player pass should be revoked

HeadHaunter wrote:

Cleansheets wrote:Let me quote you again HH. "If your coach isn't playing players in both directions so players don't lose playing time..." Are you serious!?! That is the most ridiculous thing I have read on here in a long time. Please tell me how it would benefit a top player by bringing them down to play on a lower level team?

Because they are 11 and 12 years old... period...  they are kids and are learning and if you think any differently then you ARE one of those parents that think learning and development stops at 10 because if you're not first you're last...  sheesh...

My question is: are you serious!?!  do you really think a top player is done learning or developing or learning to play with kids of different levels?  Do you not think a kid could still learn and develop by playing with a group of girls she's not played with much or ever for that matter?  learning to adapt?  just cause she's a top player does not mean she is a God of soccer - just means there are things they do better than others...  maybe she needs work on passing, or sharing the ball or playing a different position, or learning new players or just learning period.  What can a 10, 11 or 12 year old learn from playing more soccer?  Seriously!?!  I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'm not going to change your mind on the use of CPP - all I know is that my DD is benefiting from it - don't care if yours isn't or won't or the coach isn't going to let it happen - my DD is benefiting, if yours was too, I'd give you the ol' thumbs up and wouldn't ridicule you because she is.  I could care less if a player from DI played in a DIII PPL game if they thought it would give her more touches on the ball regardless of the people she's playing...  I'll put her in a damn rec game if someone asked her to play cause she loves to play and it's game speed touches regardless of the level of the competition.  She'll get all the competition she needs playing at her own level, why not let her be the star player once in awhile and use those skills she otherwise wouldn't have time to use in another format - allow her to hone those skills a little...  I got not problem with that and surprised that you do....

Where are you Cobra Kai? If Johnny won't get up there and sweep the leg anymore, I think we've found someone that will!

well rockindaddy?  should I not be?  seems no one else cares what my kid is getting out of something everyone else apparently thinks should go away...  I went with the normal discussions but as people get punchy, so do I...  not saying people are right or wrong, just saying why I like it...  don't like being berated for a perfectly good reason for liking something that I feel helps kids at this age, so I went on the defensive...

I probably should have just said, I am serious and don't call me Shirley...

I think is interesting is that none of the parents who's kids lost time do to another DD being temporarily placed on team has come forward on this forum............do not get me wrong I think CPP in its current format not right but I would assume the parents of the effected kids would be more vocal.

Havingfunyet wrote:I think is interesting is that none of the parents who's kids lost time do to another DD being temporarily placed on team has come forward on this forum............do not get me wrong I think CPP in its current format not right but I would assume the parents of the effected kids would be more vocal.

And you won't. You are only going to hear from the "parents egos" who were hurt by playing against a team with CPP's.

soccernovice04 wrote:

HeadHaunter wrote:

Cleansheets wrote:Let me quote you again HH. "If your coach isn't playing players in both directions so players don't lose playing time..." Are you serious!?! That is the most ridiculous thing I have read on here in a long time. Please tell me how it would benefit a top player by bringing them down to play on a lower level team?

Because they are 11 and 12 years old... period...  they are kids and are learning and if you think any differently then you ARE one of those parents that think learning and development stops at 10 because if you're not first you're last...  sheesh...

My question is: are you serious!?!  do you really think a top player is done learning or developing or learning to play with kids of different levels?  Do you not think a kid could still learn and develop by playing with a group of girls she's not played with much or ever for that matter?  learning to adapt?  just cause she's a top player does not mean she is a God of soccer - just means there are things they do better than others...  maybe she needs work on passing, or sharing the ball or playing a different position, or learning new players or just learning period.  What can a 10, 11 or 12 year old learn from playing more soccer?  Seriously!?!  I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'm not going to change your mind on the use of CPP - all I know is that my DD is benefiting from it - don't care if yours isn't or won't or the coach isn't going to let it happen - my DD is benefiting, if yours was too, I'd give you the ol' thumbs up and wouldn't ridicule you because she is.  I could care less if a player from DI played in a DIII PPL game if they thought it would give her more touches on the ball regardless of the people she's playing...  I'll put her in a damn rec game if someone asked her to play cause she loves to play and it's game speed touches regardless of the level of the competition.  She'll get all the competition she needs playing at her own level, why not let her be the star player once in awhile and use those skills she otherwise wouldn't have time to use in another format - allow her to hone those skills a little...  I got not problem with that and surprised that you do....

