# Why do we tolerate 3+ games in 2-3 days?



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

Texting with a few friends who went to AZ last weekend (kids are Juniors in HS) and I was struck how all three of them (don't know one another) felt the current tournament structure needs to be changed.  More than two games in a weekend is not healthy (short term and long term) and does not facilitate good quality play either.  One parent's kid played 5 games, 5!,  in 3 days.  Said the early games weren't that competitive and the Final was more kickball than he had seen for his kid's team in years.  "Not getting any good video clips from that game," was his quote.

Got me to thinking...why do we allow the clubs to put our sons and daughters through it?  Although never a fan of the DA, I did appreciate their rule of no more than 2 games in 3 days.  Smart and player-thoughtful.  Eight year old kids may be able to run forever on a little field, but once we get to 11 v 11, the tournaments should no longer be about winning trophies after 5 games and simply be about providing good competitive games for players to test their development, get looks from scouts, and enjoying the team experience. 

Some will say that the tournaments are providing more games to justify travel and their fees.  But that assumes parents wouldn't travel and pay the same for two competitive games on good fields and in a attractive destination (eg, Phoenix, Las Vegas, San Diego, etc.).  I, for one, would certainly be happy to pay my 1/16 share of $1500 and spend two nights in Vegas for two high quality games.  Would you?  If so, then let your club know.  Maybe we can get an enlightened, forward-thinking club to give it a try?


----------



## futboldad1 (Jan 7, 2021)

Being formerly in DA, I really hated the idea of 4 days to play 3 games..... I'm not wealthy so prospect of the extra night in a hotel and time off work and school was very hard as a parent of younger player..... I know several parents on the team a year older than than my 2006 who agreed....

but yes 5 games in 3 days in crazy..... and don't forget some tournaments like West Coast are 5 games in 2 days!!

1 game per day for a maximum of 3 consecutive days.... 2 games in 2 days even better..... is the best balance of health/$/logistics imho..... especially as they get older


----------



## dk_b (Jan 7, 2021)

Vegas Cup’s schedule always struck me as particularly outrageous (and dangerous).  The more we know about ACL risks, the more all parents should be against the 4 to 5 game tournaments.

I think this is driven by money (more games to justify the cost - either you cram them into too few days or add disruption/lodging of rest days), a “need” for us to have “champions” (hard to do that w/only 2 games) and this idea that “kids are young, they can handle it”.  My guess: The odds that a specific kid is injured may not be significantly increased but the odds that SOME kids on Day 3 will suffer a big injury do increase.  And the chance of injury mid-week at practice or during the following weekend‘s games . . . There should be real tracking of this.


----------



## Franco2020 (Jan 7, 2021)

oh canada said:


> Texting with a few friends who went to AZ last weekend (kids are Juniors in HS) and I was struck how all three of them (don't know one another) felt the current tournament structure needs to be changed.  More than two games in a weekend is not healthy (short term and long term) and does not facilitate good quality play either.  One parent's kid played 5 games, 5!,  in 3 days.  Said the early games weren't that competitive and the Final was more kickball than he had seen for his kid's team in years.  "Not getting any good video clips from that game," was his quote.
> 
> Got me to thinking...why do we allow the clubs to put our sons and daughters through it?  Although never a fan of the DA, I did appreciate their rule of no more than 2 games in 3 days.  Smart and player-thoughtful.  Eight year old kids may be able to run forever on a little field, but once we get to 11 v 11, the tournaments should no longer be about winning trophies after 5 games and simply be about providing good competitive games for players to test their development, get looks from scouts, and enjoying the team experience.
> 
> Some will say that the tournaments are providing more games to justify travel and their fees.  But that assumes parents wouldn't travel and pay the same for two competitive games on good fields and in a attractive destination (eg, Phoenix, Las Vegas, San Diego, etc.).  I, for one, would certainly be happy to pay my 1/16 share of $1500 and spend two nights in Vegas for two high quality games.  Would you?  If so, then let your club know.  Maybe we can get an enlightened, forward-thinking club to give it a try?


The only way to address it is by shortening the games to 20 minute halves in tournaments??.  But then parents would feel  that they are not getting their money's worth and would complain of not enough playing time.  Hard issue to tackle, at the High School level is even worse, one/two games on the weekend, followed by a possible third game during the week, plus 21/2 hour training sessions all other days.   Forget finesse, its all about which warrior can grind it out the longest, is not soccer is more of a fitness test contest.   Regular league is not any better, some kids will play 2 to 3 games on a weekend and parents love it, little Johnny is getting more playing time and playing on the A, B, and C team, crazy.   Parents are then puzzled when the injuries start to set in.    Funny thing in Europe, the youth elite academies are only allowed to play one game on the weekend, the rest is training.  Crazy model in this country.


----------



## Dubs (Jan 7, 2021)

Agree.  Any "tournament format" once kids reach 13/14 is insane.


----------



## lafalafa (Jan 7, 2021)

Tournaments need to make $$$ and they won't attract enough participates if there are not "winners" that get $4 medals and $50 team trophies.

The obsession with having to crown champions in every flight in ever ages means teams need to play 9am on Monday and then 1215 same day after they already played 3 games the previous 2-3 days.

One game at day with no more than 2 consecutive days + a rest day is the best model.  If you need a 4th game that could be after the rest day.  5-6 games over 4 days is too much.   That would mean no semis which is fine, less drama get it done in group play but there are too teams in many tournaments and people won't be happy.

We sacrifice our kids heath to win basically and sometimes style of play.   Having seen the effects of 5-6 game marathons where my Player(s) need a week or more to recoup hardly seems work it.

Nice to see them get on podiums don't get me wrong but I don't like the model or they way some teams go after players physically to no end,  attempting to injury them so they have a better chance at advancing. If you can't win with skill, there is no honor in winning at all costs which is normally just a short term gambit they ends up not being great for the players in the long run.


