Tournament Tipping Point?

[Grace T.]

There will always be a tournament. If USSOCCER said stop tournaments, clubs would call it a gathering of the better than better teams.

If the initiatives were to become mandatory, clubs could do these gatherings but it would have to kind of like AYSO does U8 and below....everybody is sort of aware of the rankings and who finished first and who finished last but no one gets a trophy or other reward and it's not officially acknowledged. Otherwise, the idea is they'd get sanctioned.

And it's not necessarily clear that tournaments would be structured that way (though I admit the market for trophies seem to suggest it, because the parents want them and the coaches need the mandatory recruiting picture with the medals). AYSO United, for example, does an end of season gathering where United teams scrimmage other United teams.

 

[justified]

While I do think that the obsession in the US with winning and standings (some as a result of structural issues, some cultural) is having a negative impact on US soccer development, I'm agnostic on the entire trophy/tournaments thing. My point is while I appreciate the poster's complains about CalSouth (and agree with them), federalizing the thing will likely have results that weren't anticipated, including doing away with tournaments (at least as far as we know them) for the youngers.

Fair point. The Southern California population is huge, it's an anomaly compared to the rest of the USA in terms of the amount of teams, clubs, talent, climate, etc. Federalizing it is impossible and not the goal. Think guidelines and standards and expectations as is done in the academy system. Just think of some positives that benefit players and their families if the focus was shifted to an environment focused on players and not one that is based on increasing the bottom line: more $ to educate referees, coach training over and above what is currently provided, support for clubs to focus more on all players (within reason). Yes the academy model is far from perfect, but at least you know what to expect because there are rules that are closer to enforceable, as opposed to a random email coming from an invisible administrator telling everyone to move their chairs back this weekend and don't get drunk and yell at the refs or something will happen. It is impossible to fathom the positives that could come from a shift away from a model that is exclusively based on profit, controlled by an entity that is not exclusively for profit. Given the current climate, it is impossible to fathom how it could even work, but when you reach a tipping point, something needs to change.

 

[Surfref]

Are we at a tipping point of tournament saturation?
Maybe it's this way every year and I haven't paid attention.

With a few exceptions, it seems that every tournament is:
1. Begging for teams to sign up a week before.
2. Has filled brackets mostly with teams from their club/sister club
3. Has moved a team up an age group to fill in.
4. Just leaves an open spot.
5. Only have 1 bracket of 4 teams. Or 2 brackets of 3 teams with top points moving to the final (When the draw you get has a big impact).

You just have not paid attention. I remember back 10-15 years ago tournaments were asking for teams just like now.

 

[LASTMAN14]

Btw, I probably received 50 emails over the summer (and emails are still coming in this week) with Directors almost begging to fill spots; some of them sent multiple emails almost every day for a week.

Saturation.

I’m not a DOC or a coach. And, I get the same emails.

 

[Dirtnap]

Here's an example of a tournament that is coming up in 2 weeks. Still a few weeks until kickoff, so things could change. But registration closed.
CDA Slammers FC Toyota of Orange Classic.
186 Teams are listed.

• 150 girls
• 36 Boys

On the girls side, of the 150 teams 96 of them have some form of "Slammer" in their name. I don't think teams are forced to play in an affiliate tourney, but I'm sure they are encouraged.

On the girls side, there are 11 age groups and 24 total brackets. Of those 24 brackets, only 4 of them have more non-Slammers teams. 4 of them are even. 15 0f them have more Slammers than non-slammers.

I could "nerd out" a bit more, but I'll leave it for now.

Why not just grab a bunch of fields and call it "Slammers Friendly Day" and just have all of the various slammers teams play each other.


Anyone know the economics of this? If you play for a CDA Slammers team - Do you have to pay for this tournament?

Yep! have to pay is what I was told. the following weekend is another tournament. "Player's Cup" free if teams work it.

 

[Dirtnap]

I’m not a DOC or a coach. And, I get the same emails.

as do I.

 

[LASTMAN14]

as do I.

Wish they’d just go to junk mail.

 

[dk_b]

Really interesting thread. So many areas to discuss but I will limit to this: the sheer volume of games and the risks that flow from that.

