04's SDL scores week 6 10-16-2011

Respect is earned and not given and I do believe that tbg has earned the respect of all of the academy teams in ntx . These girls that play on this team are second to none. There are some very good clubs out there that also deserve a lot of respect also but not just because they have a big name . Tbg has earned everyone's respect on the field and people need to start taking notice of that. Tournament records are not a real assessment of a team its league games that are no guest players just the real team is playing a lot of these big name clubs take just there best player's plus 2 or 3 of the best guest players from other teams within the club or even outside of the club. All I'm saying is its time to put tbg at the top not because they are asking because they deserve it.

Nocrying wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote:The newly recruited GK was in the right spots. Although in retrospect the game was played overall by the rowdies with several more shots on goal by the rowdies. Just could not sink one in. This game was opposite of the Solar vs Rowdies, solar better team but wasn't able to stick the ball in. Ref also sucked,,, he helped block a shot and hurt a TBG player. Where does SDL find these refs....

I agree if they beat rosales or solar... TBG should be bumped up but at this time they should not move.

Ifs, shoulda, woulda, coulda gets you what FCSoccer???????? Thats why your kids will never develope.... Always an excuse! How about telling your daughter she lost! Practice harded and be ready the next time. Oh, and, do not kick it at the goalie?! >

I could care less about rankings, I just want my daughter to know she needs to "bring it" on a consistent basis no matter who shows up for our team and the other.

Did my DD improve? Yes Did TBG win? Yes.

thats all that matters!!!!!!! Just win baby.....

Your right shoulda, woulda, coulda isn't going to get the job done. Just because you win doesn't mean you look good winning. Just means you played a worse team then you. As my dd's coach tells them "Luck is not strategy!".

I am sorry it's not all about winning. It's about player & team development at this age. In the years to come it will be about winning and showing true results but at u8 it's not the age. If that is all you care about your dd won't ever be a great player in the years to come. You have to lose to become a better player. It shows the team where the break downs that are over looked by all when a team wins. I saw it first hand this weekend with my older dd's team. The won their game but looked like a train wreck out there. Of course none of the parents cared & only congratulated their child for the win. Not I my dd & I had game recap on the way home. We talked about what went wrong and how in the future to improve.

I would rather take a loss knowing we lost giving it our all and playing a great game. Then win looking sloppy and making huge mistakes because in the long run they won't learn how to truly play this sport.

TBG supporters and parents please stop posting


Coach Freddy

mejadad77 wrote:Respect is earned and not given and I do believe that tbg has earned the respect of all of the academy teams in ntx . These girls that play on this team are second to none. There are some very good clubs out there that also deserve a lot of respect also but not just because they have a big name . Tbg has earned everyone's respect on the field and people need to start taking notice of that. Tournament records are not a real assessment of a team its league games that are no guest players just the real team is playing a lot of these big name clubs take just there best player's plus 2 or 3 of the best guest players from other teams within the club or even outside of the club. All I'm saying is its time to put tbg at the top not because they are asking because they deserve it.

I know guest playing is much more common in the older age groups but I haven't seen that in tourneys in this age group this past summer. I only saw Solar using guests players when they played up. But, In this age bracket I saw most if not all using only their teams true roster. Could be wrong but the teams we played in the gold bracket that wasn't the case.

I do age just because you beat the #1 team doesn't make you automatically #1. Doesn't work like that in any sport. Sure it moves you up a spot or 2 and the number #1 could loss a spot or so. Now if you go and beat all the teams ranked higher then you earned your #1 spot.

TBG congrats on the win! I have no dog in this fight and wasn't at the game to give my $.02 but will give congrats to both teams as it sounds like it was a good game.

Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

mejadad77 wrote:Tournament records are not a real assessment of a team its league games that are no guest players just the real team is playing a lot of these big name clubs take just there best player's plus 2 or 3 of the best guest players from other teams within the club or even outside of the club.

Hmmm. Not sure I agree with this statement at all. We have seen at least 3 SDL league teams magically get A LOT better in the second half while also watching their bench grow by 4 to 5 kids. Now we play in the D3 table so it's obvious the other coach is playing kids from his top team against us which is great as it makes our girls play harder. Actually, to be accurate, one team played their top kids in the first half then pulled them in the second half as they had a game right after ours.

This may not happen as much with D1 teams... but if I were to guess I'd say SDL rosters change quite a bit as league play progresses.

