to play for the HS, I really believe most kids do. Her ECNL team is an 1 hr so no other local girls play there. Her HS had 2 Sr GK last yr and then a Freshman. We only got to a few games and saw the freshman play JV last yr. My daughter knew right then she was better then her. Summer practices started and a summer league with the HS. The HS coach never saw my daughter play soccer but knew her well, he was her teacher in 6th grade. My daughter would talk to him about her games, her ODP stuff and national team stuff. So we felt he had some knowledge of her background. She said after the 1st summer league game she thought he was surprised by her play on the field, surprised in a good way. After the game the HS GK coach came up to us and told us that our daughter was fantastic. We were taken back by this, we know our daughter has a lot to learn in the position and is far from fantastic. Although my daughter was standing right there when he said it. The HS coach has asked us to let him know when the ECNL schedule comes out so he knows of any conflicts. If there are any conflicts , my daughter will go to ECNL games over HS. There maybe a few conflicts. Nothing is set in stone yet with the HS team, my daughter may not start or even play varsity. I am telling her this, just in case it happens. What HS has done for my daughter, in the little time she has been there, is build her confidence. Everything is much slower then at her Club practices. Coaches are less demanding. She is doing things that she might be a little worried to try at club practice. She is currently on a break with her club so hopefully once she starts back with the club she will take this confidence over there.
From what I read here a highschool has to choose between two options. First option to be the Highschool that wins silverware (mostly by fielding players that can bully opponents physically) and thus attracting parents with a short sighted vision. Their children end up with being winners of school silverware and probably nothing else. Second option to be the school that doesnot or hardly win any silverware, but is the greenhouse of talents that make it to the top later on, and thus being the desired destination for top talents, because they know it is their development that is the priority of the school.
I agree High School soccer does tend to be more physical than Club or DA soccer, but I think all High School programs tend to place winning over development…that’s not necessarily a bad thing, it’s just the nature of the beast…all High School sports place winning over development…it’s about beating your cross town rival, it’s about having a winning season, it’s about going to and winning State…that’s not to say development doesn’t happen; it happens all the time…it’s just that some sports athletes are easier to development then others…and unfortunately, soccer players tend to be one of the more difficult… A freshmen can walk on to a HS football program having never touched a football in his life, and by the time he graduates, be All-State and have a full ride to Ohio State…that…just…isn’t…going to happen in soccer…for a soccer player to move the next level, their development can’t be done solely through a HS program…I don’t care how good that program is…they need be fundamentally developed prior to ever getting to HS and probably need to continue their development elsewhere during the off-season….
It is more than possible to play a good brand of soccer in high school, have a ton of fun and win. I have 9 ECNL players on my high school team (5 of them were in Seattle for the ECNL national championships this week) ALL of them MUCH prefer playing for the school team over their respective club teams.
I agree, not the best rate…but I still disagree that indulging a bunch of impatient and spoiled underclassmen is the answer to whatever the problem may actually be…