You have $25,000, what would you do?

It is an unwritten rule that you don't discuss the amount of scholarship your dd has gotten. Their are too many variables to consider revealing that information, from your club team to your future college team.

Ah Uncle, I wouldn't need to know the amount necessarily, but it would be handy to know how many of our girls actually get one and from where.  (I wouldn't want to break any unwritten rules!)

frankly the whole question is moot. taking your idea to the next level, you have to be nuts to have a child in financial terms, college, food,  doctor appts, soccer, music,dance whatever, it is an enormous drain financially that you could avoid and lead a pretty comfortable life. now having said that, you can't take money with you and watching your child grow up is an experience that money simply can't hold a candle to.....

The thing is, what is going to give the kids the best experience, and why are YOU putting them in select soccer?

Are you putting them in there to win championships or relive you past glory, or have something you can brag about?

• If so, I'd probably just set that money aside for college instead of having them play select soccer.
  

IMO, you should be putting your child in select soccer because it is something they enjoy. It's something they want to do. And, it's a program that teaches them not only soccer, but life lessons as well.

When looking for a club, these are the characteristics that you should be looking for:

• Has coaches that are knowledgable about the game, and do well explaining things to players.
  
• Makes the experience enjoyable for the player both on and off the field
  
• Coaches that understand these are young players learning the game, and are not C. Ronaldo just yet.
  
• Understands the value of teaching the kids life lessons, such as being a good sport and a good person on and off the field.
  
• Is more worried about your player getting better at soccer, than they are about winning trophies and earning national respect.
  

I think this is the perfect worth for your money. I'd spend $100,000 on a club that does this any day. Sure it's fun to win trophies, but should it really be the ultimate goal in youth soccer? Many clubs that concentrate on doing this Texans, Solar, Liverpool, and other such clubs, in my opinion, don't teach soccer or life lessons at all. The coaches will cut you as soon as the next best player walks through their door. A coach that is concerned with giving you and your daughter the things I mentioned above will be dedicated to your player and making them better no matter who walks through their door.

People wonder why the US Men's isn't better at soccer, or why the US Women's team is starting to drop off. It's because these other nations don't care to much about winning trophies at the youth level. Most of these other nations don't even play the full 11 v 11 side a game until around the U14 age, and don't really keep score until the U18 age. They are worried about developing their players for when it matters. Other nations have begun to train their women's teams the same way they train their men's teams... and those women's teams are catching up to the US Women's team. I wouldn't be surprised if the Women's national landscape looked a lot like the Men's in about 10-20 years. Meaning the US Women would be ranked some where in the 20-30's range instead of in the Top 5.

InaB wrote:Ah Uncle, I wouldn't need to know the amount necessarily, but it would be handy to know how many of our girls actually get one and from where.  (I wouldn't want to break any unwritten rules!)

Any child that signs a National Letter of Intent is receiving some kind of scholarship. It could be as little as paying for your books but the college has made a financial commitment. Go back and look at the signing lists. That will give you an idea.

NTXSjunkie wrote:

• Has coaches that are knowledgable about the game, and do well explaining things to players.
  
• Makes the experience enjoyable for the player both on and off the field
  
• Coaches that understand these are young players learning the game, and are not C. Ronaldo just yet.
  
• Understands the value of teaching the kids life lessons, such as being a good sport and a good person on and off the field.
  
• Is more worried about your player getting better at soccer, than they are about winning trophies and earning national respect.
  

Blah, blah, blah. This argument continues to be idiotic, no matter how many different ways it is given. Every thread like this has to evolve into some moron tells us that winning clubs don't develop or care about the kids or allow them to have any fun. Keep your kid where she is if your happy but don't give me your little loser club vs. big winning club rationalizations.

"Any child that signs a National Letter of Intent is receiving some kind of scholarship. It could be as little as paying for your books but the college has made a financial commitment. Go back and look at the signing lists. That will give you an idea. "

Thanks Uncle! (DOH moment on my part)

Does that mean that there is a DFW list for those that signed letters and would it indicate what league they play in?

Cmon_Man wrote:Does that mean that there is a DFW list for those that signed letters and would it indicate what league they play in?

