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

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?

JustaSport wrote:

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?

My point is I have the resources to choose. I earned the resources by working hard and making wise choices. What is "extreme" to you is not extreme to me. I feel very comfortable with the choice I've made and I believe it is the right choice for me and my DD. I dont care what choice you would like to make for me. 

Winston Churchill attended private school not sure about the others.

Uncle Numanga wrote:

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.

Clubs actually do very little other than get visibility/fields - coaches do the developing and teams/parents are responsible for the fun (or lack of fun).  Interesting some people paint the 'successful' teams as the evil ones - like kids aren't developing or enjoying themselves there?  Wins are always a much bigger deal for those driving the kids to the game than the actual kid.

dfeetersarethebomb wrote:Clubs actually do very little other than get visibility/fields - coaches do the developing and teams/parents are responsible for the fun (or lack of fun).  Interesting some people paint the 'successful' teams as the evil ones - like kids aren't developing or enjoying themselves there?  Wins are always a much bigger deal for those driving the kids to the game than the actual kid.

This is Laughable!! I would say that if there are kids that don't care about wins, then those kids don't have a very competitive drive, and probably shouldn't be in a very competitive environment.  I hear that all the time.."Parents care more about winning than the kids do" or "They didn't want to move teams, their parents wanted to say that their kid is on XYZ Top Tier Team and the kid wanted to play with her friends."  That may be true at U6 to U9 but by the time they are in High School Winning matters just as much to those kids.  Not in terms of Scholarships or recognition, but in terms of "Fruits of my Labor!"  I can't imagine anyone after a loss saying "Oh well, it really doesn't bother me that we lost."  I can imaging your reaction if you heard one of your DD's teammates saying that as they walked off the field and your DD had just played her heart out.   I mean, don't we all have opinions on how much heart an athlete has while we watch them on TV?  It's funny to hear how passive everyone seems to be about competitiveness when we talk about youth sports, but I'll bet Kobe, MJ, Messi, Alex Morgan, Ian Kinsler, Nolan Ryan, etc... all cared deeply about each and every win from the time they were very young.   My .02

John Galt wrote:

JustaSport wrote:

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?

My point is I have the resources to choose. I earned the resources by working hard and making wise choices. What is "extreme" to you is not extreme to me. I feel very comfortable with the choice I've made and I believe it is the right choice for me and my DD. I dont care what choice you would like to make for me. 

Winston Churchill attended private school not sure about the others.

You think I would like to choose for you?  Hey, as a self-employed guy for 27 years, I'm all about people spending their disposable incomes on things they don't necessarily need.  And as a guy who grew up in select soccer, still coaches, and has put on older daughter through the system, it's entirely possible my big picture view is better than average.  But you were the one that somehow correlated playing select sports to becoming a "legacy".  What a stretch.

I don't get the Winston Churchill reference.  Is select soccer now equal to private school?  Or do you think perhaps he would have been less a drunk had he been on a Texans' team growing up?

Uncle Numanga wrote:

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?

Yes, actually I have read a NLI. The one I signed years ago.

There is no obligation for the school to pay. They have it written in there. 

I used the over-signing in football as an example, as it's an easy one to find online and do research on. If all those players signed a NLI, and the school is obligated to pay, how is then, that those kids end up having to pay for their own school? Answer that.