----------



## VegasParent (Jan 7, 2021)

dk_b said:


> Vegas Cup’s schedule always struck me as particularly outrageous (and dangerous).  The more we know about ACL risks, the more all parents should be against the 4 to 5 game tournaments.


Last year at Vegas Cup Utah Avalanche girls 06 made the final and played 6 games in 3 days. That's insane.


----------



## timbuck (Jan 7, 2021)

VegasParent said:


> Last year at Vegas Cup Utah Avalanche girls 06 made the final and played 6 games in 3 days. That's insane.


And probably a late night game followed by an early morning game at least 1 of those days.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

lafalafa said:


> Tournaments need to make $$$ and they won't attract enough participates if there are not "winners" that get $4 medals and $50 team trophies.
> 
> The obsession with having to crown champions in every flight in ever ages means teams need to play 9am on Monday and then 1215 same day after they already played 3 games the previous 2-3 days.
> 
> ...


I realize that's the general consensus--that teams/families won't sign up for a 2-game weekend "tournament"--but I think that may simply be wrong, especially for the 11v11 games.  Time for a club to disrupt the status quo and give it a try!  Charge the same entry fee so the revenue will be the same.  Give us parents a chance to choose healthier and better soccer and we will reward you!


----------



## Dirtnap (Jan 7, 2021)

you will have to roll up like a D1/D2 school with 29-31 players.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

Dirtnap said:


> you will have to roll up like a D1/D2 school with 29-31 players.


i don't understand?


----------



## dk_b (Jan 7, 2021)

timbuck said:


> And probably a late night game followed by an early morning game at least 1 of those days.


I know I have seen 3 games in a 24-hr period (7p, 9a, 4p, for example - not sure if it was exactly that (it's been some years) but close)


----------



## dk_b (Jan 7, 2021)

oh canada said:


> I realize that's the general consensus--that teams/families won't sign up for a 2-game weekend "tournament"--but I think that may simply be wrong, especially for the 11v11 games.  Time for a club to disrupt the status quo and give it a try!  Charge the same entry fee so the revenue will be the same.  Give us parents a chance to choose healthier and better soccer and we will reward you!


I think that is a good comment and you may be right. But "showcases" don't have the same allure and the lengthy travel for 2 days means that fewer (not none) teams from outside the area of the tourney will show.

Don't get me wrong - some of the most fun watching my kids play has been at tournaments when the families are hanging out, much beer is consumed at night and the kids just have a blast.  Whether it was a BooFest in costume when they were little or going to my kid's first Surf Cup (when it was a bit smaller so "Best of the Best" seemed to have greater meaning) or to an ECNL showcase with scouts lining both sidelines.  I miss not having that w/my younger kids but as much as I like it, I am not sure how far we'd travel for a 2 game event and I'm not sure the 3 to 4 (or more) game weekend is worth the health risk at their age (early in the prime injury years)


----------



## Eagle33 (Jan 7, 2021)

There are plenty of Tournaments using Showcase format (3 games - 1 a day), no trophies and they are very popular.


----------



## happy9 (Jan 7, 2021)

dk_b said:


> I know I have seen 3 games in a 24-hr period (7p, 9a, 4p, for example - not sure if it was exactly that (it's been some years) but close)


Happened to me a few times with my oldest at a previous club years ago.  Played an important part in  why we left.  

While the DA showcase rules did reach deeper into your pockets, they were well intentioned.  My youngest has never played more than one game a day.  The only reason to play 2 games in a day is to "crown an champion", which appeals to many.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 7, 2021)

Dubs said:


> Agree.  Any "tournament format" once kids reach 13/14 is insane.


You just need to scale it back one way or another.

A tournament of 4 short games could be fun.  So could a 3 day event with 2 regular length games.

The stupid part is trying to squeeze 360-450 minutes of play into 2 or 3 days.


----------



## timbuck (Jan 7, 2021)

oh canada said:


> I realize that's the general consensus--that teams/families won't sign up for a 2-game weekend "tournament"--but I think that may simply be wrong, especially for the 11v11 games.  Time for a club to disrupt the status quo and give it a try!  Charge the same entry fee so the revenue will be the same.  Give us parents a chance to choose healthier and better soccer and we will reward you!


I'd love to see a tournament last a week.  Have games every other weekday.  Finals on Sunday.
Probably doesnt make sense for teams that need to travel, but for teams that live within an hour -  Evening games in the summer!!


----------



## GT45 (Jan 7, 2021)

futboldad1 said:


> Being formerly in DA, I really hated the idea of 4 days to play 3 games..... I'm not wealthy so prospect of the extra night in a hotel and time off work and school was very hard as a parent of younger player..... I know several parents on the team a year older than than my 2006 who agreed....
> 
> but yes 5 games in 3 days in crazy..... and don't forget some tournaments like West Coast are 5 games in 2 days!!
> 
> 1 game per day for a maximum of 3 consecutive days.... 2 games in 2 days even better..... is the best balance of health/$/logistics imho..... especially as they get older


These tournaments do not play full length games so be a little more realistic about this. Kids like to play. If you have a solid sized roster it is fine to play this many games.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

timbuck said:


> I'd love to see a tournament last a week.  Have games every other weekday.  Finals on Sunday.
> Probably doesnt make sense for teams that need to travel, but for teams that live within an hour -  Evening games in the summer!!


Or similar to State Cup format, just stretch it out to two weekends if all of your teams are within driving distance and you feel you need to crown a champion.  Group games on weekend one and semi's, final on weekend two.  

By the time the kids get to high school age, I honestly think they really care less about another medal in their shoebox.  It's more about the game itself and the socializing after.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

GT45 said:


> These tournaments do not play full length games so be a little more realistic about this. Kids like to play. If you have a solid sized roster it is fine to play this many games.


