# Parent perspectives on the cost of competitive youth sports



## mirage (Apr 19, 2018)

On this forum, we often discuss how much we spend on our kids and how much we sacrifice time and freedom to do so.

The attached is from TD Ameritrade survey done in mid 2016 to examine the financial sacrifices parents make at the expense of investing for the future.  

The out take from their executive summary:

Parents of elite athletes medal in commitment to kids, yet sideline financial goals

Parents cut out extras and admit to saving less, delaying retirement and tapping college funds to pay for sports.
One-third do not contribute regularly to a retirement account (33 percent).
A majority have no long-term financial plan (57 percent).
Sixty percent say the cost of youth sports has them concerned about their ability to save for the future.
Seventy-seven percent say youth sports affect household budgeting – discretionary spending gets cut first.

Parents bank on scholarships

Parents typically spend between $100–$499 a month per child on elite youth sports, with the bulk of the money going toward travel and team fees. $1000+ a month is not unheard of.
Two-thirds dream of scholarships to cover more than half of college costs. Forty percent are at least pretty sure their kids will snag one.
A third hope their children will go to the Olympics or turn pro. In fact, 15 percent are counting on it.
Parents of past players offer a reality check: only 2 percent of the children of those surveyed went to the Olympics or turned pro and 24 percent got a scholarship.

Sitting on the sidelines: Parents need to get their financial game on

Parents spend 4xs more time on children’s sports activities than on their own finances.
Parents are more likely to characterize themselves as “Johnny-come-latelys”, who got a late start, but are working to catch-up.
Nearly 60 percent believe they could be better disciplined when it comes to financial planning, investing and saving.
While virtually all parents feel their child’s sports coach is important, only 35 percent believe a financial coach would benefit them.


In the end, parents say the benefits of sports outweighs the cost

Only 26 percent of parents say they consider cutting back on their child’s sports activities.
Approximately two-thirds strongly believe that their children learn important life lessons from sports.
For parents, the joy of watching a child excel in sports (66 percent) is a top benefit followed by the bonding experience with a child (63 percent).
For parents of adult children, most have no regrets (58 percent), while some would have tried to find a better balance between avoiding debt and saving for the future and spending on sports (42 percent).


----------



## LASTMAN14 (Apr 19, 2018)

Those are scary numbers.


----------



## LASTMAN14 (Apr 19, 2018)

mirage said:


> On this forum, we often discuss how much we spend on our kids and how much we sacrifice time and freedom to do so.
> 
> The attached is from TD Ameritrade survey done in mid 2016 to examine the financial sacrifices parents make at the expense of investing for the future.
> 
> ...


That sounds nothing like me.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Apr 19, 2018)

mirage said:


> Parents bank on scholarships
> 
> A third hope their children will go to the Olympics or turn pro. In fact, 15 percent are counting on it.


Those numbers look awfully high to me.  They must have surveyed a lot of parent with kids in U8 or younger.  Most people I know are somewhat realistic after a few years in club soccer.

I do agree that benefits out-weigh the cost.  For $3,000:
-I can go hack 52 rounds of golf per year instead of hanging out with my DD.  With my handicap, this is about 50% enjoyment and 50% frustration.
-Take a family of four on vacation.  Won't be able to fly very far and it lasts a week or less only.
-Watching my DD play soccer - priceless.


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Apr 19, 2018)

Now that club  fees are almost $3k a year, I strongly believe that club soccer will experience a decrease in participation.    Also there's the fact that younger kids are not into sports as much as older generations.  Just look at the TV ratings. 

 A correction of supply and demand will be happening as early as next year.  

I am already seeing this in north Orange County.  Fewer kids are trying out at the younger age groups.


----------



## Simisoccerfan (Apr 19, 2018)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> Now that club  fees are almost $3k a year, I strongly believe that club soccer will experience a decrease in participation.    Also there's the fact that younger kids are not into sports as much as older generations.  Just look at the TV ratings.
> 
> A correction of supply and demand will be happening as early as next year.
> 
> I am already seeing this in north Orange County.  Fewer kids are trying out at the younger age groups.


