Too many teams???

When are there too many teams in an organization to accurately judge the direction of the clubs, philosophies and training/playing style. I was looking at some of the player looking post and still noticed club teams forming at the older ager groups. Thought this was interesting:

Liverpool:48 Boys Teams, 68 Girls Teams. 116 DFW Teams

Dallas Texans:61 Boys Teams, 51 Girls Teams. 112 DFW Teams

Solar:51 Boys Teams, 60 Girls Teams. 111 DFW Teams

So just out of curiousity, with the pro club affiliations of each of the three listed, do they adopt that clubs overall play style? With that many teams and coaches, can you have a common carriculum coached by all coaches on all teams, is that even the goal? I'm still in shock at just the sheer quantaty of teams............

P.S. Not bashing the clubs at all, just looking for insight and opinions.

$$$$$$$$

I don't think it is all about the money. If you take the '01 girls for example, there are three central teams, one in the north, one in the south and one in Fort Worth. Considering the metroplex covers over 9000 square miles and has 3 million residents, it doesn't seem excessive.

Half a dozen squads in the same age group in each region... okay... but six covering 12 counties.... no.

1more_dd_dad wrote:When are there too many teams in an organization to accurately judge the direction of the clubs, philosophies and training/playing style. I was looking at some of the player looking post and still noticed club teams forming at the older ager groups. Thought this was interesting:

Liverpool:48 Boys Teams, 68 Girls Teams. 116 DFW Teams

Dallas Texans:61 Boys Teams, 51 Girls Teams. 112 DFW Teams

Solar:51 Boys Teams, 60 Girls Teams. 111 DFW Teams

So just out of curiousity, with the pro club affiliations of each of the three listed, do they adopt that clubs overall play style? With that many teams and coaches, can you have a common carriculum coached by all coaches on all teams, is that even the goal? I'm still in shock at just the sheer quantaty of teams............

P.S. Not bashing the clubs at all, just looking for insight and opinions.

Not sure your team counts are correct, Liverpool and Solar counts are Academy and Competitive, while the Texans is just Competitive. I would put the Texans closer to 175. Where is FC Dallas they have the most teams in the area.

1more_dd_dad wrote:When are there too many teams in an organization to accurately judge the direction of the clubs, philosophies and training/playing style. I was looking at some of the player looking post and still noticed club teams forming at the older ager groups. Thought this was interesting:

Liverpool:48 Boys Teams, 68 Girls Teams. 116 DFW Teams

Dallas Texans:61 Boys Teams, 51 Girls Teams. 112 DFW Teams

Solar:51 Boys Teams, 60 Girls Teams. 111 DFW Teams

So just out of curiousity, with the pro club affiliations of each of the three listed, do they adopt that clubs overall play style? With that many teams and coaches, can you have a common carriculum coached by all coaches on all teams, is that even the goal? I'm still in shock at just the sheer quantaty of teams............

P.S. Not bashing the clubs at all, just looking for insight and opinions.

I have very recently had similar discussions with a few select soccer coaches whose opinions I value. I can tell you that for the most part, DOC's of larger clubs do not actively manage the teams under their direction. This extends well beyond the three clubs you've mentioned. Some clubs do setup guidelines or training programs for their coaches. I believe Liverpool, Sting, and possibly FC Dallas are among those (and there are surely others). From what I've seen, however, this applies more to academy training than select. In most clubs, once a team hits select age, the coach is virtually free from any type of oversight.

I strongly believe that the much larger issue is not the number of teams within a club, it's the sheer number of players participating in select soccer. A statement I often make to parents is "select is no longer select". Many years ago, club coaches would put their teams together through recruitment of athletic players who would then be taught to play good soccer. For instance, a coach would go watch a rec game and invite (i.e. select) a player to come try out for his team. Alternately, a very good rec player could ask a club coach if she could come try out for his team. It wasn't merely a situation like today in which if a player shows up at a club and the parents are willing to pay the fees, she will most assuredly be placed on one of the teams. Were some good players overlooked in the old system. Obviously. But it wasn't the business that it is today; and let's be honest, many/most of the girls currently playing select soccer should be on advanced rec teams (such as those in PSA), playing multiple sports, enjoying vacations with their families more often, and using the cost savings for college 529 plans.