You must have younger kids only because once they reach 13yrs, they are playing 40-minute halves.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

Eagle33 said:


> There are plenty of Tournaments using Showcase format (3 games - 1 a day), no trophies and they are very popular.


Please share a few names -- I'm not aware of any in SoCal?


----------



## GT45 (Jan 7, 2021)

happy9 said:


> Happened to me a few times with my oldest at a previous club years ago.  Played an important part in  why we left.
> 
> While the DA showcase rules did reach deeper into your pockets, they were well intentioned.  My youngest has never played more than one game a day.  The only reason to play 2 games in a day is to "crown an champion", which appeals to many.


ECNL does not play more than one game per day either. They just do not have the day in between off like DA did, which made it hard on families financially, and hard for kids missing more class.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

GT45 said:


> ECNL does not play more than one game per day either. They just do not have the day in between off like DA did, which made it hard on families financially, and hard for kids missing more class.


True, but ask any player how they feel on that third day in a row (or coach), and if they're being honest, they will tell you 70% at best.  (if they were going 100% on day 1 and 2, of course).  You can see the dropoff on the field too.  I'd be totally fine with ECNL showcases having only 2 games over the course of 2 or 3 days.  Sounds like most parents on this thread would as well.


----------



## MacDre (Jan 7, 2021)

timbuck said:


> Probably doesnt make sense for teams that need to travel


To me it makes the most sense because if a team can’t beat other local teams, then there’s no need to travel.


----------



## watfly (Jan 7, 2021)

Personally I'm in favor of the showcase style for 11v11 games with shortened game lengths.  With shortened games I think 3 games in two days is doable.  We participated in a DA showcase a couple of years ago with this format and it was a blast (might have been 3 over 3 days).  Best part was we were purposely matched with teams we wouldn't normally play...2 from Nocal and 1 from Colorado.   I realize this may not be realistic in some cases.


----------



## watfly (Jan 7, 2021)

MacDre said:


> To me it makes the most sense because if a team can’t beat other local teams, then there’s no need to travel.


Depends on the family's motivation, whether its only about winning or more about the experience.  Our family is more about the experience, but maybe that's just because my son's team rarely wins.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 7, 2021)

MacDre said:


> To me it makes the most sense because if a team can’t beat other local teams, then there’s no need to travel.


There are no girls teams in CA who need to do overnight trips to find decent opponents.  No, not even if your kid plays ECNL.

Good thing, too.  When we hit orange, we will need a list of local opponents.


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Jan 7, 2021)

Ive never been a fan of so many tournaments.  It feels like parents are the ones that love tournaments more than kids.  Eliminate so many tournaments and you can avoid the issue of injuries with kids.   Scrimmages 2x a weekend is more than enough.


----------



## CheatingMkay (Jan 7, 2021)

oh canada said:


> Texting with a few friends who went to AZ last weekend (kids are Juniors in HS) and I was struck how all three of them (don't know one another) felt the current tournament structure needs to be changed.  More than two games in a weekend is not healthy (short term and long term) and does not facilitate good quality play either.  One parent's kid played 5 games, 5!,  in 3 days.  Said the early games weren't that competitive and the Final was more kickball than he had seen for his kid's team in years.  "Not getting any good video clips from that game," was his quote.
> 
> Got me to thinking...why do we allow the clubs to put our sons and daughters through it?  Although never a fan of the DA, I did appreciate their rule of no more than 2 games in 3 days.  Smart and player-thoughtful.  Eight year old kids may be able to run forever on a little field, but once we get to 11 v 11, the tournaments should no longer be about winning trophies after 5 games and simply be about providing good competitive games for players to test their development, get looks from scouts, and enjoying the team experience.
> 
> Some will say that the tournaments are providing more games to justify travel and their fees.  But that assumes parents wouldn't travel and pay the same for two competitive games on good fields and in a attractive destination (eg, Phoenix, Las Vegas, San Diego, etc.).  I, for one, would certainly be happy to pay my 1/16 share of $1500 and spend two nights in Vegas for two high quality games.  Would you?  If so, then let your club know.  Maybe we can get an enlightened, forward-thinking club to give it a try?


For the older ages (2006 - 2002) Surf Cup Phoenix was 1 game per day over 3 days, then shortened games on the 4th day for semis and finals. Agree that it tests the depth of many teams. What is the alternative? Would TopHat from Georgia have made the trip if they had to stay 8 days in a hotel to space out the games? Like it or not, parents, players, and coaches would all prefer to compete for a trophy, and college coaches want to see players competing for something and not just playing in a showcase where no one really cares whether they win or not.


----------



## lafalafa (Jan 7, 2021)

Eagle33 said:


> There are plenty of Tournaments using Showcase format (3 games - 1 a day), no trophies and they are very popular.


Used to be more popular but in today's covid restrictive environment spending to play out of state showcases without championships is a hard sell.  Parents have less to spend so they want more to play for.  College coaches and D1 attendance not a draw like it once was for regular tournaments.


----------



## dk_b (Jan 7, 2021)

Even shortened halves used in invitational events can be bad in the aggregate, especially if the kids have moved to the full field.  That is a lot of minutes over a relatively short period of time for developing bodies (is it worth it to play 20 min halves just so you can have a champion at the end?).  ECNL showcases playing full 90s over 3 consecutive days? It’s unhealthy for all but the GKs.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 7, 2021)

CheatingMkay said:


> For the older ages (2006 - 2002) Surf Cup Phoenix was 1 game per day over 3 days, then shortened games on the 4th day for semis and finals. Agree that it tests the depth of many teams. What is the alternative? Would TopHat from Georgia have made the trip if they had to stay 8 days in a hotel to space out the games? Like it or not, parents, players, and coaches would all prefer to compete for a trophy, and college coaches want to see players competing for something and not just playing in a showcase where no one really cares whether they win or not.