We have so much more knowledge today than in the past (not even the distant past) regarding the connection of tired muscles (whether overuse over time or more acutely after a period of heavy use). Playing 2 games in a day over multiple days is really risky - the cumulative wear, tear and fatigue, followed by practices followed by another weekend of multiple games . . . it is a bad recipe, especially if you have a daughter and she enters the prime ACL risk age. Even when halves are shortened to, say, 30 mins - that is still 120 mins/day over multiple days. This is far more than the fittest adult would be playing in a competitive environment. But, what's the response?

Fewer Tournaments - you could have policies that prohibit more than 2 tourneys in a 4 week span and/or prohibit tourneys on 3 consecutive weekends. But who can enforce that? Do people get pissed when yet another rule takes agency from them?

Fewer Games - prohibit allowing 2 games/day OR prohibit 2 games/day on more than 1 day of an event. Well, that pretty much kills invitationals OR requires more days at the event with the ensuing costs (fields, officials, vendors, hotel, meals, car rental if traveling, etc.). Does it effectively turn all invitationals into showcases? Does it mean that fewer teams will come from afar? That would not necessarily be a bad thing for all of you in SoCal - there are so many teams at every level that you can still have competitive events (it might even be better) - but it impacts teams from other areas who might head your way (or even our way (I'm in NorCal)) to find proper competition. By reducing travel, would the entire college scouting component be gutted? The college coaches would probably like that - it takes a budgetary decision from them - but it also means that the need to scout the in-season showcases/post-season playoffs a bit more closely (which is probably also not a bad thing since you get more apples-to-apples comparisons).

I am not sure what the solutions are though I think, as with many things, we (parents, players, coaches, DOCs, tournament organizers) need something to protect ourselves from ourselves.

 

[Paul Spacey]

Really interesting thread. So many areas to discuss but I will limit to this: the sheer volume of games and the risks that flow from that.

We have so much more knowledge today than in the past (not even the distant past) regarding the connection of tired muscles (whether overuse over time or more acutely after a period of heavy use). Playing 2 games in a day over multiple days is really risky - the cumulative wear, tear and fatigue, followed by practices followed by another weekend of multiple games . . . it is a bad recipe, especially if you have a daughter and she enters the prime ACL risk age. Even when halves are shortened to, say, 30 mins - that is still 120 mins/day over multiple days. This is far more than the fittest adult would be playing in a competitive environment. But, what's the response?

Fewer Tournaments - you could have policies that prohibit more than 2 tourneys in a 4 week span and/or prohibit tourneys on 3 consecutive weekends. But who can enforce that? Do people get pissed when yet another rule takes agency from them?

Fewer Games - prohibit allowing 2 games/day OR prohibit 2 games/day on more than 1 day of an event. Well, that pretty much kills invitationals OR requires more days at the event with the ensuing costs (fields, officials, vendors, hotel, meals, car rental if traveling, etc.). Does it effectively turn all invitationals into showcases? Does it mean that fewer teams will come from afar? That would not necessarily be a bad thing for all of you in SoCal - there are so many teams at every level that you can still have competitive events (it might even be better) - but it impacts teams from other areas who might head your way (or even our way (I'm in NorCal)) to find proper competition. By reducing travel, would the entire college scouting component be gutted? The college coaches would probably like that - it takes a budgetary decision from them - but it also means that the need to scout the in-season showcases/post-season playoffs a bit more closely (which is probably also not a bad thing since you get more apples-to-apples comparisons).

I am not sure what the solutions are though I think, as with many things, we (parents, players, coaches, DOCs, tournament organizers) need something to protect ourselves from ourselves.

One of the best replies to any post I've read for a while. Spot on.

 

[timbuck]

Good stuff above.
How about this - DA won't allow multiple games in a day. And won't allow games on 3 consecutive days.
And National Cup only has 1 game per day for the olders. (I think. Someone can fact check me on this).
This leads me to believe that the "people in charge" somewhat believe that playing multiple games in a day is a bad idea.

If a kid gets hurt on the 4th game within 36 hours, is there legal recourse to say "Tournament Director should know better than to have 12 year old boys/girls playing 4 games in 36 hours."