Parents have been brain-washed in the last 10-12 years: Rec soccer is a waste of time and is filled with the chubby, slow girls who could never be on a select team. Select soccer is the only route worth pursuing if your daughter wants to be any good, so just grit your teeth and keep signing the checks.

With the exception of the very, very few truly elite athletes who sell their souls for the sport and one day work their way through college by kicking a ball full-time, everyone else will eventually be thinking: How much time and money did we give up for our child to participate in an activity which was Justasport?

It seems that the system has been diluted not with just players, but also with overrun of coaches trying to coach young players.

Just my opinion, but shouldn't their be an evaluation system for coaches. That might give players and parents a true picture of a coaches ability.

Well said JustaSport

JustaSport wrote:

1more_dd_dad wrote:When are there too many teams in an organization to accurately judge the direction of the clubs, philosophies and training/playing style. I was looking at some of the player looking post and still noticed club teams forming at the older ager groups. Thought this was interesting:

Liverpool:48 Boys Teams, 68 Girls Teams. 116 DFW Teams

Dallas Texans:61 Boys Teams, 51 Girls Teams. 112 DFW Teams

Solar:51 Boys Teams, 60 Girls Teams. 111 DFW Teams

So just out of curiousity, with the pro club affiliations of each of the three listed, do they adopt that clubs overall play style? With that many teams and coaches, can you have a common carriculum coached by all coaches on all teams, is that even the goal? I'm still in shock at just the sheer quantaty of teams............

P.S. Not bashing the clubs at all, just looking for insight and opinions.

I have very recently had similar discussions with a few select soccer coaches whose opinions I value. I can tell you that for the most part, DOC's of larger clubs do not actively manage the teams under their direction. This extends well beyond the three clubs you've mentioned. Some clubs do setup guidelines or training programs for their coaches. I believe Liverpool, Sting, and possibly FC Dallas are among those (and there are surely others). From what I've seen, however, this applies more to academy training than select. In most clubs, once a team hits select age, the coach is virtually free from any type of oversight.

I strongly believe that the much larger issue is not the number of teams within a club, it's the sheer number of players participating in select soccer. A statement I often make to parents is "select is no longer select". Many years ago, club coaches would put their teams together through recruitment of athletic players who would then be taught to play good soccer. For instance, a coach would go watch a rec game and invite (i.e. select) a player to come try out for his team. Alternately, a very good rec player could ask a club coach if she could come try out for his team. It wasn't merely a situation like today in which if a player shows up at a club and the parents are willing to pay the fees, she will most assuredly be placed on one of the teams. Were some good players overlooked in the old system. Obviously. But it wasn't the business that it is today; and let's be honest, many/most of the girls currently playing select soccer should be on advanced rec teams (such as those in PSA), playing multiple sports, enjoying vacations with their families more often, and using the cost savings for college 529 plans.

Parents have been brain-washed in the last 10-12 years: Rec soccer is a waste of time and is filled with the chubby, slow girls who could never be on a select team. Select soccer is the only route worth pursuing if your daughter wants to be any good, so just grit your teeth and keep signing the checks.

With the exception of the very, very few truly elite athletes who sell their souls for the sport and one day work their way through college by kicking a ball full-time, everyone else will eventually be thinking: How much time and money did we give up for our child to participate in an activity which was Justasport?

Best post that I have seen in a long time!

EPL Fan wrote:

1more_dd_dad wrote:When are there too many teams in an organization to accurately judge the direction of the clubs, philosophies and training/playing style. I was looking at some of the player looking post and still noticed club teams forming at the older ager groups. Thought this was interesting:

Liverpool:48 Boys Teams, 68 Girls Teams. 116 DFW Teams

Dallas Texans:61 Boys Teams, 51 Girls Teams. 112 DFW Teams

Solar:51 Boys Teams, 60 Girls Teams. 111 DFW Teams

So just out of curiousity, with the pro club affiliations of each of the three listed, do they adopt that clubs overall play style? With that many teams and coaches, can you have a common carriculum coached by all coaches on all teams, is that even the goal? I'm still in shock at just the sheer quantaty of teams............

P.S. Not bashing the clubs at all, just looking for insight and opinions.

Not sure your team counts are correct, Liverpool and Solar counts are Academy and Competitive, while the Texans is just Competitive. I would put the Texans closer to 175. Where is FC Dallas they have the most teams in the area.