Finally, I do believe tournaments are the true measuring stick of where teams are. Any team can have an off day in league play (or be missing a sick kid or two)... but when you play 3 to 5 games over the course of a 2 day tourney you really see what a team has.

With this said, all this debating about who is #1, etc. will work itself out nicely as the season finishes. In fact, DT North Manchester plays TBG Elite this coming Sunday at 5 PM on SDL East Field 7. And TBG Elite then plays Solar Kenn on 11/6. If they win those two games they stand alone at the top of the table. It's really as simple as that.

True...

TBGsoccer wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote:The newly recruited GK was in the right spots. Although in retrospect the game was played overall by the rowdies with several more shots on goal by the rowdies. Just could not sink one in. This game was opposite of the Solar vs Rowdies, solar better team but wasn't able to stick the ball in. Ref also sucked,,, he helped block a shot and hurt a TBG player. Where does SDL find these refs....

I agree if they beat rosales or solar... TBG should be bumped up but at this time they should not move.

wow you surprise me everytime you post something its almost like you have a personal grudge with TBG if it was any of the other teams that won they would get bumped up so its only right every team gets the same respect. lets clear this up i was not going to give my opinion but sense you gave yours i will give an more accurate opinion as a coach which is more reliable then just a spectators.rowdies are a great team alot of skill but like Ive said in the past pressure the skill and thats what we did and we also made short passes to the rowdies long passes two different styles rowdies had alot of shots but tbg put the pressure on and did not let them shoot correctly so when u say rowdies over all played better it makes you sound like you dont know soccer.TBG had the upper hand this game.rowdies played very well nothing negative to say about them.thats soccer oh yeah I almost forgot good game tactics.

No grudges against you coach or the team... I am just bringing my point of view to the forum. Its my opinion/experience coaches playing top teams play with their top players for all or most of the game and leave the rest on the bench. I am sure many parents on this forum have seen this tactic. I would not understimate you will do the same for DT Rosales and Solar since they too will now do the same.

FCsoccer1 wrote: Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

Yep, it's called rec.

Games should be a reflection of what is taught in practice. It can take 2-3 calls of a player's name on a dead-ball just to get their attention to sub them out. Exactly how much critical instruction do you think kids this age are taking while the game is in mid-flow?

If players hustle hard, concentrate and apply themselves in practice, then they should be rewarded with game time even if they might not be the strongest players. But to suggest the weakest players will play equal time with the strongest players is self-defeating in terms of growing a team. Where's the reward principle for working hard in practices and games if you know you're going to get 50% regardless? If a player turns up to a game tardy, slacks off in warm-up, can't pay attention, puts in minimal effort, etc. you really think they deserve the same amount of playtime as a kid who is hustling their butt off?

Socialism doesn't work in sports in the same way as it doesn't work in the real world.

My argument is this, if a team is division 1, 2, or 3 then those teams should fill their rosters with the appropriate player/s. What I have seen is many of these teams play differently against other opponents of the same division. One case in point is the one I am mentioning where teams competing for top spot will sit out their weakest players during matches, in which case why are those players even there to begin with if they can't be used to subtitute a player. Are they there to bring down the cost of the tournament?

I do think everyone at this age deserves 50% or more. This is academy, parents put their kids in clubs because they know their kids have something. Are all kids at the same level? No, but they should be fitted in the right division so they can play and develop.

FCsoccer1 wrote:My argument is this, if a team is division 1, 2, or 3 then those teams should fill their rosters with the appropriate player/s. What I have seen is many of these teams play differently against other opponents of the same division. One case in point is the one I am mentioning where teams competing for top spot will sit out their weakest players during matches, in which case why are those players even there to begin with if they can't be used to subtitute a player. Are they there to bring down the cost of the tournament?

I do think everyone at this age deserves 50% or more. This is academy, parents put their kids in clubs because they know their kids have something. Are all kids at the same level? No, but they should be fitted in the right division so they can play and develop.