Many other sports cost a lot more money.


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Apr 20, 2018)

Simisoccerfan said:


> Many other sports cost a lot more money.


Correct on other sports are more expensive. However you don't see everyone playing hockey or golf in Southern California.   With club fees surpassing $3k, low income kids will be priced out.  Club soccer is becoming a sport for the middle and upper income. 
I can afford $3k a year but now I have to think about what I can do with $300 a month.


----------



## apmullaly (Apr 20, 2018)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> Also there's the fact that younger kids are not into sports as much as older generations.  Just look at the TV ratings.


I'm not sure if I really agree with this one.  Most kids I know (I'm a middle school teacher) are hugely into sports, but they rarely watch tv.  They get almost everything from alternative sources (youtube, a huge variety of apps, bootleg satellite feeds, etc.). They can tell you the bench players on the 12th place team in Spain, but could care less about regular tv.


----------



## Slammerdad (Apr 20, 2018)

I think it is important for parents of young children (ages 10 and below) to test the waters of sports through various inexpensive organizations (AYSO, NJB, Little League) and see what your child enjoys best.  For my DD, it has pretty much always been about soccer.  Even with that, she played AYSO until she was 10. then signature, then jumped to club at 12.  Now she plays at a pretty high level but before we got to that level (4k plus a year) she progressed on her own scale, not mine.  It's easy to fall into the trap "my DD is special" but the numbers presented provide the stark reality that none of us have that USWNT player (ok well .001% of us do) so it is good to keep things in perspective.  I have another daughter younger as well.  So far she has tried soccer, tennis, gymnastics, swimming.  She currently is doing horse back riding and we will see how long that will last.  The bottom line is we try to manage the financial perspective with their involvement and interest.  My oldest played club baseball, club lacrosse through high school and as an adult does neither.  It took awhile for me to realize it wasn't up to me.


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Apr 20, 2018)

Look at the drop in soccer.  The key message here is that lower income kids are less likely to participate due to cost

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/recruiting-insider/wp/2017/09/06/youth-sports-study-declining-participation-rising-costs-and-unqualified-coaches/?utm_term=.d0b49ad3edb3


----------



## Grace T. (Apr 20, 2018)

Slammerdad said:


> So far she has tried soccer, tennis, gymnastics, swimming.  She currently is doing horse back riding and we will see how long that will last.  The bottom line is we try to manage the financial perspective with their involvement and interest.


Condolences on that one.  My eldest did the Pentathalon for a while.  Not only is horseback riding freaking dangerous, it's expensive!  Once you get to a certain level you have to lease or buy your own horse.  Then there's lessons, equipment, feed, vet bills, not to mention riding fashions.  You'll have all of us soccer, dance and even cheer parents beat (unless a sailing parent comes along ).




SoccerFan4Life said:


> Look at the drop in soccer.  The key message here is that lower income kids are less likely to participate due to cost
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/recruiting-insider/wp/2017/09/06/youth-sports-study-declining-participation-rising-costs-and-unqualified-coaches/?utm_term=.d0b49ad3edb3


I agree that income is a cost barrier to less wealthy kids, but I'm not convinced it's as big a barrier as child care and transportation....but even then there's ways around it...you only have to see some of the Latino heavy teams in Oxnard, the Valley, and Simi to see that's true (much more true, BTW, of the boys side than the girls)...not saying it's not a barrier and we aren't missing some talent....and that barrier gets worse once you get out of the silver level and higher into the more competitive leagues.  I'm also not sure that the participation decline is largely due to costs...in fact, it seems that kids once they get to middle school and going towards high school they have to make an assessment of where to spend their time....if they don't see themselves as capable or motivated enough to do the rough up and out world of soccer they are choosing to do other things.  Lastly, at the lower levels, there's independent clubs (which seem to blow up often but exist) and now AYSO United providing more affordable opportunities, particularly for kids not looking to climb the up and out ladder.  So I totally agree cost is a problem, but I also think it might be overstated.