Of those 4 or 5 games, how many were worth the trip for Top Hat?

I would bet that only 2 or 3 were worth playing.   

If you don't like a 3 game showcase, do a 3 game single elimination with a losers bracket.  3 games each.  (7 elimination games plus five consolation games.)


----------



## CheatingMkay (Jan 7, 2021)

dad4 said:


> Of those 4 or 5 games, how many were worth the trip for Top Hat?
> 
> I would bet that only 2 or 3 were worth playing.
> 
> If you don't like a 3 game showcase, do a 3 game single elimination with a losers bracket.  3 games each.  (7 elimination games plus five consolation games.)


I'd suspect that wouldn't be too popular with teams, who would complain about the bracketing. Every game an elimination game - lots of Kicks from the Mark matches. But I like the creativity!


----------



## youthsportsugghhh (Jan 7, 2021)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> Ive never been a fan of so many tournaments.  It feels like parents are the ones that love tournaments more than kids.  Eliminate so many tournaments and you can avoid the issue of injuries with kids.   Scrimmages 2x a weekend is more than enough.


I wouldn't say that about the tournaments (although I would say some parents definitely enjoyed themselves on tournament weekends) -- I know my kids loved going to 4 tournaments a year at the younger ages and spending time with teammates in hotels (Vegas, SD, Reno, Sac or Manteca). 20 minute halves and 4-5 games in 3 days usually (Friday night to Sunday) and we never came across issues in body breakdown. The DA way of doing things definitely was difficult for the participants (Players and coaches) in the aspect of Financing and Academics, but the 3 games in 4 days was probably best on the bodies.  3 games in 3 days also seems doable from a health perspective as long as the teams do proper nutrition and stretching before and after the games.


----------



## GT45 (Jan 7, 2021)

dk_b said:


> Even shortened halves used in invitational events can be bad in the aggregate, especially if the kids have moved to the full field.  That is a lot of minutes over a relatively short period of time for developing bodies (is it worth it to play 20 min halves just so you can have a champion at the end?).  ECNL showcases playing full 90s over 3 consecutive days? It’s unhealthy for all but the GKs.


It is not unhealthy. You roster 18 players. There are not enough minutes to go around in only two games for 18 high school players. I swear some of you do not grasp fitness. Do the math. If your team is fit this is a non-issue.


----------



## notintheface (Jan 7, 2021)

oh canada said:


> why do we allow the clubs to put our sons and daughters through it?


$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


----------



## dk_b (Jan 7, 2021)

GT45 said:


> It is not unhealthy. You roster 18 players. There are not enough minutes to go around in only two games for 18 high school players. I swear some of you do not grasp fitness. Do the math. If your team is fit this is a non-issue.


I can do the math and completely disagree, no matter the fitness level of the players.  It is too many minutes in too short a time frame.  If it weren’t, other levels of soccer would play more concentrated schedules.  If we could fund the study, I’d wager that injury rates are correlated to this (enough sports docs consider ACLs to be overuse-related).


----------



## VegasParent (Jan 7, 2021)

timbuck said:


> And probably a late night game followed by an early morning game at least 1 of those days.


First game 1pm on Sat, final 2:45pm Monday. 6 games in that time frame.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 7, 2021)

GT45 said:


> It is not unhealthy. You roster 18 players. There are not enough minutes to go around in only two games for 18 high school players. I swear some of you do not grasp fitness. Do the math. If your team is fit this is a non-issue.


Minutes are not equally distributed, especially when the games are close. 

If you roster 18 and play 4 games, that isn't 220 minutes each.  The top players end up playing over 300 minutes each.  More if there is OT.  That probably is not healthy.


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Jan 7, 2021)

GT45 said:


> It is not unhealthy. You roster 18 players. There are not enough minutes to go around in only two games for 18 high school players. I swear some of you do not grasp fitness. Do the math. If your team is fit this is a non-issue.


My son was on a great team but he was a bench player.  He would get less than 30 minutes and starters would play almost the entire game regardless of the games during the weekend.   We often played 4 games in 2 days and these starters were exhausted.  We had a roster of 16 but 9 of them would play 70% of the minutes.


----------



## TigresFan (Jan 7, 2021)

Our team has played 4 games this season and had 2 torn acl’s and a concussion. 02/03 age group.


----------



## socalkdg (Jan 7, 2021)

Travel 7 hours each way,  pay two nights hotel, play 2 games,  do the same the following weekend to get 4 games in.   Pay to play at its finest.   So glad everyone has the time and money.  1/2 the kids on my daughters team couldn't afford this, and there are 1000's of other teams in the same boat.

This is why we have leagues and can play locally so we can get in 1-2 games per weekend for 12-14 games total.   But there are 100's of cities where this isn't even possible in the US, so they travel to a tourney so they can play.   A 3 game  tourney or showcase with a Friday night, Saturday afternoon,  Sunday day time game would be a nice compromise to get 3 games in vs quality competition.   4-5 is excessive.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

socalkdg said:


> Travel 7 hours each way,  pay two nights hotel, play 2 games,  do the same the following weekend to get 4 games in.   Pay to play at its finest.   So glad everyone has the time and money.  1/2 the kids on my daughters team couldn't afford this, and there are 1000's of other teams in the same boat.
> 
> This is why we have leagues and can play locally so we can get in 1-2 games per weekend for 12-14 games total.   But there are 100's of cities where this isn't even possible in the US, so they travel to a tourney so they can play.   A 3 game  tourney or showcase with a Friday night, Saturday afternoon,  Sunday day time game would be a nice compromise to get 3 games in vs quality competition.   4-5 is excessive.


