Too many teams???

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.

silentparent wrote:* 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....

As the US quietly slips into 16th place among all other countries for our low performing students, I sometimes think there is hope. Then I realize their are people like SilentParent pushing the buttons in the voting booths.

I say "select" soccer is a free market thus" buyer beware"I have found if you are honest with yourself about your DDs skill level and do your homework on a coach/team you will be happy
There are a lot of select teams in North TX because there is a lot of money in N TX. Rec is fine for younger age groups but rec soccer in the older age groups can be dangerous the same can be said for many High School soccer programs

Seven wrote:I say "select" soccer is a free market thus" buyer beware"I have found if you are honest with yourself about your DDs skill level and do your homework on a coach/team you will be happy
There are a lot of select teams in North TX because there is a lot of money in N TX. Rec is fine for younger age groups but rec soccer in the older age groups can be dangerous the same can be said for many Hogh School soccer programs

I cannot argue your point select soccer is a free market, buyer beware! It's just like buying a car so many people pay the sticker price because they don't know driving the prices up for everyone else! It's just the way it is.

totalsoccer wrote:

Seven wrote:I say "select" soccer is a free market thus" buyer beware"I have found if you are honest with yourself about your DDs skill level and do your homework on a coach/team you will be happy
There are a lot of select teams in North TX because there is a lot of money in N TX. Rec is fine for younger age groups but rec soccer in the older age groups can be dangerous the same can be said for many Hogh School soccer programs

I cannot argue your point select soccer is a free market, buyer beware! It's just like buying a car so many people pay the sticker price because they don't know driving the prices up for everyone!

That is a valid point

totalsoccer wrote:

Seven wrote:I say "select" soccer is a free market thus" buyer beware"I have found if you are honest with yourself about your DDs skill level and do your homework on a coach/team you will be happy
There are a lot of select teams in North TX because there is a lot of money in N TX. Rec is fine for younger age groups but rec soccer in the older age groups can be dangerous the same can be said for many Hogh School soccer programs

I cannot argue your point select soccer is a free market, buyer beware! It's just like buying a car so many people pay the sticker price because they don't know driving the prices up for everyone else! It's just the way it is.

And too many parents think they are buying Porsche's when in reality what they get are Yugo's.

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?

It definately helps to be able to identify all the qualities to make for a good coach.. But few parents can truly identify the proper coach that is tactically sound, and a benefit for their daughter. There are hundreds of coaches in the N. Tex area, and only a handful of the one's I am referring to...

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?



I totally agree, academy and many select teams are just a business. I admit to being one of the parents that "pay to say". She Ioves it though and enjoys playing at a higher level as well as playing all year, which rec can't offer.

Well Said mommabear, like a lot of parents ,I too will continue to keep my child in "select as long as select is what she needs and desires.

mommabear wrote: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?



I totally agree, academy and many select teams are just a business. I admit to being one of the parents that "pay to say". She Ioves it though and enjoys playing at a higher level as well as playing all year, which rec can't offer.

Nailed it! Great job

My DD plays rec to be with her friends and club, because she loves the game. While I understand that there are parents who are over the top, I don't agree that wanting your child to learn the game from professional coaches in a competitive environment is wrong or makes you a snob. Are parents who pay for their child to take private trombone lessons from a professional music teacher so they can participate in a school or citywide band snobs? Rec soccer is great for most kids who like soccer, but are not interested in playing theagamemnone year round. However, like anything else, true mastery will only come from professional instruction and A LOT of practice. You don't get that playing with your friends at the Y.

I also don't agree that "select" soccer should be reserved for an elite few players. Yes there are some kids who are naturally gifted athletes. However any DD that has the desire and is willing to put in the time and effort should have the opportunity to play. It's not about becoming the next Mia Hamm - it's about giving your kid a chance to learn that personal goals require hard work and dedication.

And yes the cost is crazy and the "mandatory" uniform packages are over the top, but I'd rather see my DD wearing $500 worth of soccer clothing than a lot of the crap they are selling at the mall.

coollikethatsoccermom wrote:Well Said mommabear, like a lot of parents ,I too will continue to keep my child in "select as long as select is what she needs and desires.