Where are you Cobra Kai? If Johnny won't get up there and sweep the leg anymore, I think we've found someone that will!

This isn't knitting class.

HeadHaunter wrote:well rockindaddy?  should I not be?  seems no one else cares what my kid is getting out of something everyone else apparently thinks should go away...  I went with the normal discussions but as people get punchy, so do I...  not saying people are right or wrong, just saying why I like it...  don't like being berated for a perfectly good reason for liking something that I feel helps kids at this age, so I went on the defensive...

I probably should have just said, I am serious and don't call me Shirley...

I'll give you points for the Airplane reference. My question to you HH is your DD moving up or moving down via CPP? I'm curious what your team affiliation is also. If your DD is a top player on a D3 team and she gets brought up to D1 to gauge her ability against better competition, got no problem with that. However, sending a top D1 player down to a D3 team makes no sense to me. Quite frankly it stinks of a ringer it just doesn't look good. Perception is reality unfortunately.
Now in cases of injury I can see the exception. Say your D3 teams keeper is injured and no one else on the team plays keeper. Then you get your clubs D1 keeper if she is available. That is the only scenario that I see this thing working moving down instead of up.

Where is Kix at? That joker chimes in on just about everything else on here. I'm sure he has an insightful and profound view on this topic.

rockindaddy wrote:Been watching this forum for over 5 years and that has to be the all time winner in the self centered,( yeah for me and screw everybody else) post.Well done there has been some stiff competition.

RnD - Another great post.

My DD was not effected by a CPP system but there were guest players and a time when she lost playing time on a team we committed to and paid to be on. One tourney the coach brought in some guest players who took PT away from players who were actually on the team. I can tell you things look a lot different on this debate when your kid is sitting. As you say they develop while playing and if someone is coming in and taking that PT away they are not developing. I can tell you what happens to a lot of these kids is they leave the game. Not all develop at the same time and those with late birthdays often are behind especially at younger ages. The CPP is very easy to abuse especially when playing down. I agree with BWG that its not all bad and focus should be on improvements.

One of the other biggest problems with CPP touched on but not the focus in most of this is the skewing of relegation/promotion based on bringing in ringers. Yes you may get better by playing the better competition but what is wrong with a team rightfully earning promotion in their division against those actual teams in their division and playing a whole next season in the upper level. Say they miss out on a promotion to a Big club bringing down players to get a win for their club. For independent or small club teams trying to work their way up is a long slow process. It will likely take at least 3 years from a team to move from D3 to D1 without any hiccups in the process. Big clubs usually have a lot more power to get teams at a higher level from the start than the small club.

While I do not blame a parent for looking out for their DD first (Yes, I mean you HH) you are much less likely to have an unbiased opinion on this than those with no dog in the fight. From what I have read on here the CPP has been abused. Not always but obviously way more often than not. I love the idea of transparency and a list of which clubs are playing up and playing down and how many. Coaches also have their club and income to worry about and do not have all the players best interest in mind in this debate either. I would only allow playing up and limit the number of times per player per season.

bwgophers wrote:

KnKsDad wrote:

bwgophers wrote:

KnKsDad wrote:Can anyone cite examples of CPP's being used to play up in division?

bwgophers wrote:

PrimeTime wrote:
I guess I still am looking for examples of the CPP being used in the other direction, whereby a player plays up vs their normal respective division (i.e. D2 to D1, D1 to ECNL and actually plays not just there to round out the 30 player roster).

3 players from my DD's U14 D1 team (2 Field, 1 GK) CPP'd with a U15 D1/PL team in U15 Premier League games this fall.  The 2 field players played 50% or more in both games played that weekend, 1 win and 1 loss.

Again, my question was same as PrimeTimes, when has CPP been used to play up in division within same age group?

Actually, PT's question neither stated, nor implied that it was limited to within the same age group.  If you don't consider my case a valid example of playing "up" (both in age group and in division/level since it was PL games instead of regular D1 LHGCL league games), and therefore, want to discount it, then that is certainly your prerogative.  