Agree that league schedule is the best with weekly games etc.  But tournaments are also here to stay because clubs want the additional revenue.  For the older kids, I just don't think parents and players care as much about trophies and medals.  I bet 80% of families would be fine paying the same fee for 2 or 3 showcase type games without a "champion" crowned.  Sounds like you would be too.  The 20% crazies with the biggest mouths shouldn't hold the keys to our kids' health.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

CheatingMkay said:


> Like it or not, parents, players, and coaches would all prefer to compete for a trophy, and college coaches want to see players competing for something and not just playing in a showcase where no one really cares whether they win or not.


All due respect, I just don't believe this is true for 80% of players and families 14yrs and up.  Sounds like most on this thread agree.  I guarantee college coaches want to see if kids play just as hard when a trophy is *not *on the line.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 7, 2021)

notintheface said:


> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


But that's my point...charge the same tournament fee so the $Revs remain the same and reduce the number of games.  Sounds like most here would be ok with that.


----------



## Gkdad1 (Jan 8, 2021)

Remember daughter playing in 2019 Legends cup were they had 2 games on Saturday followed by 3 games on Sunday, as they made the finals. This was the first tournament playing 11v11 and they played 35 minute halves. I don’t think I have ever seen kids that tired in my life.


----------



## VegasParent (Jan 8, 2021)

oh canada said:


> Agree that league schedule is the best with weekly games etc.  But tournaments are also here to stay because clubs want the additional revenue.  For the older kids, I just don't think parents and players care as much about trophies and medals.  I bet 80% of families would be fine paying the same fee for 2 or 3 showcase type games without a "champion" crowned.  Sounds like you would be too.  The 20% crazies with the biggest mouths shouldn't hold the keys to our kids' health.


I definitely don't care about the trophies or 5 dollar medals at this point and neither does my kid. I'm hoping her team now (u15) will mostly play only showcase style events. Luckily her coach is not a big fan of tournaments either.


----------



## El Clasico (Jan 8, 2021)

oh canada said:


> But that's my point...charge the same tournament fee so the $Revs remain the same and reduce the number of games.  Sounds like most here would be ok with that.


You, and your position, confuses me. I have have had kids involved in competitive soccer for about 15 years and have been on this board as long as I can remember and I just don't remember anybody, ever, saying that we should pay more and get less. It must be nice to be you but where I am from, most people struggle, or stretch to pay their fees now. Is that the new slogan going on now days.... Charge me more! Give me less! No thanks. Besides, and try not to take this the wrong way but a big part of what is wrong with club soccer is parents like you.  You don't have the courage to make your own decisions so you try to recruit a mob to do it for you. If you don't want your child playing 5 games in a weekend, then don't let her play 5 games in a weekend.  Aren't you the one in charge of that? Do your team a favor and tell the coach you don't want your kid playing that many minutes and it will allow another player on your team to get some minutes in. Isn't that a win win? You win and the teammates win. That's leadership. Coming on this board whining about it is not leadership.


----------



## lafalafa (Jan 8, 2021)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> My son was on a great team but he was a bench player.  He would get less than 30 minutes and starters would play almost the entire game regardless of the games during the weekend.   We often played 4 games in 2 days and these starters were exhausted.  We had a roster of 16 but 9 of them would play 70% of the minutes.


Yup that's what happens,  coaches say they will rest the starters more but then the games are in the balance and they don't.   Try 95%-90% of the minutes over 6 games in 3 days like Cerritos memorial.  My Player couldn't even walk right for many days after, 2 weeks to recover.  Start with 18 by the time 3 game rolls around down to 16 with injuries.  Our team won it but made the decision not to do that again.

Anyway being careful what you sign up for is about the only solution I know of, asking the coach to limit minutes for your player doesn't seem to work and no way am I getting involved in micromanagement once a tournament starts.   My Player will die out there before asking out so coach/player have to figure it out.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 8, 2021)

El Clasico said:


> You, and your position, confuses me. I have have had kids involved in competitive soccer for about 15 years and have been on this board as long as I can remember and I just don't remember anybody, ever, saying that we should pay more and get less. It must be nice to be you but where I am from, most people struggle, or stretch to pay their fees now. Is that the new slogan going on now days.... Charge me more! Give me less! No thanks. Besides, and try not to take this the wrong way but a big part of what is wrong with club soccer is parents like you.  You don't have the courage to make your own decisions so you try to recruit a mob to do it for you. If you don't want your child playing 5 games in a weekend, then don't let her play 5 games in a weekend.  Aren't you the one in charge of that? Do your team a favor and tell the coach you don't want your kid playing that many minutes and it will allow another player on your team to get some minutes in. Isn't that a win win? You win and the teammates win. That's leadership. Coming on this board whining about it is not leadership.


Not sure where to start...ok, noted, you are part of the 20% who want your kids to play 5 games in 2-3 days.  Unlike you, I don't presume to know anything about you or your kids, but I can tell you those of us who have seen their kids play more than 2 games in a weekend on a 11v11 field see a decrease in play quality and an increase in injuries.  

Clearly you look at your child's longterm soccer development and health as a financial transaction.  More games = better value.  That is exactly the type of thought that Tournament operators currently appeal to.  It is flawed.  I encourage you to google the "law of diminishing returns".  More is not always better.  Will you eat a dozen donuts if put in front of you?  Or stop after 2 or 3 knowing that more might cause issues later in the day?  5 games in a weekend = eating 2 dozen donuts.

Last, questioning the status quo in a reasoned manner and seeking others' thoughts on this board is discussion, debate and should be encouraged by all.  I realize it is fashionable right now as part of the cancel culture to shut down such attempts, label them as "whining", and make other personal attacks.  If that's part of your "leadership" training, I'm glad I learned differently.