There is a long perpetuated myth that no rec team could ever compete with even the lowest level select team. That is far from true. I have seen several 01G teams in PSA that could give most LH D3 teams a run for their money. In fact, there is one team in particular named FC Trinity (no, it's not the one I coach) that I honestly believe would beat a few LH D2 teams. They are genuinely "that" good. Like a lot of other PSA teams, the girls DO play year around - spring outdoor, summer indoor, fall outdoor, and winter indoor. And like a lot of other PSA teams, they are coached by qualified individuals who know the sport and are comprised of players who work their tales off. Options like this are out there; one just has to see beyond the hype of select soccer.

I don't mean to paint all club soccer as bad. That's not it at all. But again, there are way too many parents who believe that the only way their child can become good at soccer is if they pay upwards of $3000 per year to be on a select team. This is false.

JustaSport wrote:

coollikethatsoccermom wrote:Well Said mommabear, like a lot of parents ,I too will continue to keep my child in "select as long as select is what she needs and desires.

There is a long perpetuated myth that no rec team could ever compete with even the lowest level select team. That is far from true. I have seen several 01G teams in PSA that could give most LH D3 teams a run for their money. In fact, there is one team in particular named FC Trinity (no, it's not the one I coach) that I honestly believe would beat a few LH D2 teams. They are genuinely "that" good. Like a lot of other PSA teams, the girls DO play year around - spring outdoor, summer indoor, fall outdoor, and winter indoor. And like a lot of other PSA teams, they are coached by qualified individuals who know the sport and are comprised of players who work their tales off. Options like this are out there; one just has to see beyond the hype of select soccer.

I don't mean to paint all club soccer as bad. That's not it at all. But again, there are way too many parents who believe that the only way their child can become good at soccer is if they pay upwards of $3000 per year to be on a select team. This is false.

If they play year round why wouldnt they challenge themselves against other teams that do instead of dominating PSA? And its very seductive to believe standout players against weaker competition would fare as well week in, week out against the best. The LH teams have fewer holes, especially defensively. Much harder to look like a star when your time and space are cut in half.

Its like the folks claiming Neymar is better than Messi. Ummm...no, not until he does something in europe against top competition. PSA and rec have their place. The last thing we want to do is turn them into same rat race we have in select.

What you said about the level of competition is true but there is a lot of unfound talent in the rec leagues. Many either do not know the avenues to get on a team or they can't afford to play on the top teams even though they deserve to be there more than some of those that can pay. I would prefer to see a player that has heart and wants to learn and plays with passion than a player that can afford to be on team but doesn't really care either way. You can teach just about everything but passion and desire. Just my opinion!

Few areas have a "PSA" type rec league. I know the area we live in has a crazy system where you are randomly assigned to teams that (in our experience prior to select) were mostly full of players who weren't interested in practicing or developing skills. Many could barely run down the field. It was a frustrating experience for a child who loves the game.

Additionally, I do sometimes think about the money we spend on select soccer and wonder if it would be better saved toward college. However, I believe that she is learning so many more lessons through the experience that will help her both in and out of the classroom that it is worth every penny. Of course, she has played on a wonderful team for the past 6 years with a coach who pushes and inspires them to push themselves and teammates who epitomize the meaning of team, so I guess we're one of the lucky few!

JustaSport wrote:

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.

Select or rec is just a name.

Your rationals are largely false. For example, bottom select teams don't dilute or hurt the development of the top teams because they don't play in the same league.

Then you went on commenting on how parents manage their money?

None of your statements have anything to do with the original question, which is a good one.

Don't over analyze. It's just a sport, right?

Btw, your well respected coaches should ask what they can do better to develop players with much more money flooded into the system. Blame the parents who pay and the kids?

4-4-2-Diamond wrote:

JustaSport wrote:

coollikethatsoccermom wrote:Well Said mommabear, like a lot of parents ,I too will continue to keep my child in "select as long as select is what she needs and desires.

There is a long perpetuated myth that no rec team could ever compete with even the lowest level select team. That is far from true. I have seen several 01G teams in PSA that could give most LH D3 teams a run for their money. In fact, there is one team in particular named FC Trinity (no, it's not the one I coach) that I honestly believe would beat a few LH D2 teams. They are genuinely "that" good. Like a lot of other PSA teams, the girls DO play year around - spring outdoor, summer indoor, fall outdoor, and winter indoor. And like a lot of other PSA teams, they are coached by qualified individuals who know the sport and are comprised of players who work their tales off. Options like this are out there; one just has to see beyond the hype of select soccer.