I will say that every coach would love to have a team where at every kid gets to play 75%+. With new kids coming on board, it sometimes takes a while to get those player up to speed. Long term though, bench sitting benefits nobody and a new team should be found for the player. No player should be used to keep the cost down, I agree with that. Most teams though are in that state of change where they are trying out new kids, have kids who they can give substantially more time to against weaker teams but not the stronger teams, etc. A lot of teams also, especially in academy, have those kids who come out, try out and show some promise then descend into treating it like rec. and they need to find another team where that type of approach is ok'd. You can spot potential pretty quickly in a player and so a coach will take a kid on based upon that. What you can't spot without time under your belt is whether that player/parent will ever put in the hard work to realize that potential.

wolf2.0 wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote:My argument is this, if a team is division 1, 2, or 3 then those teams should fill their rosters with the appropriate player/s. What I have seen is many of these teams play differently against other opponents of the same division. One case in point is the one I am mentioning where teams competing for top spot will sit out their weakest players during matches, in which case why are those players even there to begin with if they can't be used to subtitute a player. Are they there to bring down the cost of the tournament?

I do think everyone at this age deserves 50% or more. This is academy, parents put their kids in clubs because they know their kids have something. Are all kids at the same level? No, but they should be fitted in the right division so they can play and develop.

I will say that every coach would love to have a team where at every kid gets to play 75%+. With new kids coming on board, it sometimes takes a while to get those player up to speed. Long term though, bench sitting benefits nobody and a new team should be found for the player. No player should be used to keep the cost down, I agree with that. Most teams though are in that state of change where they are trying out new kids, have kids who they can give substantially more time to against weaker teams but not the stronger teams, etc. A lot of teams also, especially in academy, have those kids who come out, try out and show some promise then descend into treating it like rec. and they need to find another team where that type of approach is ok'd. You can spot potential pretty quickly in a player and so a coach will take a kid on based upon that. What you can't spot without time under your belt is whether that player/parent will ever put in the hard work to realize that potential.

Very well said.

FCsoccer1 wrote: Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

Could not disagree with you more. There is no guarantee of playing time when you sign up for a team. You pay for training, league fees, practice fields, etc. Some leagues do require minimum playing time for each game but it is usually only a few minutes a game. I take it your DD plays less than 50%. How about use that as motivation to get better? If you want equal playing time, rec or other academy teams are available. If you are not happy, you can leave for a team that fits your needs. There will always be a competitive environment for the top teams with the best players. The best and hardest working players deserve the most play time.

if a DD isn't playing enough on an academy team then she would be best served playing on team that is maybe not as tough. It is up to the player to be at the level of the other players on any given team not the job of the team to play at hers. I think at parents we are often sidetracked by this top team or that one and it really doesn't matter. The kids need to play in an enviornment in which what they do on the field matters. This is not the age to "step it up" This is the age to play and learn. I think coaches should have multiple teams so that they can keep the teams balanced. It is very easy to spread playtime around to kids at an equal level. The problem becomes when they are not equal. It is not Bennet or any other coaches job to make sure every kid plays "enough" minutes. It is the parents job to find another team when they feel their DD isn't playing enough. There are plenty of teams and some good coaches. I think LW is great, Bennet, apparently Deleon, I thought Kenn was doing a great job. Texans south has some nice work going on. Talon (keegan)over at LP I am sure there are others.

2good4u wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote: Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

Could not disagree with you more. There is no guarantee of playing time when you sign up for a team. You pay for training, league fees, practice fields, etc. Some leagues do require minimum playing time for each game but it is usually only a few minutes a game. I take it your DD plays less than 50%. How about use that as motivation to get better? If you want equal playing time, rec or other academy teams are available. If you are not happy, you can leave for a team that fits your needs. There will always be a competitive environment for the top teams with the best players. The best and hardest working players deserve the most play time.

Actually my DD plays quite a lot but It doesn't stop me from caring about the other players in my team and in others, these are kids we want to progress. See G099 comments.... I do think parents and coaches should resolve player abilities. I personally would not want to be on a team where "winning" is the objective at this age. I move my dd from rec to academy because she needed to be matched with the right group. I did this by looking how my dd compared with the others on a team and I also discussed it with the coach. If for some reason I saw my DD was not up to par I'd move her down, and I would think the coach would recommend the same. But reality is this isn't happenning in clubs, maybe its because some coaches don't want the loosing/lower team. But I think spreading the girls in right division would resolve what I am discussing.