I thought i counted all the academy teams, maybe I only counted Dalas Academy... 112 teams, 1150 teams, 175 teams, splitting hairs. There are still a lot of teams.

I have very recently had similar discussions with a few select soccer coaches whose opinions I value. I can tell you that for the most part, DOC's of larger clubs do not actively manage the teams under their direction. This extends well beyond the three clubs you've mentioned. Some clubs do setup guidelines or training programs for their coaches. I believe Liverpool, Sting, and possibly FC Dallas are among those (and there are surely others). From what I've seen, however, this applies more to academy training than select. In most clubs, once a team hits select age, the coach is virtually free from any type of oversight.

I strongly believe that the much larger issue is not the number of teams within a club, it's the sheer number of players participating in select soccer. A statement I often make to parents is "select is no longer select". Many years ago, club coaches would put their teams together through recruitment of athletic players who would then be taught to play good soccer. For instance, a coach would go watch a rec game and invite (i.e. select) a player to come try out for his team. Alternately, a very good rec player could ask a club coach if she could come try out for his team. It wasn't merely a situation like today in which if a player shows up at a club and the parents are willing to pay the fees, she will most assuredly be placed on one of the teams. Were some good players overlooked in the old system. Obviously. But it wasn't the business that it is today; and let's be honest, many/most of the girls currently playing select soccer should be on advanced rec teams (such as those in PSA), playing multiple sports, enjoying vacations with their families more often, and using the cost savings for college 529 plans.

Parents have been brain-washed in the last 10-12 years: Rec soccer is a waste of time and is filled with the chubby, slow girls who could never be on a select team. Select soccer is the only route worth pursuing if your daughter wants to be any good, so just grit your teeth and keep signing the checks.

With the exception of the very, very few truly elite athletes who sell their souls for the sport and one day work their way through college by kicking a ball full-time, everyone else will eventually be thinking: How much time and money did we give up for our child to participate in an activity which was Justasport?[/quote]

This is what I have been saying all along and exeactly why the model that everyone hates so much will never change.

Reducing the number of coaches down to those that qualify to coach at a certain level ( evaluations, certification, and or experience) would this not reduce teams and players and raise the quality?

I saw a news article that is somewhat related recently. It gave the following statistic provided by US Youth Soccer, " In 1974, there were only 100,000 kids registered on teams. By 2011, there were close to 3.1m lacing up." The soccer mom in the video from this news article is justifying the amount of time and expense her family devotes to the sport as quality family time. I don't think it's just soccer.... everything seems to have grown and is more competitive since 1974- dance, cheer, volleyball, baseball..... It seems to be a nationwide phenomenon.

Is it just society that has changed and has forced us all to put our kids into organized and competitive activities?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18602220

Would it raise the quality of the competition if Lake Highlands reduced the number of teams in DII and DIII as the girls get older like they do in DI? And if a club couldn't keep a bye by putting together a completely new team?

LHGCL used to one have ONE division per age group and 10 teams in each division back in the day. Having 10 top teams did keep competition at its height. When it got watered down to 3 divisions and 30 teams per age group, the talent dispersed. Wondering if this has any effect on the fact that we are not sending any talent to our national teams from the NTx area?

Texas T wrote:Would it raise the quality of the competition if Lake Highlands reduced the number of teams in DII and DIII as the girls get older like they do in DI? And if a club couldn't keep a bye by putting together a completely new team?

That was done before - just a few years ago, in fact. The clubs protested loudly. LHGCL changed it back to 10 per age group and even added a D3. To their credit, LHGCL did not want to do this. They believed (rightly so) that the talent pool would be diluted by adding more slots and divisions. ECNL shrewdly stepped in to address this and appealed to the very top talent (i.e. the top tier coaches and parents) by offering something that is supposed to be more elite.

Indy28 wrote:LHGCL used to one have ONE division per age group and 10 teams in each division back in the day. Having 10 top teams did keep competition at its height. When it got watered down to 3 divisions and 30 teams per age group, the talent dispersed. Wondering if this has any effect on the fact that we are not sending any talent to our national teams from the NTx area?

I don't think it is a factor. There are some players in D2 and D3 and Plano and Arlington that could be playing in D1, but that doesn't stop us from emphasizing technical development and having players who are willing to practice every day to develop their technique and skills. Those are the things we need to do to help the best athletes be even better soccer players.

totalsoccer wrote:Reducing the number of coaches down to those that qualify to coach at a certain level ( evaluations, certification, and or experience) would this not reduce teams and players and raise the quality?