I was simply answering a question and providing an example.  The direct knowledge of CPP cases that I have, suggests (as I think most expect) that the overwhelming majority of CPP cases are those in which players are CPP'd either parallel or down as opposed to up.  I have gone on record on this forum stating that LHGCL should have easy access to this data and should analyze it, and from a PR standpoint, it would be great if they made it public.  If the data shows that a significant majority of CPP cases (i.e. something like >70%) are playing down, then that says to me that "the spirit of the rule" as written by LHGCL clearly isn't being followed by most, and thus a modification of the CPP in LHGCL needs to be made.

If CPP is truly being used for development, then there should be roughly a 50/50 split between playing up and playing down.  With statistical slop, I'll even allow that a 60/40 split would suggest that it is being used primarily for development.  However, if it gets above 60% playing down, I find it hard to make any argument that CPP is really being used for development as opposed to competitive advantage.

No problem with your response. I interpreted the highlighted above differently than you - to mean within the same age group. My bad for assuming. It would should show some integrity if LH actually did some statistical analysis as you suggest.

Hard Practice wrote:

rockindaddy wrote:Been watching this forum for over 5 years and that has to be the all time winner in the self centered,( yeah for me and screw everybody else) post.Well done there has been some stiff competition.

RnD - Another great post.

My DD was not effected by a CPP system but there were guest players and a time when she lost playing time on a team we committed to and paid to be on.  One tourney the coach brought in some guest players who took PT away from players who were actually on the team.  I can tell you things look a lot different on this debate when your kid is sitting.  As you say they develop while playing and if someone is coming in and taking that PT away they are not developing.  I can tell you what happens to a lot of these kids is they leave the game.  Not all develop at the same time and those with late birthdays often are behind especially at younger ages.  The CPP is very easy to abuse especially when playing down.  I agree with BWG that its not all bad and focus should be on improvements.  

One of the other biggest problems with CPP touched on but not the focus in most of this is the skewing of relegation/promotion based on bringing in ringers.  Yes you may get better by playing the better competition but what is wrong with a team rightfully earning promotion in their division against those actual teams in their division and playing a whole next season in the upper level.  Say they miss out on a promotion to a Big club bringing down players to get a win for their club.  For independent or small club teams trying to work their way up is a long slow process.  It will likely take at least 3 years from a team to move from D3 to D1 without any hiccups in the process.  Big clubs usually have a lot more power to get teams at a higher level from the start than the small club.  

While I do not blame a parent for looking out for their DD first  (Yes, I mean you HH) you are much less likely to have an unbiased opinion on this than those with no dog in the fight.  From what I have read on here the CPP has been abused.  Not always but obviously way more often than not.  I love the idea of transparency and a list of which clubs are playing up and playing down and how many.  Coaches also have their club and income to worry about and do not have all the players best interest in mind in this debate either. I would only allow playing up and limit the number of times per player per season.

Yes! You nailed it. And therein lies an unintended (or intended?) potential consequence of causing some of those teams to fold due to players/parents not wanting to have to endure that long slow process. As top players leave to play at that higher level immediately, the independent/small club team could/would diminish in status and potentially fold. This is a real concern I have possibly affecting our team. Not putting that all on CPP, but is an added contributing factor.

KnKsDad - If you liked that post here is another addressing the same from another thread about CPP on this fowum.  There are too many to keep up with. My comments are in bold Italic.

bwgophers wrote:

gimeemore wrote:"Why aren't we seeing the same first hand accounts from people who's DD's have been benched for CPP players?"

So we have heard from a few that have had playing time effected due to CPP. On the flip side, is there anyone out there brave enough to share their story about their DD playing on another of their club teams on a CPP?  Wondering if there is that perspective available.

Where?

Hard practice talked about his DD losing playing time to guest players in academy, not CPP in select.  Then he talked about a case where players from his own club didn't get CPP'd to a higher level team, in favor of a guest player (not a CPP player).  So again, while they may be similar in nature, and I may be splitting hairs, these are not direct examples of kids in select (where they are bound by contracts vs. the free-for-all-you-can-switch-teams-at-any-time world of academy) losing playing time on their own team, because a CPP player was brought in.