I don't know why the coaches don't do it or the parents don't step up and do it. In the end it is actually the kid who suffers. Although I have been told by parent that "they don't care, their kid won't even be playing soccer later anyway so who cares about development. They want them to be on a top team and winning now so they can enjoy it". And to be fair to the coaches, I once talked to a boys coach who said the hardest part and the part that he hated about the job was to tell a kid and parent that they were not ready for this level "yet". It's tough and can't be a good feeling.

yep, i've seen this case first hand as well as others. I guess we can't really solve it today but perhaps someone is reading this and will take something from it.

go99 wrote:I don't know why the coaches don't do it or the parents don't step up and do it. In the end it is actually the kid who suffers. Although I have been told by parent that "they don't care, their kid won't even be playing soccer later anyway so who cares about development. They want them to be on a top team and winning now so they can enjoy it". And to be fair to the coaches, I once talked to a boys coach who said the hardest part and the part that he hated about the job was to tell a kid and parent that they were not ready for this level "yet". It's tough and can't be a good feeling.

No doubt a tough message to deliver. Truth is, many coaches don't 'cut' players because each player represents a monthly check. The more players you have, the more you get paid. You can even find many cases where the weakest players generate the biggest income for the coach because the weaker players are encouraged to take private skills to improve their position/play time.

Keeping the right talent balance on a team is tough...the right balance to develop, the right balance to win, the right balance to attract more talent as rosters grow, the right balance for parents to stay put, the right balance to make the car and rent payments. That's on the coaching side of things.

The parent side of things is actually more complicated. What is right for our dd is actually pretty individualized. What makes the Academy soccer experience good for each kid is a mix of things - soccer development, friends, coach compatibility, fun, winning (yep - winning is fun), individual skill development, team strategy and field awareness development, fitting in (athletically and personally), etc., etc., etc. So it might be tough for the coach, but i think it's actually much more complicated for the parents.

wolf2.0 wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote: Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

Yep, it's called rec.

Games should be a reflection of what is taught in practice. It can take 2-3 calls of a player's name on a dead-ball just to get their attention to sub them out. Exactly how much critical instruction do you think kids this age are taking while the game is in mid-flow?

If players hustle hard, concentrate and apply themselves in practice, then they should be rewarded with game time even if they might not be the strongest players. But to suggest the weakest players will play equal time with the strongest players is self-defeating in terms of growing a team. Where's the reward principle for working hard in practices and games if you know you're going to get 50% regardless? If a player turns up to a game tardy, slacks off in warm-up, can't pay attention, puts in minimal effort, etc. you really think they deserve the same amount of playtime as a kid who is hustling their butt off?

Socialism doesn't work in sports in the same way as it doesn't work in the real world.

lol socialism in sports or society!!! im proud of you- good game patriot , god bless you- i truly mean that

pettyyack wrote:

wolf2.0 wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote: Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

Yep, it's called rec.

Games should be a reflection of what is taught in practice. It can take 2-3 calls of a player's name on a dead-ball just to get their attention to sub them out. Exactly how much critical instruction do you think kids this age are taking while the game is in mid-flow?

If players hustle hard, concentrate and apply themselves in practice, then they should be rewarded with game time even if they might not be the strongest players. But to suggest the weakest players will play equal time with the strongest players is self-defeating in terms of growing a team. Where's the reward principle for working hard in practices and games if you know you're going to get 50% regardless? If a player turns up to a game tardy, slacks off in warm-up, can't pay attention, puts in minimal effort, etc. you really think they deserve the same amount of playtime as a kid who is hustling their butt off?

Socialism doesn't work in sports in the same way as it doesn't work in the real world.

lol socialism in sports or society!!! im proud of you- good game patriot , god bless you- i truly mean that

Socialism is the equal sharing of misery!
Winston Churchill

RoidRage wrote:

pettyyack wrote:

wolf2.0 wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote: Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

Yep, it's called rec.

Games should be a reflection of what is taught in practice. It can take 2-3 calls of a player's name on a dead-ball just to get their attention to sub them out. Exactly how much critical instruction do you think kids this age are taking while the game is in mid-flow?

If players hustle hard, concentrate and apply themselves in practice, then they should be rewarded with game time even if they might not be the strongest players. But to suggest the weakest players will play equal time with the strongest players is self-defeating in terms of growing a team. Where's the reward principle for working hard in practices and games if you know you're going to get 50% regardless? If a player turns up to a game tardy, slacks off in warm-up, can't pay attention, puts in minimal effort, etc. you really think they deserve the same amount of playtime as a kid who is hustling their butt off?

Socialism doesn't work in sports in the same way as it doesn't work in the real world.

lol socialism in sports or society!!! im proud of you- good game patriot , god bless you- i truly mean that

Socialism is the equal sharing of misery!
Winston Churchill

Or as Margaret Thatcher put it: "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money!"

wolf2.0 wrote:

RoidRage wrote:

pettyyack wrote:

wolf2.0 wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote: Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

Yep, it's called rec.