I've pondered this before. But even now, few parents care about the license level of the coaches for their daughters. I wonder how many of them even know what license the coach holds or what is required to earn it. Of course, a coach can be good at what he does without a license, just as some of the worst ones I've ever watched (in terms of demeanor) have held A & B qualifications. I believe LHGCL used to require a D minimum, but I'm not sure if that's even the case anymore. And let's be honest: It's really not that hard for anyone who has ever played to pass the D course.

More directly to your question, however, is that I suspect none of the clubs or leagues wants to reduce the number of coaches or teams... for obvious financial reasons.

Yes I agree that their is always an exception to every rule, but to have no standard to evaluate our coaches to assure they are capable to coach our children at the select level is like putting a teacher in the classroom with a degree and no teacher certification. Hey even lake highlands is producing a evaluation system for referees. Why not coaches?

weatherbug wrote:I saw a news article that is somewhat related recently. It gave the following statistic provided by US Youth Soccer, " In 1974, there were only 100,000 kids registered on teams. By 2011, there were close to 3.1m lacing up." The soccer mom in the video from this news article is justifying the amount of time and expense her family devotes to the sport as quality family time. I don't think it's just soccer.... everything seems to have grown and is more competitive since 1974- dance, cheer, volleyball, baseball..... It seems to be a nationwide phenomenon.

Is it just society that has changed and has forced us all to put our kids into organized and competitive activities?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18602220

Yes, I think that societal perception is the primary reason so many parents feel like they must have their children in all manner of organized activities:

* Parents are afraid. We don't allow our kids to take off on their bikes all day or meet their friends at the parks for pickup games. We're convinced that there is a predator just waiting at every corner. The predators have always been there; now we're constantly made aware of it. So the safer option seems to be keeping the kids loaded down with organized activites. Select sports certainly offer that!

* Parents want their children to be the best at everything, not just a few things. We live vicariously through our children to a fault. Kids now days are expected to be great athletes, A+ honor students, leaders in their churches, first place science fair winners, and on and on. We are always looking for - and buying into - anything that will give them the inside advantage. (Meanwhile, the Indian and Asian children are focusing on their studies and becoming doctors.)

* And finally, as mentioned before, parents have developed a disdain for recreational sports. For example, we disparage rec, indoor, and school soccer as meaningless and loaded with lesser athletes. A coach I know refers to this as "soccer snooty". Why aren't we just happy that our kids are active and enjoying the sports instead of constantly looking for the negative? People have genuinely convinced themselves that their children are somehow better off as human beings because they are involved in select sports.

Just some things to think about...

totalsoccer wrote:Yes I agree that their is always an exception to every rule, but to have no standard to evaluate our coaches to assure they are capable to coach our children at the select level is like putting a teacher in the classroom with a degree and no teacher certification. Hey even lake highlands is producing a evaluation system for referees. Why not coaches?

Why do you need a system to evaluate a coach for you? Cant you evaluate a coach yourself?

The more kids play soccer, the worse the result? OMG.

* And finally, as mentioned before, parents have developed a disdain for recreational sports. For example, we disparage rec, indoor, and school soccer as meaningless and loaded with lesser athletes


Yep because rec IS meaningless and IS loaded with lesser athletes. By the way, I will take our way over the empty drones of Asian students who only study for exams and have no other activities in life. Tiger moms are disgraceful....

Seven wrote:

totalsoccer wrote:Yes I agree that their is always an exception to every rule, but to have no standard to evaluate our coaches to assure they are capable to coach our children at the select level is like putting a teacher in the classroom with a degree and no teacher certification. Hey even lake highlands is producing a evaluation system for referees. Why not coaches?

Why do you need a system to evaluate a coach for you? Cant you evaluate a coach yourself?

I have no problems evaluating coaches but I cannot speak for the many others that cannot. What is wrong with raising the standard for coaches to be graded to coach at certain levels?

driftingwolf wrote:The more kids play soccer, the worse the result? OMG.

I'm guessing you just read the title of the thread, right?

The issue is not the number of kids playing soccer. It's the number of kids playing SELECT soccer. Too many parents think their children are elite athletes (thus the term "select") and are paying big money to have suspect coaches try to train their little Mia's into something they will never be.