 

[dk_b]

Good stuff above.
How about this - DA won't allow multiple games in a day. And won't allow games on 3 consecutive days.
And National Cup only has 1 game per day for the olders. (I think. Someone can fact check me on this).
This leads me to believe that the "people in charge" somewhat believe that playing multiple games in a day is a bad idea.

If a kid gets hurt on the 4th game within 36 hours, is there legal recourse to say "Tournament Director should know better than to have 12 year old boys/girls playing 4 games in 36 hours."

ECNL also does not play more than 1 game/day and does have rest days during playoffs (not during showcases). I think NPL also uses the same approach. But those certainly are different than the money-making invitational tournaments - the tournament format requires either multiple games on certain days OR many more days. That's hard to do with a large event (and even with an elite event like a GDA or ECNL showcase) - it asks a lot from the families (and even the organizers though I am less sympathetic toward them as they should be able to use to increase $$$).

The challenge with legal recourse is "causation" - it would be really difficult to say that that specific injury was due to the overscheduled event. Especially when the vast, vast majority of the players leave the event relatively unscathed.

Here's what would be interesting (if I were uber wealthy, here's a study I'd fund (the other has to do with youth baseball)): a comprehensive study of rates of play and rates of injury. For example, I'm less concerned about Day 1 or even Day 2 of an event but I am about Day 3 (with girls, a tired hammy means ACL risk goes UP (not just girls; some speculate that Klay Thompson's ACL is a direct result of having tweaked his hammy)) and I'm also really concerned about practice post-tournament or the tournament the weekend after a prior tournament (when my now 17yo was younger, her team played 4 consecutive weekends one summer (I think it was 4; may have been 3), all with 2 games/day formats; I don't recall if they did that more than once). There was ONE ACL tear following that run. Was that the cause? Was it because, like a lot of soccer players, she had really strong quads that were out of balance w/merely strong (but not really strong)? Was it a combo? A large sample-size study involving kids from all over the country, looking at #s of practice sessions, rest following competition, games/day, etc. would be fascinating and, who knows, may contribute to a more healthy approach to programming (which, in the end, leads to better players (serving all interested parties except for those who make money on volume)).

 

[SoccerFan4Life]

At the very least, the US Soccer federation should have a tournament mandate of no more than 2 games a day. This weekend our team (09) is in a tournament where could be playing 5 games in 2 days. Better yet 5 games in a 29 hour span with only 2 subs.

 

[timbuck]

ECNL also does not play more than 1 game/day and does have rest days during playoffs (not during showcases). I think NPL also uses the same approach. But those certainly are different than the money-making invitational tournaments - the tournament format requires either multiple games on certain days OR many more days. That's hard to do with a large event (and even with an elite event like a GDA or ECNL showcase) - it asks a lot from the families (and even the organizers though I am less sympathetic toward them as they should be able to use to increase $$$).

The challenge with legal recourse is "causation" - it would be really difficult to say that that specific injury was due to the overscheduled event. Especially when the vast, vast majority of the players leave the event relatively unscathed.

Here's what would be interesting (if I were uber wealthy, here's a study I'd fund (the other has to do with youth baseball)): a comprehensive study of rates of play and rates of injury. For example, I'm less concerned about Day 1 or even Day 2 of an event but I am about Day 3 (with girls, a tired hammy means ACL risk goes UP (not just girls; some speculate that Klay Thompson's ACL is a direct result of having tweaked his hammy)) and I'm also really concerned about practice post-tournament or the tournament the weekend after a prior tournament (when my now 17yo was younger, her team played 4 consecutive weekends one summer (I think it was 4; may have been 3), all with 2 games/day formats; I don't recall if they did that more than once). There was ONE ACL tear following that run. Was that the cause? Was it because, like a lot of soccer players, she had really strong quads that were out of balance w/merely strong (but not really strong)? Was it a combo? A large sample-size study involving kids from all over the country, looking at #s of practice sessions, rest following competition, games/day, etc. would be fascinating and, who knows, may contribute to a more healthy approach to programming (which, in the end, leads to better players (serving all interested parties except for those who make money on volume)).