Games should be a reflection of what is taught in practice. It can take 2-3 calls of a player's name on a dead-ball just to get their attention to sub them out. Exactly how much critical instruction do you think kids this age are taking while the game is in mid-flow?

If players hustle hard, concentrate and apply themselves in practice, then they should be rewarded with game time even if they might not be the strongest players. But to suggest the weakest players will play equal time with the strongest players is self-defeating in terms of growing a team. Where's the reward principle for working hard in practices and games if you know you're going to get 50% regardless? If a player turns up to a game tardy, slacks off in warm-up, can't pay attention, puts in minimal effort, etc. you really think they deserve the same amount of playtime as a kid who is hustling their butt off?

Socialism doesn't work in sports in the same way as it doesn't work in the real world.

lol socialism in sports or society!!! im proud of you- good game patriot , god bless you- i truly mean that

Socialism is the equal sharing of misery!
Winston Churchill

Or as Margaret Thatcher put it: "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money!"

i love the quotes but great britian hasnt been great sense america busted that fabian socialist booty- please dont use the quotes of the british anymore lol their just britian now- theres nothing great about them anymore even their antisocialist quotes- they fell to the socialist so lets use american quotes lol

pettyyack wrote:

wolf2.0 wrote:

RoidRage wrote:

pettyyack wrote:

wolf2.0 wrote:

FCsoccer1 wrote: Good job on the win. TBG played for the win and will continue to do so against Solar and DT Rosales.

I will not point out this particular team because I have seen other teams (top teams) do the same thing. But if winning means leaving the weak players on the bench for most/all of the game, I have no doubt teams will win.

Show me a team that can play all their players.

I really would like to see a club that tries to develop players not only in practice but in games. Everyone pays their fair share to play 50% of the game.

Yep, it's called rec.


Games should be a reflection of what is taught in practice. It can take 2-3 calls of a player's name on a dead-ball just to get their attention to sub them out. Exactly how much critical instruction do you think kids this age are taking while the game is in mid-flow?

If players hustle hard, concentrate and apply themselves in practice, then they should be rewarded with game time even if they might not be the strongest players. But to suggest the weakest players will play equal time with the strongest players is self-defeating in terms of growing a team. Where's the reward principle for working hard in practices and games if you know you're going to get 50% regardless? If a player turns up to a game tardy, slacks off in warm-up, can't pay attention, puts in minimal effort, etc. you really think they deserve the same amount of playtime as a kid who is hustling their butt off?

Socialism doesn't work in sports in the same way as it doesn't work in the real world.

lol socialism in sports or society!!! im proud of you- good game patriot , god bless you- i truly mean that

Socialism is the equal sharing of misery!
Winston Churchill

Or as Margaret Thatcher put it: "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money!"

i love the quotes but great britian hasnt been great sense america busted that fabian socialist booty- please dont use the quotes of the british anymore lol their just britian now- theres nothing great about them anymore even their antisocialist quotes- they fell to the socialist so lets use american quotes lol

I love the quotes but Great Britain hasn't been 'great' since America busted that Fabian socialist booty. Please don't use the quotes of the British anymore, lol, they're just 'Britain' now. There's nothing 'great' about them anymore, even their anti-socialism quotes. They fell to socialism so let's use American quotes, lol.

Fixed for you. My cat had problems reading the first version.

[img][/img]

My dad is English, pettyack, in the words of his Irish mom, FECK YOU!

....at least their kids have health coverage, something this great State of ours is failing our children, not to mention having the worst child abuse rates in the industrialized world. We ain't all Perfect, so let's not be rude to other folks.

Master Bates wrote:....at least their kids have health coverage, something this great State of ours is failing our children, not to mention having the worst child abuse rates in the industrialized world. We ain't all Perfect, so let's not be rude to other folks.

im sorry to hear about your father being british- secondly mr.master bates this is america if you want socialized medicine or health care go to europe- we have winners and loosers in america, thank god- as for the child abuse rate i want to see what poll or study gave you that idea- im sure it was a socialist marxist poll done in new york city or LA- thats pushing for another govt hand out program payed for by your tax dollars to mentor children and parents lol- how in gods name do you know what other countries around the world are doing to their children? then again you are mr.masterbates- i thank you for the conversation though- when does your flight leave for your trip to protest wallstreet or are you just going downtown?