I can't find the old Dallas Morning News list but here is a link and you can look at clubs or colleges.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AriynKqmGsRwdGUyR1ZrSFFUbHFZblNCMnBNZnNqc1E&output=html&gid=6

I never said big club vs little club, and that little clubs develop players and big clubs don't.

What I said was you should find a club that concentrates on developing players.

For example, was on Texans for a while, and paid out the butt to have my player on there, and then paid even more to have them teach my player to strike a ball at a ball striking lesson once a week. Did this for an entire year, and didn't see any improvements. 

Took her to another club, yes this one happened to be smaller, and now they can strike a ball better in the 2 months we've been there than she ever could playing for the Texans.

Clubs like the Texans are only concerned with getting you to spend your money. They could care less about actually developing the players. And, most of the time if you ask their senior level players if they've played for Texans for their entire career you'll find that a majority of them haven't. Most of their top players are recruited from other teams during the offseason. Most of them played academy for clubs like one that I described earlier. 

Youth soccer should be about development, and not winning the trophies just yet.

When you get older, no one cares about how many trophies you won in youth soccer. What they care about is what type of person you are, and if you have qualities they need. Go talk to Sir Alex Furgeson about what type of player he'd rather sign:

• A player that developed their technique until they were 18, occasionally winning trophies along the way, but not often. Got plenty of touches on the ball and actually learned the game.
  

-OR-

• A player that has an alright touch, plays kick and rush soccer, but won the State Cup with their team every year along with countless trophies from various tournaments.
  

I would be everything I had that he'd sign the first player. There's a reason why clubs in England like West Ham have produced many of the top players in soccer:

• Rio Ferdinand
  
• Mark Noble
  
• Michael Carrick
  
• Jermain Defoe
  
• Frank Lampard
  
• Joe Cole
  
• John Terry
  

Those are just some of the players they've put out. And, the reason is... they worry about development and not winning trophies there. As an extra point here, England only recently added the U18 English FA Cup competition to the board. This past season was the FIRST time it had been around.

BTW, just because you sign a LOI you do not get money. All the LOI says is that YOU will play said sport for that college and only that college. The school is under no obligation to give you any money. Just look at the SEC and over singing. They will only have 20 or so scholarships to give out a season.... yet they'll sign like 28 players (in football). That means 8 players wont get money, yet they cannot go to another school without sitting out a year for NCAA rules. This happens in soccer as well.

NTXSjunkie wrote:I never said big club vs little club, and that little clubs develop players and big clubs don't.

What I said was you should find a club that concentrates on developing players.

For example, was on Texans for a while, and paid out the butt to have my player on there, and then paid even more to have them teach my player to strike a ball at a ball striking lesson once a week. Did this for an entire year, and didn't see any improvements. 

Took her to another club, yes this one happened to be smaller, and now they can strike a ball better in the 2 months we've been there than she ever could playing for the Texans.

Clubs like the Texans are only concerned with getting you to spend your money. They could care less about actually developing the players. And, most of the time if you ask their senior level players if they've played for Texans for their entire career you'll find that a majority of them haven't. Most of their top players are recruited from other teams during the offseason. Most of them played academy for clubs like one that I described earlier. 

Youth soccer should be about development, and not winning the trophies just yet.

When you get older, no one cares about how many trophies you won in youth soccer. What they care about is what type of person you are, and if you have qualities they need. Go talk to Sir Alex Furgeson about what type of player he'd rather sign:

• A player that developed their technique until they were 18, occasionally winning trophies along the way, but not often. Got plenty of touches on the ball and actually learned the game.
  

-OR-

• A player that has an alright touch, plays kick and rush soccer, but won the State Cup with their team every year along with countless trophies from various tournaments.
  

I would be everything I had that he'd sign the first player. There's a reason why clubs in England like West Ham have produced many of the top players in soccer:

• Rio Ferdinand
  
• Mark Noble
  
• Michael Carrick
  
• Jermain Defoe
  
• Frank Lampard
  
• Joe Cole
  
• John Terry
  

Those are just some of the players they've put out. And, the reason is... they worry about development and not winning trophies there. As an extra point here, England only recently added the U18 English FA Cup competition to the board. This past season was the FIRST time it had been around.