----------



## Surfref (Apr 20, 2018)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> Correct on other sports are more expensive. However you don't see everyone playing hockey or golf in Southern California.   With club fees surpassing $3k, low income kids will be priced out.  Club soccer is becoming a sport for the middle and upper income.
> I can afford $3k a year but now I have to think about what I can do with $300 a month.


I know of a good number of clubs in San Diego that are below $2000 in club fees and a few that are still close to $1000.  My daughter helps out with her clubs rec program and they had to add staff due to the large number of 5-10 year olds that came out this past fall and spring.  I am sorry you have to pay $3000, but maybe there is a cheaper but still quality option out there in your area.


----------



## Surf Zombie (Apr 20, 2018)

Youth sports are a lot of money for most people. If you are counting on youth sports as some type of financial return in lieu of good grades or investing in a college fund you are a moron. 

I just try to look at it like taking a ski trip. It was expensive, but it was a lot of fun and I don’t expect anything down the road from it in return other than my kds  hopefully having had a great childhood.


----------



## Surfref (Apr 20, 2018)

Just get an alternate source of income doing something you really enjoy.  For me that is refereeing. I guess I was lucky when my daughter was playing club (currently a college player, club coach and referee).  The money I made as a referee during one season of high school soccer covered all of her club fees plus travel for the year, so no out of pocket costs.  The money I make now as a referee goes toward vacations.  In the past year it paid for vacations to Grand Cayman (my sister lives there), Cabo, Pittsburgh (Steelers and Pirates games) and Disney World.  That meant we went on a good 5-10 day vacation for either just my wife and I or the whole family once every 3 months.  My daughter's referee money allowed her to take three trips to Grand Cayman in the past year.  And, we also did not have to worry about college tuition because I am a disabled Veteran so my daughter goes to college for free at any California university (UC, CS, or JC).

I think it is crazy that people pay $3k to over $4K in initial club fees to have their kid play soccer.


----------



## Surfref (Apr 20, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> ..... and now AYSO United providing more affordable opportunities, particularly for kids not looking to climb the up and out ladder.


Some of these AYSO United teams that I have seen during State Cup have been really good.  I was an AR on a boys game for State Cup with a Slammers team vs an AYSO United Team.  During team check in I overhead several Slammers players comment that the game was going to be easy because they were playing an AYSO team.  Then on the sideline I heard Slammers parents making similar comments.  Game ended 6-1 with AYSO United winning.  I thought after the game, "Fools. That is why the game is played on grass and not on paper."  So, the $1000 a year team beat the $3000+ a year team.


----------



## Sunil Illuminati (Apr 20, 2018)

Surfref said:


> Some of these AYSO United teams that I have seen during State Cup have been really good.  I was an AR on a boys game for State Cup with a Slammers team vs an AYSO United Team.  During team check in I overhead several Slammers players comment that the game was going to be easy because they were playing an AYSO team.  Then on the sideline I heard Slammers parents making similar comments.  Game ended 6-1 with AYSO United winning.  I thought after the game, "Fools. That is why the game is played on grass and not on paper."  So, the $1000 a year team beat the $3000+ a year team.


Some of these AYSO refs who don't get paid are better too!


----------



## ItsCalledSoccer (Apr 20, 2018)

Wow $3k is a lot in my opinion. Logic should dictate that as you progress up the levels/flights, the costs should decrease, due to clubs being more competitive to have you on their team. Glad to hear lots of DA clubs are free, this should always be the case at the top levels.