----------



## El Clasico (Jan 8, 2021)

You may need to work on your reading comprehension, or because english is not my first language, it may be my fault but I never stated my position on the issue. In fact, I didn't state, or mean to imply anyone's position on those tournaments. What I take exception to is your argument that 80% of parents would rather pay the same for less. I don't agree and I think you just made that number up so you could start your own thread. The other comment I made was that you can choose for yourself if you don't want your daughter to play that many minutes and in fact, it would benefit your kid's teammates if you lived out your convictions. In other words, grow some balls and make your one decisions. Again, if another player gets minutes that they would not otherwise gotten because you had the guts to stand by your beliefs then everybody wins. You feel better about yourself, your kid is healthier and you just helped out your fellow man by getting them some playing minutes. Isn't that a win, win, win? Only problem is if you only complain about it here and don't go out and do it, nobody wins anything.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 8, 2021)

Perhaps we as parents need to be more insistent about clubs being willing to play the good teams close to us.  

I can totally understand why the business guy at club A might want to make life rough for the business guy at club B.

However, as a parent, I don’t care.  If club B is ten miles away and has a similar team, then we should be playing against them.  Don’t ask me to drive past a great opponent so I can get to the airport.

It gets even worse when you explain that, because tournaments are expensive, we’re going to schedule too many games and my kid is going to risk injury.


----------



## VegasParent (Jan 8, 2021)

There are many reasons why tournaments are popular and will probably not go away. First, they make clubs/organizations money. That's why Surf Cup was not canceled. They wanted to make money no matter how long the tournament was delayed and having to move it out of state. Next is that parents love to post pictures of their kids with the trophy and medal and brag how their kid is on a winning team. It doesn't matter if little Mia or young Ronaldo only played 5 minutes total in the six games it took to win the tournament. They got the medal and that all that matters to the parents. The reason that I think is sometimes over looked is the coaches ego. In some coaches mind advancing far and winning these tournaments is a reflection on them. Not how many kids they send to the next level to play. That's not tangible to them. They need to have that trophy to say how successful a coach they are. That's why they will burn out their starters in five games over three days. Hell, some coaches do that in showcases when there is no trophy on the line. They need to get that W on gotsoccer to show how good they are. Winning is equal to development in their eyes. That's why the best advice I have seen on this forum is find the right coach not the coach who wins the most tournaments.


----------



## Dubs (Jan 8, 2021)

youthsportsugghhh said:


> I wouldn't say that about the tournaments (although I would say some parents definitely enjoyed themselves on tournament weekends) -- I know my kids loved going to 4 tournaments a year at the younger ages and spending time with teammates in hotels (Vegas, SD, Reno, Sac or Manteca). 20 minute halves and 4-5 games in 3 days usually (Friday night to Sunday) and we never came across issues in body breakdown. The DA way of doing things definitely was difficult for the participants (Players and coaches) in the aspect of Financing and Academics, but the 3 games in 4 days was probably best on the bodies.  3 games in 3 days also seems doable from a health perspective as long as the teams do proper nutrition and stretching before and after the games.


As said before, it only becomes an issue once teen years hit.  I think we all loved those early years traveling to events where our kids played 3,4,5 games trying to get that trophy, but once the teens hit, it's just not advisable because of how many injuries occur, as well as quality of play once you get to game 3.  I'm fine with the showcase format.  I think it's the only format that semi-works for teens+.


----------



## Eagle33 (Jan 8, 2021)

VegasParent said:


> There are many reasons why tournaments are popular and will probably not go away. First, they make clubs/organizations money. That's why Surf Cup was not canceled. They wanted to make money no matter how long the tournament was delayed and having to move it out of state. Next is that parents love to post pictures of their kids with the trophy and medal and brag how their kid is on a winning team. It doesn't matter if little Mia or young Ronaldo only played 5 minutes total in the six games it took to win the tournament. They got the medal and that all that matters to the parents. The reason that I think is sometimes over looked is the coaches ego. In some coaches mind advancing far and winning these tournaments is a reflection on them. Not how many kids they send to the next level to play. That's not tangible to them. They need to have that trophy to say how successful a coach they are. That's why they will burn out their starters in five games over three days. Hell, some coaches do that in showcases when there is no trophy on the line. They need to get that W on gotsoccer to show how good they are. Winning is equal to development in their eyes. That's why the best advice I have seen on this forum is find the right coach not the coach who wins the most tournaments.


Very well put, but.....
A team who wins trophies and tournaments is most cases did it _*because*_ they have a good coach.


----------



## watfly (Jan 8, 2021)

Eagle33 said:


> Very well put, but.....
> A team who wins trophies and tournaments is most cases did it _*because*_ they have a good coach.


I wish that was always true, but oftentimes the coach is a good recruiter, or a beneficiary of the recruiting power of a particular club name.


----------



## Eagle33 (Jan 8, 2021)

watfly said:


> I wish that was always true, but oftentimes the coach is a good recruiter, or a beneficiary of the recruiting power of a particular club name.


I didn't say always but in most cases it is true


----------



## VegasParent (Jan 8, 2021)

watfly said:


> I wish that was always true, but oftentimes the coach is a good recruiter, or a beneficiary of the recruiting power of a particular club name.


I agree with this. The best coaches are not necessarily at ECNL/GA/MLS clubs but good players will usually migrate to these teams because they feel they need the platform to get to the next level. When my kid left an ECNL club to go to a non-letter club at the time (became DA, now GA) because I liked the coach, we were told to stay because of ECNL not because the coaching was better.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 8, 2021)

Eagle33 said:


> Very well put, but.....
> A team who wins trophies and tournaments is most cases did it _*because*_ they have a good coach.


Absolutely agree that a winning coach is probably good at some combination of recruiting, conditioning, and skills development.

But there is no reason to believe that a winning coach is necessarily good at injury prevention or character development.