This was posted on another thread. Looks like a solid study is underway.
https://news.engin.umich.edu/2019/0...ter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=August_2019

“The new hope is that a change in athlete training and preparation could then limit the number of risky submaximal loading cycles,” Banaszak said. “Allowing sufficient time for soft tissue recovery during or between training bouts could prevent the accumulation of ACL micro-damage and eventual failure.

 

[dk_b]

At the very least, the US Soccer federation should have a tournament mandate of no more than 2 games a day. This weekend our team (09) is in a tournament where could be playing 5 games in 2 days. Better yet 5 games in a 29 hour span with only 2 subs.

Oh, no . . . that is really egregiously bad

 

[dk_b]

This was posted on another thread. Looks like a solid study is underway.
https://news.engin.umich.edu/2019/0...ter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=August_2019

“The new hope is that a change in athlete training and preparation could then limit the number of risky submaximal loading cycles,” Banaszak said. “Allowing sufficient time for soft tissue recovery during or between training bouts could prevent the accumulation of ACL micro-damage and eventual failure.

Thank you for sending that. That was really interesting - and interesting how they constructed the study. I'm going to send that around to some folks I know who work/research in this area (for adolescent athletes specifically). Curious what they have to say (if anything is relevant to this discussion, @timbuck , I will message you or post here).

 

[Not_that_Serious]

Wish they’d just go to junk mail.

me too along with the Barca and Madrid HURRY UP NOW 1 Spot Left for Camp @ $500...Normally $5000!

 

[Socal United]

At the very least, the US Soccer federation should have a tournament mandate of no more than 2 games a day. This weekend our team (09) is in a tournament where could be playing 5 games in 2 days. Better yet 5 games in a 29 hour span with only 2 subs.

That was why we stopped going to West Coast. We did that one year, won the tournament, and took us until league to get healthy. We didn't play it again.
I think the phrase saving ourselves from ourselves is a correct statement. I don't know of a way to curb it. I am doing way less tournaments than I ever have, in response many of the kids are playing with other teams, seeking out borrow opportunities, etc. Our club has put a 5 tournament Memorial Day to Labor Day rule, it has not gone over well across the board. I do see more and more tournaments dropping off, we have two from this weekend that are no longer. Maybe we are finally getting somewhere.

 

[RJonesUSC]

Here's an example of a tournament that is coming up in 2 weeks. Still a few weeks until kickoff, so things could change. But registration closed.
CDA Slammers FC Toyota of Orange Classic.
186 Teams are listed.

• 150 girls
• 36 Boys

On the girls side, of the 150 teams 96 of them have some form of "Slammer" in their name. I don't think teams are forced to play in an affiliate tourney, but I'm sure they are encouraged.

On the girls side, there are 11 age groups and 24 total brackets. Of those 24 brackets, only 4 of them have more non-Slammers teams. 4 of them are even. 15 0f them have more Slammers than non-slammers.

I could "nerd out" a bit more, but I'll leave it for now.

Why not just grab a bunch of fields and call it "Slammers Friendly Day" and just have all of the various slammers teams play each other.


Anyone know the economics of this? If you play for a CDA Slammers team - Do you have to pay for this tournament?

This tournament as well is looking for more girls teams to sign up. Not sure which age group they're looking for but my dd's coach was contacted.

 

[SoccerFan4Life]

That was why we stopped going to West Coast. We did that one year, won the tournament, and took us until league to get healthy. We didn't play it again.
I think the phrase saving ourselves from ourselves is a correct statement. I don't know of a way to curb it. I am doing way less tournaments than I ever have, in response many of the kids are playing with other teams, seeking out borrow opportunities, etc. Our club has put a 5 tournament Memorial Day to Labor Day rule, it has not gone over well across the board. I do see more and more tournaments dropping off, we have two from this weekend that are no longer. Maybe we are finally getting somewhere.

Yes, it’s the west coast tournament this weekend for our team. Somehow I am ok if we can just make it to the semifinals and cap it at 4 games in 25 hours. Lol.

 

[timbuck]

Looks like that tournament is about $300 cheaper for older teams than the last few years.

Is this further proof of the tipping point? Used to be able to charge a premium for a “big tournament”.