----------



## ItsCalledSoccer (Apr 20, 2018)

Surfref said:


> Some of these AYSO United teams that I have seen during State Cup have been really good.  I was an AR on a boys game for State Cup with a Slammers team vs an AYSO United Team.  During team check in I overhead several Slammers players comment that the game was going to be easy because they were playing an AYSO team.  Then on the sideline I heard Slammers parents making similar comments.  Game ended 6-1 with AYSO United winning.  I thought after the game, "Fools. That is why the game is played on grass and not on paper."  So, the $1000 a year team beat the $3000+ a year team.


As an AYSO United parent we hear this all the time, always keeps us amused. Might be because we play CSL that the big clubs don't see us in league play.


----------



## OrangeCountyDad (Apr 20, 2018)

cheaper than getting them out of trouble, I say.


----------



## mirage (Apr 20, 2018)

Messi>CR7 said:


> Those numbers look awfully high to me.  They must have surveyed a lot of parent with kids in U8 or younger.  Most people I know are somewhat realistic after a few years in club soccer.
> 
> I do agree that benefits out-weigh the cost.  For $3,000:
> -I can go hack 52 rounds of golf per year instead of hanging out with my DD.  With my handicap, this is about 50% enjoyment and 50% frustration.
> ...


Do not believe so.  Nothing in the data set would imply that the parents of U-littles.  In fact just the opposite.  The survey says most of the money spent is for travel and team fees.  Don't think too many U-little players travel so much that it dominates the costs.

Also the survey is not specific to soccer.  Just youth sports in general, including soccer.  Both individual and team sports considered.


----------



## mirage (Apr 20, 2018)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> Now that club  fees are almost $3k a year, I strongly believe that club soccer will experience a decrease in participation.    Also there's the fact that younger kids are not into sports as much as older generations.  Just look at the TV ratings.
> 
> A correction of supply and demand will be happening as early as next year.
> 
> I am already seeing this in north Orange County.  Fewer kids are trying out at the younger age groups.


Its not the $3k/yr that makes a difference.  Its what percent of their income that will determine if the participation will decline or not.

If the cost of club soccer is the same or lower than what it used to be for any given family by percent of their income, the I would not expect a change of behavior - all other situations being equal.  But if it is larger percent of their income, then probably would happen.  

So the real question is has the average family income increased to keep up with the increase in club soccer fees.

As for decline in sports, I highly doubt it.  The composition of the sports and the medium in which its viewed have clearly changed.  More kids are into e-Sports and are watching on their smartphones.  Some sports have seen increase in popularity: whereas, other have seen decline, but the total I believe has remained steady.


----------



## FlashDrive (Apr 20, 2018)

where are u guys getting 3K per year??  You're insane if u think it's just club fees 

more like 5-7K total with uniforms, tournament/scrimmage/ref fees, travel (hotel/gas/food) etc

and as we all learned last season - 7-10K total if you're living the DA dream

3K?  you guys are in serious financial denial


----------



## mirage (Apr 20, 2018)

FlashDrive said:


> where are u guys getting 3K per year??  You're insane if u think it's just club fees
> 
> more like 5-7K total with uniforms, tournament/scrimmage/ref fees, travel (hotel/gas/food) etc
> 
> ...


$3K is just the club fee, before team fee, uniforms and extra tournaments.

The only reason to talk about just the club fee is because each team/club operates bit differently and it also depends on family, both parents, a parent or just a player travels make a large variability for the aggregate costs.

When my older kid played DA, he traveled up and down the entire west coast as well as back east for showcase/playoffs.  We/I went to most of the out of the area games so airfare, rental car, hotel and incidentals including meals are not included in any discussion.

The issue of $3k, is it used to be $2.5K last year or two years ago and $2k just before that.  Its the rising cost of the club fees.


----------



## FlashDrive (Apr 20, 2018)

mirage said:


> $3K is just the club fee, before team fee, uniforms and extra tournaments.
> 
> The only reason to talk about just the club fee is because each team/club operates bit differently and it also depends on family, both parents, a parent or just a player travels make a large variability for the aggregate costs.
> 
> ...