----------



## whatithink (Jan 8, 2021)

VegasParent said:


> There are many reasons why tournaments are popular and will probably not go away. First, they make clubs/organizations money. That's why Surf Cup was not canceled. They wanted to make money no matter how long the tournament was delayed and having to move it out of state. Next is that parents love to post pictures of their kids with the trophy and medal and brag how their kid is on a winning team. It doesn't matter if little Mia or young Ronaldo only played 5 minutes total in the six games it took to win the tournament. They got the medal and that all that matters to the parents. The reason that I think is sometimes over looked is the coaches ego. In some coaches mind advancing far and winning these tournaments is a reflection on them. Not how many kids they send to the next level to play. That's not tangible to them. They need to have that trophy to say how successful a coach they are. That's why they will burn out their starters in five games over three days. Hell, some coaches do that in showcases when there is no trophy on the line. They need to get that W on gotsoccer to show how good they are. Winning is equal to development in their eyes. That's why the best advice I have seen on this forum is find the right coach not the coach who wins the most tournaments.


A couple of things to add.

1. Clubs want to win tournaments. They post it on their social media and like to project the winning/successful club persona to recruit more players.
2. Coaches like to win tournaments because it goes on their "resume". Its "empirical" evidence of their skill set when they look for another job. Its alongside the # of players who went to college, or made the NT etc. Its no different than a sales person saying I made $xM revenue or a CFO who saved $xM in costs etc. Its esp. important to the younger coaches who don't have the "players developed" stats yet, as a way to get the next gig.


----------



## oh canada (Jan 8, 2021)

El Clasico said:


> You may need to work on your reading comprehension, or because english is not my first language, it may be my fault but I never stated my position on the issue. In fact, I didn't state, or mean to imply anyone's position on those tournaments. What I take exception to is your argument that 80% of parents would rather pay the same for less. I don't agree and I think you just made that number up so you could start your own thread. The other comment I made was that you can choose for yourself if you don't want your daughter to play that many minutes and in fact, it would benefit your kid's teammates if you lived out your convictions. In other words, grow some balls and make your one decisions. Again, if another player gets minutes that they would not otherwise gotten because you had the guts to stand by your beliefs then everybody wins. You feel better about yourself, your kid is healthier and you just helped out your fellow man by getting them some playing minutes. Isn't that a win, win, win? Only problem is if you only complain about it here and don't go out and do it, nobody wins anything.


You assume much and know little.  Don't assume I haven't already done this with my kids, nor have them sit out a tournament completely.

Your posts drip with machismo--"grow balls", "had guts", "don't have the courage", etc.--English is my second language as well but I know that testosterone is never helpful with logical decision-making.


----------



## watfly (Jan 8, 2021)

VegasParent said:


> I agree with this. The best coaches are not necessarily at ECNL/GA/MLS clubs but good players will usually migrate to these teams because they feel they need the platform to get to the next level. When my kid left an ECNL club to go to a non-letter club at the time (became DA, now GA) because I liked the coach, we were told to stay because of ECNL not because the coaching was better.


I can tell you for my sons 7 years of club soccer there has been little correlation between quality of coaching and winning.  I'm jealous of those whose experience has been different.


----------



## lafalafa (Jan 8, 2021)

watfly said:


> I can tell you for my sons 7 years of club soccer there has been little correlation between quality of coaching and winning.  I'm jealous of those whose experience has been different.


Generalization but with my 2 players over 14 yrs time frame my experience has been:

High quality skilled players + Quality coach(s) make a habit of winning a very high % of the time.  Will draw occasionally or lose but for tournaments normally advance out of bracket play and are playing the post season playoffs.

Quality players + average coach still can do well but likely not win league, advance to regionals or make it out of tournaments brackets for anything beyond a small local.

With a below average coach's can be hard but not impossible to overcome with the right set of high quality players. 

In any of the cases beyond 1st example without developing players to be higher skilled won't get to the two levels above.


----------



## notintheface (Jan 9, 2021)

watfly said:


> I can tell you for my sons 7 years of club soccer there has been little correlation between quality of coaching and winning.  I'm jealous of those whose experience has been different.


Don't be jealous-- most teams are similar to your son's. Remember in a tournament flight with two brackets of 8 teams, 75% of the teams end their tournament with a loss, with only the winner and the 3rd place team ending with a win. In State Cup with an age group of 64 teams, 98% of the teams end State Cup with a loss and usually only 25% of the teams have a winning record over the whole tournament.

In league play, your team is 99% more likely to have a .500 record than it is to win all its games. In a league bracket where you play every team exactly twice, you are more likely to lose more games than you win. (This sounds crazy but statistically you are more likely to lose or draw a game to a lower ranked team and lose both games to higher ranked teams)

This game has never been about being completely and utterly dominant from game to game -- yes there are some teams that are like that but they are rare, and no team wins every game that it plays during a year. This is the number one thing that I wish every parent knew-- if you feel like you are paying club fees in order for your child to win games, you are in this for the very wrong reason.

Your son's experience is normal-- please make sure your son knows this. One individual coach is not going to magically turn a flight 2 team into a giant-killing flight 1 team. It is perfectly fine for them to be on that midtable flight 2 team, because they are still better than 99% of their peers.


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Jan 9, 2021)

notintheface said:


> Your son's experience is normal-- please make sure your son knows this. One individual coach is not going to magically turn a flight 2 team into a giant-killing flight 1 team. It is perfectly fine for them to be on that midtable flight 2 team, because they are still better than 99% of their peers.


Valid point.  It is rare to see a homegrown team go from winning at all levels without recruiting new elite players.    The top teams eventually are made up of great athletes with strong technical skills.   My nephew's team went from signature at age 7 to a decent flight 1 team.  They had to recruit many elite players to win flight 1.      There is a reason why the top clubs in the country keep winning and part of it is coaching but alot has to do that they draw the best players in the region.