I don't mean to paint all club soccer as bad. That's not it at all. But again, there are way too many parents who believe that the only way their child can become good at soccer is if they pay upwards of $3000 per year to be on a select team. This is false.

If they play year round why wouldnt they challenge themselves against other teams that do instead of dominating PSA? And its very seductive to believe standout players against weaker competition would fare as well week in, week out against the best. The LH teams have fewer holes, especially defensively. Much harder to look like a star when your time and space are cut in half.

Its like the folks claiming Neymar is better than Messi. Ummm...no, not until he does something in europe against top competition. PSA and rec have their place. The last thing we want to do is turn them into same rat race we have in select.

I received a message this morning that this team did in fact move up into the U12 PYSA league last season and faced stronger competition. But I don't know if I would say they had previously "dominated" the U11 ranks in PSA. There are several others who are not far off from their level: Mutiny II, Knock-Outs, Galaxy, Shooting Stars, Sting FC, Scorch FC... All of these mentioned (and there may be others) play year round, as well. The other shocker is that there are many players from these lowly teams who guest play for select teams in tournaments - and do just fine. How can that be? Is it possible that their coaches actually know what they are doing and these girls are being challenged outside of the select world and without paying huge sums of money each year? Yes, I know it runs against the conventional "wisdom" of select soccer, but there are other options. If a girl wants to one day play for UNC, then a top ECNL team is almost certainly the route. But for those who want to be good at the sport, play for their 4A and 5A high school teams, and perhaps not burn out at age 14 like 1/3 of them are going to... there are certainly other avenues.

driftingwolf wrote:

JustaSport wrote:

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.

Select or rec is just a name.

Your rationals are largely false. For example, bottom select teams don't dilute or hurt the development of the top teams because they don't play in the same league.

Then you went on commenting on how parents manage their money?

None of your statements have anything to do with the original question, which is a good one.

Don't over analyze. It's just a sport, right?

Btw, your well respected coaches should ask what they can do better to develop players with much more money flooded into the system. Blame the parents who pay and the kids?

Indeed, "don't over analyze"! Don't ask questions. Go with the flow.

Sign the checks and hand them over to the clubs. The DOC has a mortgage payment coming due on this million dollar house in Willow Bend. Parents like you are perfect for the select soccer business.

Your mindset will be completely different by the time your daughter is in 11th or 12th grade. Try to remember that you heard it from me first.

JustaSport wrote:

4-4-2-Diamond wrote:

JustaSport wrote:

coollikethatsoccermom wrote:Well Said mommabear, like a lot of parents ,I too will continue to keep my child in "select as long as select is what she needs and desires.

There is a long perpetuated myth that no rec team could ever compete with even the lowest level select team. That is far from true. I have seen several 01G teams in PSA that could give most LH D3 teams a run for their money. In fact, there is one team in particular named FC Trinity (no, it's not the one I coach) that I honestly believe would beat a few LH D2 teams. They are genuinely "that" good. Like a lot of other PSA teams, the girls DO play year around - spring outdoor, summer indoor, fall outdoor, and winter indoor. And like a lot of other PSA teams, they are coached by qualified individuals who know the sport and are comprised of players who work their tales off. Options like this are out there; one just has to see beyond the hype of select soccer.

I don't mean to paint all club soccer as bad. That's not it at all. But again, there are way too many parents who believe that the only way their child can become good at soccer is if they pay upwards of $3000 per year to be on a select team. This is false.

If they play year round why wouldnt they challenge themselves against other teams that do instead of dominating PSA? And its very seductive to believe standout players against weaker competition would fare as well week in, week out against the best. The LH teams have fewer holes, especially defensively. Much harder to look like a star when your time and space are cut in half.

Its like the folks claiming Neymar is better than Messi. Ummm...no, not until he does something in europe against top competition. PSA and rec have their place. The last thing we want to do is turn them into same rat race we have in select.

