I said it's reasonable. Not so sure about acceptable. My kid's behavior is fine. You'll have to trust me on that.
Just for future reference, can anyone tell me if you've ever left a club mid-season and if it's possible to join another club. Not sure that's what will happen but I'm interested in learning what the pros and cons are of that and if it's super difficult to do. (Sam already mentioned player card and fees, so I guess is there anything else?)
Well, it was the 2nd game. In the first game my kid played about half the minutes, which is borderline acceptable given there were only 3 subs and hence every player should have easily played more than half. That put me on the fence. And then 2nd game where my kid (and another) sat for periods of 15-20 mins, that set me off. Totally unacceptable. It's not in line with US youth soccer guidelines. If it ever happens again I'm out. I'm not paying good money for my kid to sit on the bench. PERIOD Is this why parents end up coaching? It's pretty easy to ensure no kid is sitting for long periods. The kid who's been sitting the longest, that's who goes in next.
It all depends on the club, how they roster, how payments are made, etc. The last switch of clubs my younger son made (U12), he switched after fall season before winter/spring. As we were already paid for the winter indoor season, he honored his commitment for that season, but since the payments for the spring weren't due yet, they released him from the club for the spring. My understanding is that there was some tension between the two club owners (all club owners in a our area pretty much know each other), but in the end, the former club was ok with handing over his card to the new club.
It's rarely worth it, in my experience (watching others go through it). And if it's bothering you more than your kid, it ain't worth it at all, IMHO.
I want to go to a club that has a policy that all kids play at least half the game. I actually looked up one nearby and they actually have that policy in their guidebook/FAQ. So I think it would be a better fit. This is in line with US Youth Soccer Association guidelines. This is what is best for youth development. They will lose enjoyment from sitting on the bench.
I mean, sure--sounds like a better fit. And at your kid's age, it might be an easy switch. Maybe give it a couple of games, and feel out how your son feels?
I'm tempted to create my own club. I'll call it AllKidsPlay FC. Whoever shows up, plays. If too many kids show up, we set up goals and create another game. This is essentially how our adult pickup works. It's a lot of fun and I've improved my skills massively from playing a lot of pickup over the past 4 years. No one sits. All Kids Play. You show up, you play.
I have a pipe dream of teaming up with a couple of other ex-soccer dads and starting our own travel team where we could apply the lessons we learned the hard way by going through it.
For this weekend coach put my kid on both A team and B team rosters probably to appease me to some degree. But now I am rethinking. Please let me know about this - I can have my kid go to both games but he would get fewer minutes per game than if he just went to one game. So, is it better to go to two games and play half of each game or go to one game and play the whole game? Now I am thinking the latter is better. I think the player will enjoy it more, playing a lot in one match vs just a little bit in two. And the parents would enjoy watching more as well. Thoughts?
I've had a kid be dual rostered for a weekend (actually for a couple of seasons). He played MORE with both teams then he would with one. Here are my questions based on your post... 1) Why do you think the coach is trying to appease you? Have you said something to him? 2) Why do you assume he'd get less minutes per game if he plays two vs just one? It's possible he plays 75% of one and 25% of the other. Or it may be 50/50. Or 100% and 25%. Did the coach tell you how much playing time he'd get? 3) Have you asked your son what HE wants to do? I disagree about parents enjoy watching more. I really don't get that. I enjoy watching my kids no matter what team they're playing on, even when they're getting drubbed. If my kid is putting out effort, I enjoy watching them. Sure, there might be some extra "pride" to be on a good team, winning against challenging competition, but the enjoyment doesn't change (for me).
Both my boys have been dual rostered at various times in their club "careers". In most cases, their playing time with the 'B' team was close to 100% and their playing time on the 'A' team was in the 50-75% range, although that was oftentimes because they both played a lot of center back, which A.) wasn't a position a lot of kids wanted to play and B.) wasn't a position that the coaches tended to sub out much, unless needed. We would go wherever our boys were playing and loved seeing them play, no matter where and how much. Now that my youngest is in his final years, I relish it even more.
The most fun I ever had watching my kid play was with his school teams--his MS team was pretty bad even by the dire standards of MS soccer. But I enjoyed it and attended every game I could.
I think you're making a lot of assumptions here. I don't know why the coach is appeasing you but if that's true--by gracious and take the opportunity. Like others have said, there's no reason to think he'll play less for either team than he would normally for one. Take the win, man!
Yes I said something and was satisfied with his response. Part of the reason he gave my kid less minutes in game 3 was because he gave my kid many minutes in game 1. So I'm pretty sure if my kid plays for the B team in the morning and the A team in the afternoon his minutes will be diluted between the two games. He's the only kid on both rosters, so I'm pretty sure the coach did that to appease me. But I'm thinking it may backfire because I think it's better to play more mins in one game VS less in two. What do you think - let's keep the example simple. You can choose: Your kid plays 30 mins for B squad and 30 mins for A squad this Sat. OR Your kid plays 60 mins for A squad. Which do you choose? Oh and you would have to drive twice as far to B.
That's great. But to be clear I would love watching him play whether they win or lose, whether they play good or bad. What I don't like is not seeing him play, seeing him sit on the bench. Sure of course every kid sits at times. But I think no kid should be sitting for more than say 15 mins at a time (at 25 min halves, U8). They get cold, they get disengaged from the game. They should sub in and out quite frequently at that age, imo.
You say you're satisfied with his response, but you're already second-guessing his response and looking to back out? I'd advise you to drop it and accept that you're doing a lot of driving this weekend. Particularly as I'm not convinced you're right that your kid's playing time will be diluted (as you put it). You may be right, but you need to pick and choose your battles. And you may very well be pleasantly surprised.
I absolutely agree with this. I think most of the criticism your getting is in regards to how to deal with coaches & clubs about this, not the ideal. These are 7 year old kids and they shouldn't need to 'earn' playing time; they should be on the field having fun.
So, I talked to him about the lack of minutes. He does try to "balance" things out. So for ex, one kid had not played prior so he let him play a bunch in this past Sunday's game where my kid played little, but my had played a lot in a prior game. So yeah it seems he is sort of keeping tabs on the minutes over the long run and trying to balance things out. So if a kid gets invited to other squads (say it's an A team kid who gets invited to play on B as well and also on an upper age team) then the coach will factor that in and likely reduce his minutes on A games since he got minutues in other games, and this will give his A teammates more minutes since they didn't get minutes on B/older team.
Still seems like you're assuming he's gonna split your kid's hours between two different squads, which would be a bit unfair. I'm not 100% convinced you're right, and you kinda run the risk of becoming 'that parent' if you turn this down after more-or-less negotiating for it. Maybe just go along and see how the weekend goes? If this is just about the extra driving--I've got bad news for you about what the next decade or more is going to be like if your kid sticks with soccer.
He doesn't quite grasp things fully. He's 7. I asked him in the car on the way to school this morning. He seemed to prefer the A team because "they are better".
What irks me about all of this is the feeling of a "scarcity of minutes". There's no reason there should be a scarcity of minutes. There should be an abundance of minutes for all. This is America!