Actually my DD's are both in college now and I said the incident was pre CPP because it (CPP) didn't exist at that time.  I have however seen the whole cycle of multiple youth sports from many sides (coach, parent, star, and not a star) and know there are many constants.  The most consistant is parents will care about their DD the most.  Second is they will want to win.  Niether are bad but you just have to be aware of how they bias the opinions they spout.  One of the most absolute is some coaches will find a way around rules.  For example the only play up was instituted where we are from.  Yep, coaches just rostered their dual players to the lower team.  You can make it harder to get around for example the best solution is limiting the number of times a player can CPP but they will probably come up with something you never thought of before to skirt that.


Now Packrabbit says that kids from Sting North clearly lost playing time, but he didn't say that his/her kid lost playing time, and also didn't specify if the kids or parents of those kids were markedly upset over the situation, and if so, did they leave the team, or threaten to leave the team as a direct result of this, or, were they totally fine (or even grudgingly fine) with riding the pine in this case because the CPP players were helping to prevent their team from being relegated?

See my comments above about parenst.  As long as they are winning and it is not their DD who loses time most are OK with bringing in a ringer.  Some will not be crazy about it but few will rock the boat if THEIR kid is happy and the team is winning.  Those who are unhappy as others said fear losing all playing time, their daughter being picked on for speaking up and just sit quietly or leave.

The loudest cries about CPP are understandably coming from the parents on the teams that feel that they didn't win a game that they should have, because their opponent brought in ringers via CPP.  I would think the second loudest cries would be coming from people who's kids lost playing time due to CPP players coming in, yet it's crickets outside of a bunch of indirect references.  Again, I'm curious as to why and would love to hear from some of these people, even if it's by PM.  Anonymity fully assured.

If anyone can say in a promotion relegation format bringing in star players creates a fair system you are kidding yourself.  Simple mathmatics of minutes says if someone from outside (CPP or otherwise) comes in to play someone else is not (maybe they are hurt or out of town but without a doubt some are sitting on the bench not playing).  In my view this is a given whether someone comes on here to talk about it or not.

My DD left two clubs over the way Guest players and CPP were used in them.  Only once did it directly effect her playing time.  I did see many instances where it effected other players.  I know most paresnts are willing to put up with it when it doesn't directly hurt their DD which is why it is so attractive to coaches/clubs.

As for if your kid is sitting there must be a reason.  Oh just wait until you get to High School soccer and beyond.

Here was a note I wrote to the dad of one of my DD's former club teammates who decided to hang up her cleats midseason this year in college.

It is really interesting to hear the comments about Rams QB Austin Davis in the news.  Favre mentioned about how he may be similar to Brady and Warner.  Some people laughed but what he was talking about was those not anointed as stars may never get to shine and become one without a chance.  Brady was a back-up firmly behind Bledsoe and Warner was in a grocery store before playing behind Trent Green.  When you complain about your kid not getting a shot so many are quick to say "ya right, they just are not good enough" when sometimes they never really got a chance.  Why did it happen?  Maybe the coach preferred a different style than they played, had connections with another player/parent, the other player was faster, just a personality thing, the other player was a 4 star recruit, #1 draft pick or maybe he thought the other girl was cuter (yes the high school coach once told my daughter with his arm around the other player "Don't her eyes remind you of Mila Kunis?"), who knows.  Yes, sometimes they may not be good enough but it's good to see these examples when those not labeled good enough come through when given a chance.  One of the things that makes me dislike CPP is it is less likely that overlooked player will get that chance.

I started this thread and after 160 replies and 10700 views, I will say that as written and used by the clubs it is sanctioned cheating, pure and simple. It needs to be modified to mirror the boys rule. It is shameful that LH  has allowed sanctioned cheating to seep into the league. I know they read this forum and hopefully will have the integrity to admit their mistake and change the rule. If they don't we know that their administration of this league is a sham...

After 160 replies I have to say what we're actually arguing is the intent of the coach not the rule itself. For U11-U14 big deal, you lost a game if it means that much to you maybe it's time to take a look at your priorities. My daughter played a team that used CPP and still won. Play who's on the field. If a coach uses it too much to win and not to cover injured players then shame on them. If it's your daughter that's losing playing time I'd suggest finding another team as the coach must not think too highly of her skills.