I received a message this morning that this team did in fact move up into the U12 PYSA league last season and faced stronger competition. But I don't know if I would say they had previously "dominated" the U11 ranks in PSA. There are several others who are not far off from their level: Mutiny II, Knock-Outs, Galaxy, Shooting Stars, Sting FC, Scorch FC... All of these mentioned (and there may be others) play year round, as well. The other shocker is that there are many players from these lowly teams who guest play for select teams in tournaments - and do just fine. How can that be? Is it possible that their coaches actually know what they are doing and these girls are being challenged outside of the select world and without paying huge sums of money each year? Yes, I know it runs against the conventional "wisdom" of select soccer, but there are other options. If a girl wants to one day play for UNC, then a top ECNL team is almost certainly the route. But for those who want to be good at the sport, play for their 4A and 5A high school teams, and perhaps not burn out at age 14 like 1/3 of them are going to... there are certainly other avenues.

Dont disagree with any of that. But you are conflating individual guest play with what a rec team can do against LH teams. No need to do that to make your point IMO. If those teams were on par wth LH D2 there would exist some shred of evidence.

I would put the burnout rate by 14 at closer to 50 to 60%. Turn Rec into year round craziness trying to compete with LH and what have we gained? A rec that can chew players up and spit them out as good as LH? Let rec be rec. Good coaches are doing good things there let them keep doing it without the spotlight that drives all the hyper-competitiveness.

JustaSport wrote:

driftingwolf wrote:

JustaSport wrote:

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.

Select or rec is just a name.

Your rationals are largely false. For example, bottom select teams don't dilute or hurt the development of the top teams because they don't play in the same league.

Then you went on commenting on how parents manage their money?

None of your statements have anything to do with the original question, which is a good one.

Don't over analyze. It's just a sport, right?

Btw, your well respected coaches should ask what they can do better to develop players with much more money flooded into the system. Blame the parents who pay and the kids?

Indeed, "don't over analyze"! Don't ask questions. Go with the flow.

Sign the checks and hand them over to the clubs. The DOC has a mortgage payment coming due on this million dollar house in Willow Bend. Parents like you are perfect for the select soccer business.

Your mindset will be completely different by the time your daughter is in 11th or 12th grade. Try to remember that you heard it from me first.

But the original question is not about ROI, right?

Since you insist on talking about money, I hate to admit that I agree with you largely.

I never see this spending as investment. It's just a cost I pay for my DD to play and enjoy soccer and get active and healthy.

Why not rec? We averagely have only half of the team showing up for practice that practices and games have become no fun to my DD. We actually have a pretty strong base. The players who are interested get better and better, the ones who are not start hindering the team progress. But with rec, you can't drop them, can you? Even if we can, where do we recruit the good ones?

The clubs provide a platform for those who want to a little seriously. More teams is better cause it serves kids at different levels.

It's a service. We have to pay for it. I have no idea if the price is justifiable. Then again, I see it as a cost, not investment. Like we go to a restaurant, I will go if I can afford it or feel like I have to for whatever reasons.

I know it's spitting in the wind in NTX, but I've always thought there needed to be a level between rec and club. They call it Rec plus in some areas.

One of mine left a club team mid-year and joined a rec team. This team had some terrific athletes (soccer was a second sport for most) and actually beat a few Plano-level club teams in tourneys. The main problem was getting kids to practice. Most times, 3-4 would show. My dd had a ball playing with them for 1 1/2 years, but wanting to ensure she made her HS team (in arguably the toughest 5A conference), she felt compelled to go back to club soccer which she did.

It worked out for her, she was a 4-yr starter in HS, but she never had any intention of playing in college and in fact, left the club scene again her Senior season. I'm sure there are plenty of other cases like hers where a level in between that doesn't cost 3k makes sense. Unfortunately, that rec team was a rare find and there were no bumper stickers.

Agree with Gunner...we need a "rec plus" option where you aren't arbitrarily assigned to a team and there is a higher level of commitment. This would weed out a bunch from the "select" pool and allow some of the girls who want to play multiple sports (but still love soccer) a better alternative.

Gunner9 wrote:I know it's spitting in the wind in NTX, but I've always thought there needed to be a level between rec and club. They call it Rec plus in some areas.

Unless you can set that up by next Thursday, I will have to write a $2000 check.

Rec+ = PPL and Arlington. In the rankings flow, with ECNL at the top, they are #,5,6 and 7 depending on how many divisions the have. Too bad the cost is not proportional.

Select = LH
Rec plus = plano, arlington
Rec = Rec

The only issue is some parents pay select money for rec plus teams to big clubs. That's on the parents. There are other options.

Just as the younger academy players have refused to pay the high prices by moving to and forming teams at a less cost! Plano and arlington teams are going to need to do the same!