----------



## 46n2 (Jan 9, 2021)

Isn't it safe to say that if you have a strong team , great players also flock to that team to make it even better?  Whether or not the coach really is the draw.  I know that with my oldest , they were asked to come to the team, top team forsure, it was a great move and they couldn't be happier.  The level of play is very competitive amongst the players, while they become friends at the same time.  
Theres a point right where the kid starts to say, my old team doesn't cut it , and this new team may be what Im looking for.
Dont always blame a coach for having a good run with a bunch of talented kid.


----------



## 46n2 (Jan 9, 2021)

Ive seen many a parent ruin it for their kids too by the way.  How many of you have that friend that has 6 different jersey in six different years with a decent player.  These parents want instant gratification and let a bad season or a little playing time on a new team instantly let them have a bad taste in their mouth.  Players take time to find their pecking order on a new team, their may already be 2 great wingers, so your little johnny/sally has to fight for the spot or adhere to a new position.
One of my friends, they have ruined it for their kids by all of the movement they done over the year, and they always have a excuse and its never their fault......
Lastly there is such things as a Top Tier , Academy, Flight 1 and Flight 2 players, and thats fine, its the parents that dont accept it thats the problem.........
I personally do not see a problem with a coach that is good at recruiting and a great track record.
Troy High School is a good example.


----------



## notintheface (Jan 9, 2021)

46n2 said:


> How many of you have that friend that has 6 different jersey in six different years with a decent player.


Yes, this exactly. Parents are severely _overestimating_ the value of winning a majority of their games, and are severely _underestimating_ the value of hanging out with their friends that they've made outside of school on a consistent basis week after week year after year. 

Especially for youngers, where the highs of winning and the lows of losing last for about 30 minutes after the game, and the pizza hangouts with their friends afterwards bring laughs and fun times regardless of the scoreline. If a parent jumps clubs because their team finished in the middle of their league bracket, they don't understand most of why their kids love the game.


----------



## 46n2 (Jan 9, 2021)

Some parents will spend top $$$ to TRY and make their kid better by training 8 days a week, but similar to other sports, Skills is only one aspect of the game, you need to have speed, strength, stamina, IQ, HEART, and some luck to make it as a great player. 

FACT- You can juggle 700 times , great.... but can you visualize and draw your opponent to you , unselfishly distribute a ball, while breaking a line and be happy with a assist .  Some people have it and others just dont.

In all my years , Ive never seen a average coach do great things at the older level, maybe with ulittles, they can get lucky, but once you cross over to U14 and above, if your kids doesn't have it by then , it becomes a conversation with yourself with how much your willing to spend, lose and be ok with burning your hard earned money.

Its quick to hate or blame the coach, but alot of us sometimes need to look in the mirror and say WTF am I doing here, its just soccer.


----------



## 46n2 (Jan 9, 2021)

notintheface said:


> Yes, this exactly. Parents are severely _overestimating_ the value of winning a majority of their games, and are severely _underestimating_ the value of hanging out with their friends that they've made outside of school on a consistent basis week after week year after year.
> 
> Especially for youngers, where the highs of winning and the lows of losing last for about 30 minutes after the game, and the pizza hangouts with their friends afterwards bring laughs and fun times regardless of the scoreline. If a parent jumps clubs because their team finished in the middle of their league bracket, they don't understand most of why their kids love the game.


Very rarely will a kid really think about a win or loss after 6-24 hours, its the parent that continues to bring it up, thats a fact , because that is me, and I am ashamed to admit it


----------



## watfly (Jan 9, 2021)

notintheface said:


> Don't be jealous-- most teams are similar to your son's. Remember in a tournament flight with two brackets of 8 teams, 75% of the teams end their tournament with a loss, with only the winner and the 3rd place team ending with a win. In State Cup with an age group of 64 teams, 98% of the teams end State Cup with a loss and usually only 25% of the teams have a winning record over the whole tournament.
> 
> In league play, your team is 99% more likely to have a .500 record than it is to win all its games. In a league bracket where you play every team exactly twice, you are more likely to lose more games than you win. (This sounds crazy but statistically you are more likely to lose or draw a game to a lower ranked team and lose both games to higher ranked teams)
> 
> ...


I appreciate the sentiments and agree 100%.  Fortunately on a jealously scale I'm about a 2 out of 10. More fortunately my son has completely forgotten about the game by the time he gets to the car....he's planning his next skate surf or fishing session.  Were in a good place right now with a solid coach and a club with teams that grow signicantly more competitive as they move up in age groups.


----------



## zebrafish (Jan 14, 2021)

I think the multiple games per day/weekend thing is an absolute travesty.
I think it leads to increased risk for injury and burnout for a lot of players.
And COVID-19 is only going to make things worse.
My own kid's club is basically saying they're going to cram all the yearly tournaments, leagues, games etc. into a compressed period.
Just like in the NFL, we're going to see a lot of injuries happening once things start up again without the proper training build-up and rest necessary to prevent injury. I'm definitely going to hold my kid out of games-- we've already had issues with patellar tendonitis and overuse type of stuff. Ultimately, the clubs could care less about these issues. They care most about the profit margin.


----------



## dad4 (Jan 14, 2021)

zebrafish said:


> I think the multiple games per day/weekend thing is an absolute travesty.
> I think it leads to increased risk for injury and burnout for a lot of players.
> And COVID-19 is only going to make things worse.
> My own kid's club is basically saying they're going to cram all the yearly tournaments, leagues, games etc. into a compressed period.
> Just like in the NFL, we're going to see a lot of injuries happening once things start up again without the proper training build-up and rest necessary to prevent injury. I'm definitely going to hold my kid out of games-- we've already had issues with patellar tendonitis and overuse type of stuff. Ultimately, the clubs could care less about these issues. They care most about the profit margin.


They are worried you will leave if they don't overschedule.

Part of this falls on us to start asking for less.


----------