Now for 14 and above, yeah I fully agree the rule needs changing.

It is apparent that there is very few who like CPP so time for LHGCL to step up and fix this problem.

CPPmustgoaway wrote:It is apparent that there is very few who like CPP so time for LHGCL to step up and fix this problem.

Well, there you go.  I'm sure LHGCL has simply been waiting for you to create a new avatar and search for old threads, and then tell them what to do.

This is all so simple.

silentparent wrote:

soccersounder wrote:

slrsoccer wrote:At the risk of getting slotted by you lot, I am going to go out on a limb here.  These are one persons opinions, nothing more, nothing less.

I agree that kids are a member of a "team" but do not lose sight of the fact that the "team" is a member of a "club."

There are really two choices here, play for the small club that has 1 or 2 teams in an age group or play for the larger club that may have many.  

I for one am in favor of a more YourApeeIn type club structure to which the big clubs could follow.  If they have 3 or 4 teams in an age group, let them move around, up or down.  If the 16th player on the roster on the D1 team didn't get to play in his game then why shouldn't he be able to go down and play in the D2 game?  They need the game time just as much as any other kid in the club pool.  If a player on the D3 team has been playing great then move him up to the D2 team for a week.  That doesn't mean they have to see the field, but it is a reward for putting in the effort and playing well.  

I would encourage the player movement up and down with a caveat - there has to be a limit set on the number of games a kid can play in a given period of time.  I think you could do this by the month instead of the week and say a kid can play a max of 6 games per month in the league.  This would force the club to think about player movement and actually have a strategy regarding player movement.

If you are part of a big club you should want your 25-30 best players getting plenty of game time no matter what the level.  If you are players 31-50 then you have something to work towards in training in order to get more time on the pitch.

My current "Best Post Ever"... Some serious soccer talk on this one.. Not some "don't cheat my dds 12 year old team.. And then turn around and wonder why NTX does not have more players on the National Team..

ok great! no problem. Refund my money and lets move forward with your ideas...

Did you get your money back? Have you asked for a release? Will you be re-signing with a team that plays in LH this year?

fatherofoneplayer wrote:

silentparent wrote:

soccersounder wrote:

slrsoccer wrote:At the risk of getting slotted by you lot, I am going to go out on a limb here.  These are one persons opinions, nothing more, nothing less.

I agree that kids are a member of a "team" but do not lose sight of the fact that the "team" is a member of a "club."

There are really two choices here, play for the small club that has 1 or 2 teams in an age group or play for the larger club that may have many.  

I for one am in favor of a more YourApeeIn type club structure to which the big clubs could follow.  If they have 3 or 4 teams in an age group, let them move around, up or down.  If the 16th player on the roster on the D1 team didn't get to play in his game then why shouldn't he be able to go down and play in the D2 game?  They need the game time just as much as any other kid in the club pool.  If a player on the D3 team has been playing great then move him up to the D2 team for a week.  That doesn't mean they have to see the field, but it is a reward for putting in the effort and playing well.  

I would encourage the player movement up and down with a caveat - there has to be a limit set on the number of games a kid can play in a given period of time.  I think you could do this by the month instead of the week and say a kid can play a max of 6 games per month in the league.  This would force the club to think about player movement and actually have a strategy regarding player movement.

If you are part of a big club you should want your 25-30 best players getting plenty of game time no matter what the level.  If you are players 31-50 then you have something to work towards in training in order to get more time on the pitch.

My current "Best Post Ever"... Some serious soccer talk on this one.. Not some "don't cheat my dds 12 year old team.. And then turn around and wonder why NTX does not have more players on the National Team..

ok great! no problem. Refund my money and lets move forward with your ideas...

Did you get your money back? Have you asked for a release? Will you be re-signing with a team that plays in LH this year?

nope still waiting for my check in the mail but until then we are working to get this sanctioned cheating rule modified...

This smacks so much of the "everyone should receive a trophy mentality."

Well, you can do what you want to CPP, but I will not sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America!