Lh going to roster of 18?

Anyone heard this?

For U13 yes, but not heard that for upcoming U12.

Maybe check the rules under team formation:

Click Here

And the short answer is yes.

So that is a new change for this year for the U12 group. Guess it's more potential $ for clubs.

......this should now give the 12th-18th players more development/playing time correct?

All about development, same as CPP:)

Wait a minute - doesn't PPL allow rosters as low as 12 but as high as 18?  Not sure the problem...  I think moving to an 18 person roster becomes an issue only if the coach decides to carry a full 18.  If they carry only 16 leaving 2 spots open for potential "stragglers" then nothing changes and development stays the same right?  This is ALL about the coach.  It may also allow a coach to retain a player he might have otherwise cut so that player is getting quality training right?  I believe PPL actually runs 18 to a roster right out of the gates from U11...  this becomes a coaching dilemma and will land solely on the coaches shoulders as to how many they put on a roster - however, I assume they'll hear a lot more belly-achin' about playing time from parents if they DO carry 18.

PPL allows rosters of 18 but doesn't allow CPP (club player pass).

CBTeamworks wrote:PPL allows rosters of 18 but doesn't allow CPP (club player pass).

True...  that does make a difference...

What are the pros and cons with a league that allows an 18 member roster as well as the luxury of CPP? Who benefits and who is negatively impacted?

CBTeamworks wrote:What are the pros and cons with a league that allows an 18 member roster as well as the luxury of CPP? Who benefits and who is negatively impacted?

Cons:
When you allow both..the league and clubs with multiple teams. Possibly the coach if they are compensated for 2 more players. That's it.  Any 04 lh teams already go to 18?  18 is really not that big of a deal if they change cpp.

Of course a short roster is rarely the reason a team uses CPP. Or should I say it may be the "reason", but not the real reason.

CBTeamworks wrote:What are the pros and cons with a league that allows an 18 member roster as well as the luxury of CPP? Who benefits and who is negatively impacted?

Teams that had a successful year in PPL won't be forced to cut anyone to try out for LH QT.

fangbracken wrote:

CBTeamworks wrote:What are the pros and cons with a league that allows an 18 member roster as well as the luxury of CPP? Who benefits and who is negatively impacted?

Teams that had a successful year in PPL won't be forced to cut anyone to try out for LH QT.

That's a good reason to have uniformity of a roster max of 18 but doesn't speak to CPP or 18 + CPP. Good point on uniformity of roster max's. That helps team stability.

As the girls get older, injuries become a larger factor. I know our team had at least one girl injured most of the year. That will escalate. 18 helps that. No doubt though if your child is in that 14-18 spot she will see less time. But no coach requires you to sign. Find a team where this isnt a problem for you and stop blaming the coaches. Perhaps your kid isn't really D1 quality!!

dreadpirateroberts wrote:As the girls get older, injuries become a larger factor.  I know our team had at least one girl injured most of the year.  That will escalate.  18 helps that.  No doubt though if your child is in that 14-18 spot she will see less time.  But no coach requires you to sign.  Find a team where this isnt a problem for you and stop blaming the coaches.  Perhaps your kid isn't really D1 quality!!

Unless you play Rec....Playing time is a concern on ALL Competitive teams.  You are also implying that every D1 player get equal playing time....which is definitely not the case.

We all complain about development here in North TX.....but IMO, riding the bench (12th-18th) does not develop a player?  Yeah you get to Practice...but very little play time.

What ever happened to kids being asked to work hard in practice, put in extra skills, maybe get extra play in futsal or 3v3's to move up the ladder to increase playing time.

Just for the record.....

I would probably be in favor of 18 on the roster for uniformity reasons:
LHGCL - 18
PPL - 18
APL - 18

But only if they ELIMINATED Club Player Pass (CPP) in every League.

That's not going to happen, so what are you going to do next.

Zizou wrote:That's not going to happen, so what are you going to do next.

Yeah I know, right  So my vote would be NO then (as if I get a voice in the matter  ).

Debatable comment:  A coach is doing a disservice to their 12th-16th player to have CPP.  But now your telling me the coach gets to move that number out 2 spots to 18th.

If you start your own league they will come.

SocDad wrote:

dreadpirateroberts wrote:As the girls get older, injuries become a larger factor.  I know our team had at least one girl injured most of the year.  That will escalate.  18 helps that.  No doubt though if your child is in that 14-18 spot she will see less time.  But no coach requires you to sign.  Find a team where this isnt a problem for you and stop blaming the coaches.  Perhaps your kid isn't really D1 quality!!

Unless you play Rec....Playing time is a concern on ALL Competitive teams.  You are also implying that every D1 player get equal playing time....which is definitely not the case.

We all complain about development here in North TX.....but IMO, riding the bench (12th-18th) does not develop a player?  Yeah you get to Practice...but very little play time.

I am implying quite the opposite. I am saying if your kid is sitting 15-18 on the roster, perhaps she is on the wrong team. What's the point of sitting on the bench of a top team, or any team? Move down and get playing time. There will always be people willing to take those spots, but I never understand why. Maybe the coaching and practice is great, but nothing replaces playing time.

I agree that if a kid is 16-18 on a roster that she could benefit from more playing time on a less competitive team in order to aid development. However if the kid is in the rotation in the 12-15 position in terms of playing time then instead of jumping teams it's an opportunity to motivate the kid to improve to the point that she's in the starting lineup. This assumes that the coach is reasonable, has an open mind about all the players, continually re-evaluates the players and doesn't just go with what was true on the first day of the season.

dreadpirateroberts wrote:

SocDad wrote:

dreadpirateroberts wrote:As the girls get older, injuries become a larger factor.  I know our team had at least one girl injured most of the year.  That will escalate.  18 helps that.  No doubt though if your child is in that 14-18 spot she will see less time.  But no coach requires you to sign.  Find a team where this isnt a problem for you and stop blaming the coaches.  Perhaps your kid isn't really D1 quality!!

Unless you play Rec....Playing time is a concern on ALL Competitive teams.  You are also implying that every D1 player get equal playing time....which is definitely not the case.

We all complain about development here in North TX.....but IMO, riding the bench (12th-18th) does not develop a player?  Yeah you get to Practice...but very little play time.

I am implying quite the opposite.  I am saying if your kid is sitting 15-18 on the roster, perhaps she is on the wrong team.  What's the point of sitting on the bench of a top team, or any team?  Move down and get playing time.  There will always be people willing to take those spots, but I never understand why.  Maybe the coaching and practice is great, but nothing replaces playing time.

I'm following ya.

Honestly, we need to weed out those players that just want to ride the bench!!!  (It boggles my mind that this even happens)(so listen up parents...if your kid does not get ample PT....move to a different team, even if its a lessor team!)

Also, If the coach knows they are not going to give them ample playing time.....the coach should also cut them....because it also makes the coach look negatively....(by accepting them and their $$$). I realize this is one is a touchy/debatable topic.

CBTeamworks wrote:I agree that if a kid is 16-18 on a roster that she could benefit from more playing time on a less competitive team in order to aid development. However if the kid is in the rotation in the 12-15 position in terms of playing time then instead of jumping teams it's an opportunity to motivate the kid to improve to the point that she's in the starting lineup. This assumes that the coach is reasonable, has an open mind about all the players, continually re-evaluates the players and doesn't just go with what was true on the first day of the season.

+1