BTW, just because you sign a LOI you do not get money. All the LOI says is that YOU will play said sport for that college and only that college. The school is under no obligation to give you any money. Just look at the SEC and over singing. They will only have 20 or so scholarships to give out a season.... yet they'll sign like 28 players (in football). That means 8 players wont get money, yet they cannot go to another school without sitting out a year for NCAA rules. This happens in soccer as well.

Because i am bored i will play devils advocate. What if you dont play in college or just hang up your cleats at 18, which would you rather have memories of championships and lots of trophies or a great first touch?

Do you have any fun if your skills aren't good enough to allow you to actually play?

Sure, you're team won the State Cup... but in the entire tournament you only played 15 min. at the end of the third game. All because your touch and ability wasn't as good as the other players. 

Would you feel like you were part of the team? Would you feel like you've contributed to winning that trophy?

Hence why I said you should find a club that isn't just about on the field results, but has things off the field as well.

Does your player just show up for practice, games, and tournaments and then you're done with it. Or, does your club put on events and does the team do things together to make a bond between the players.

Plus, who wants to hear about your glory days when you were a U14 player? No one... ever talked to that parent that is still stuck in their glory days in High School and tells you about the long TD run they had? Is that what you'd like your kid to be like?

NTXSjunkie wrote:Do you have any fun if your skills aren't good enough to allow you to actually play?

Sure, you're team won the State Cup... but in the entire tournament you only played 15 min. at the end of the third game. All because your touch and ability wasn't as good as the other players. 

Would you feel like you were part of the team? Would you feel like you've contributed to winning that trophy?

Hence why I said you should find a club that isn't just about on the field results, but has things off the field as well.

Does your player just show up for practice, games, and tournaments and then you're done with it. Or, does your club put on events and does the team do things together to make a bond between the players.

Plus, who wants to hear about your glory days when you were a U14 player? No one... ever talked to that parent that is still stuck in their glory days in High School and tells you about the long TD run they had? Is that what you'd like your kid to be like?

Since we are on the girls forum, just where do you think you daughter is headed? To a career in womens soccer,the national team? For 95 percent of females,soccer in high school is the end of the road. And i imagine for those who go on to play college,for 99 percent college is the end of the road. Sucks but true, enjoy playing because unfortunately that will be what most get out of soccer.

You failed to mention that they could become soccer coaches!  We need more female coaches.
 My DD wants to be a soccer player/coach/sports medicine doctor (and of course a member of the US Women's soccer team and play in the olympics).

So what if 99 percent of all the female players won't have the same opportunities as their male counterparts. If we don't allow them to dream and hope, then that will always be the status quo. My DD said she would even play for a European team if that was an option.



edited to add comments.

NTXSjunkie wrote:

BTW, just because you sign a LOI you do not get money. All the LOI says is that YOU will play said sport for that college and only that college. The school is under no obligation to give you any money. Just look at the SEC and over singing. They will only have 20 or so scholarships to give out a season.... yet they'll sign like 28 players (in football). That means 8 players wont get money, yet they cannot go to another school without sitting out a year for NCAA rules. This happens in soccer as well.

That statement is absolutely incorrect. Over signing in football has nothing to do with what we are discussing. Have you ever read a NLI?

As far as your comments about the Texans. My dd played for them for 9 years. Learned how to play the game, loved her team and most of her coaches and won several trophies. I have no idea or even care about the other coaches on the Texans. Blanket indictments of coaching at any club is ridiculous and is not helpful to anyone. I looked out for my kid like everyone else should and I must say it worked about pretty good. Good luck at your low-level, high-development club. Does everyone get a participation medal?

I'll make him a deal. When you sign the NLI and the kid holds up her end and the school doesnt, let me know. Pro Bono. Especially if they have a large endowment.

Are we theorizing that instead of soccer that DD would literally stand idle in a corner and not create new costs during that same time she'd otherwise be participating in soccer?  $5K wouldn't be your actual savings by eliminating soccer because it would be replaced by a new cost.  Standing idle and not doing anything is the only way you'd realize that savings. 

If your DD stops playing select soccer and instead focuses on dance, the money that you save in soccer will just be forwarded to your newly acquired dancer's debt.  You're going to spend at least a portion of that money one way or another.

Select soccer, or any activity, is basically an investment in your child's education. People that don't involve their kids in activities end up with fat, maladjusted kids.

Bravo BigT:cheers:

bigtex75081 wrote:Are we theorizing that instead of soccer that DD would literally stand idle in a corner and not create new costs during that same time she'd otherwise be participating in soccer?  $5K wouldn't be your actual savings by eliminating soccer because it would be replaced by a new cost.  Standing idle and not doing anything is the only way you'd realize that savings. 

If your DD stops playing select soccer and instead focuses on dance, the money that you save in soccer will just be forwarded to your newly acquired dancer's debt.  You're going to spend at least a portion of that money one way or another.

Select soccer, or any activity, is basically an investment in your child's education. People that don't involve their kids in activities end up with fat, maladjusted kids.

Careful, Tex, you said fat. The PC forum police are coming...

NTXSjunkie wrote:Do you have any fun if your skills aren't good enough to allow you to actually play?

Sure, you're team won the State Cup... but in the entire tournament you only played 15 min. at the end of the third game. All because your touch and ability wasn't as good as the other players. 

Would you feel like you were part of the team? Would you feel like you've contributed to winning that trophy?

Hence why I said you should find a club that isn't just about on the field results, but has things off the field as well.

Does your player just show up for practice, games, and tournaments and then you're done with it. Or, does your club put on events and does the team do things together to make a bond between the players.

Plus, who wants to hear about your glory days when you were a U14 player? No one... ever talked to that parent that is still stuck in their glory days in High School and tells you about the long TD run they had? Is that what you'd like your kid to be like?

Why is it that on every top team, the kids only play 15 minutes? Who gets the rest of the minutes? Obviously somebody on the team has the skills to play 90 minutes. That is another tired argument.

Like I have said before, my dd has played on the same team for about 9 years. We won our share of trophies and she has made friends that will last over time. Our club didn't have to throw them parties, their team did that. Sleepovers, holiday parties when they were traveling, team dinners, etc. were just a few of the ways they bonded. My dd will remember those times long after the trophies have tarnished.

Hi Uncle, bravo to your team.

Our team as well provides bonding events outside of soccer. We (the whole team and coach) believe that it should be part of the experience.

bigtex75081 wrote:Are we theorizing that instead of soccer that DD would literally stand idle in a corner and not create new costs during that same time she'd otherwise be participating in soccer?  $5K wouldn't be your actual savings by eliminating soccer because it would be replaced by a new cost.  Standing idle and not doing anything is the only way you'd realize that savings. 

If your DD stops playing select soccer and instead focuses on dance, the money that you save in soccer will just be forwarded to your newly acquired dancer's debt.  You're going to spend at least a portion of that money one way or another.

Select soccer, or any activity, is basically an investment in your child's education. People that don't involve their kids in activities end up with fat, maladjusted kids.

That may be giving select soccer a bit too much credit.  Everything a parent does for their children could be loosely categorized as an "investment" - whether it be good or bad.  The question is whether or not an investment is worth it.  I know teams that have played together in PSA, PYSA, and other organizations since they were 5 years old.  They've trained under knowledgeable coaches, practiced year round, become as good as most players in PPL (yeah, I'll catch heat for that statement, but it's true), done all of the team parties, AND the parents have saved a ton of money versus club sports.  It works out to only paying league fees, indoor costs, and new uniforms from time to time.  The cost?  About $350 per year on average... a far cry from $4000 and counting in select soccer.

The funny thing is, I don't encounter many maladjusted kids in this category.  Most of the real Queen B's tend to be in club sports... along with a much higher percentage of crazy parents.

Instead of sp

I think you have this whole thing backwards. My DD is the investment the 25-45K is the price I pay to protect the investment. Its like life insurance for your daughters life, you dont want your money back you want your daughter to be the best possible person she can be. To neglect education in any form academic athletic etc if you have the resources would be irresponsible. A solid productive citizen, a legacy thats the ROI.

JustaSport wrote:

bigtex75081 wrote:Are we theorizing that instead of soccer that DD would literally stand idle in a corner and not create new costs during that same time she'd otherwise be participating in soccer?  $5K wouldn't be your actual savings by eliminating soccer because it would be replaced by a new cost.  Standing idle and not doing anything is the only way you'd realize that savings. 

If your DD stops playing select soccer and instead focuses on dance, the money that you save in soccer will just be forwarded to your newly acquired dancer's debt.  You're going to spend at least a portion of that money one way or another.

Select soccer, or any activity, is basically an investment in your child's education. People that don't involve their kids in activities end up with fat, maladjusted kids.

That may be giving select soccer a bit too much credit.  Everything a parent does for their children could be loosely categorized as an "investment" - whether it be good or bad.  The question is whether or not an investment is worth it.  I know teams that have played together in PSA, PYSA, and other organizations since they were 5 years old.  They've trained under knowledgeable coaches, practiced year round, become as good as most players in PPL (yeah, I'll catch heat for that statement, but it's true), done all of the team parties, AND the parents have saved a ton of money versus club sports.  It works out to only paying league fees, indoor costs, and new uniforms from time to time.  The cost?  About $350 per year on average... a far cry from $4000 and counting in select soccer.

The funny thing is, I don't encounter many maladjusted kids in this category.  Most of the real Queen B's tend to be in club sports... along with a much higher percentage of crazy parents.

Instead of sp

Well done, only in affluent ntx does 5 k for kids sports seem reasonable.  These are kids and select is a business, 75 percent of these kid would be well served in a less expensive rec league. Growing up we played sports and no one was wasting 5k on youth sports...

silentparent wrote:

JustaSport wrote:

bigtex75081 wrote:Are we theorizing that instead of soccer that DD would literally stand idle in a corner and not create new costs during that same time she'd otherwise be participating in soccer?  $5K wouldn't be your actual savings by eliminating soccer because it would be replaced by a new cost.  Standing idle and not doing anything is the only way you'd realize that savings. 

If your DD stops playing select soccer and instead focuses on dance, the money that you save in soccer will just be forwarded to your newly acquired dancer's debt.  You're going to spend at least a portion of that money one way or another.

Select soccer, or any activity, is basically an investment in your child's education. People that don't involve their kids in activities end up with fat, maladjusted kids.

That may be giving select soccer a bit too much credit.  Everything a parent does for their children could be loosely categorized as an "investment" - whether it be good or bad.  The question is whether or not an investment is worth it.  I know teams that have played together in PSA, PYSA, and other organizations since they were 5 years old.  They've trained under knowledgeable coaches, practiced year round, become as good as most players in PPL (yeah, I'll catch heat for that statement, but it's true), done all of the team parties, AND the parents have saved a ton of money versus club sports.  It works out to only paying league fees, indoor costs, and new uniforms from time to time.  The cost?  About $350 per year on average... a far cry from $4000 and counting in select soccer.

The funny thing is, I don't encounter many maladjusted kids in this category.  Most of the real Queen B's tend to be in club sports... along with a much higher percentage of crazy parents.

Instead of sp

Well done, only in affluent ntx does 5 k for kids sports seem reasonable.  These are kids and select is a business, 75 percent of these kid would be well served in a less expensive rec league. Growing up we played sports and no one was wasting 5k on youth sports...

Reasonable is in the eye or the beholder. When I see a guy driving a Porsche or Mercedes I know they could get where they are going in a much more reasonably priced car, but maybe that is reasonable for him. You are right in that they could maybe get the same benefit from rec soccer, but select is they way they want to go. If the money is an issue for a family, that changes things and your argument is spot on.

John Galt wrote:I think you have this whole thing backwards. My DD is the investment the 25-45K is the price I pay to protect the investment. Its like life insurance for your daughters life, you dont want your money back you want your daughter to be the best possible person she can be. To neglect education in any form academic athletic etc if you have the resources would be irresponsible. A solid productive citizen, a legacy thats the ROI.

Truth be told, I think it's you and many others - those who pay blindly into the club sport system - that have it wrong.  Have you genuinely come to believe that spending extreme amounts of money for a kid's sport is a protection of his or her well-being?  I wonder how many of history's greatest people ever spent a day in a high dollar, pay-for-play program.  It's amazing those that didn't ever accomplished anything.  Again, I think the average poster places soccer on way too high a pedestal.  Are sports good for kids in numerous way?  Unquestionably.  Would a parents "be irresponsible" if they chose to keep their children in a less expensive option?  Are you kidding?