There is no reason to just talk about the club fee.. that's a huge financial mistake... if you're truly planning your investment.. double at minimum your club fees and that's what you'll truly spend on your kid's sport.. and trust me that's bare minimum.. most likeley  you will spend more.. A LOT MORE


----------



## Lambchop (Apr 20, 2018)

mirage said:


> $3K is just the club fee, before team fee, uniforms and extra tournaments.
> 
> The only reason to talk about just the club fee is because each team/club operates bit differently and it also depends on family, both parents, a parent or just a player travels make a large variability for the aggregate costs.
> 
> ...


You should talk to someone whose kid plays club volleyball, olders! It is insane!  Everyone decides where to spend their money.  Sports, music, art, etc etc., rehab, counseling etc etc. whatever you need for your child.


----------



## mirage (Apr 20, 2018)

Surf Zombie said:


> Youth sports are a lot of money for most people. If you are counting on youth sports as some type of financial return in lieu of good grades or investing in a college fund you are a moron.
> 
> I just try to look at it like taking a ski trip. It was expensive, but it was a lot of fun and I don’t expect anything down the road from it in return other than my kds  hopefully having had a great childhood.


Being on this forum (both old and new) for 5~6 years now, I've read many, many parents comments about how much they spend and what expectations they have.

It is rare that anyone sees club soccer expenditure as an investment with some kind of ROI attached to it, albeit qualitatively (e.g, club soccer = college scholarship).  My sense is that most parents see it as a mean to spend quality time with their kids and bestow some teamwork, pride and meaning of competing into their kids life lessons.

Personally, I think its nuts not to have a 529 account or equivalent for your kid from the day they are born, when time is on your side.  By the time the kid is ready to goto college, the 529 will, may not be all, pay a good deal of the educational cost. While many have the means to pay for their kids formal education and not have to worry about 529, it still makes sense to have one - just as 401K/(Roth)IRA does for retirement (assuming that one's income level is such that you qualify to make a contribution).

What I've found interesting in the survey is not so much of how much people spend - because people spend whatever they want to on anything - but they do so at the expense of their own retirement future.  Its no wonder that the average retirement savings/person in this country is abysmal.


----------



## mirage (Apr 20, 2018)

Lambchop said:


> You should talk to someone whose kid plays club volleyball, olders! It is insane!  Everyone decides where to spend their money.  Sports, music, art, etc etc., rehab, counseling etc etc. whatever you need for your child.


Our next door had one of their kids play club VB and also another do Cheer.  Yes I know the costs.  Club soccer is actually quite low compared to some other activities.

Someone mentioned hockey earlier, and I also know few families that did hockey at $5k/yr just for club fees many years ago.  I think club soccer at the time was around $1.5k/yr ($3K equivalent of today)


----------



## Socal United (Apr 20, 2018)

I see what all the numbers say but I wouldn't change it at all.  We are normal middle class family but if our kids got an opportunity to do something, try something new, go somewhere and they wanted to, we did everything to make it happen.  Soccer was and is #1 in our family and we have gone 2 entirely different routes with our kids in regards to level and have no preconceived notions of scholarships, going pro, etc.  I consider whatever money we spent(it was a lot) money well spent.  They both have a great group of friends that they spend time outside of soccer with, have not gotten in any trouble(son is 17, pray for me  ) and they are genuinely well adjusted.  I was by no means the best parent, I honestly believe the competitive soccer environment that my kids were/are a part of was instrumental in them being who they are.


----------



## Grace T. (Apr 22, 2018)

Looks like my son is going to jump on the United bandwagon.  Really good team....surprised how good they are....just whipped the silver team that dinged him earlier and most have only been together a month (silver teams been together a year).  Not run and shoot kickballers either....my son being brought on board because of his ability to play the back....coach didn't even look at his punting during trials.  Am optimistic.


----------



## ItsCalledSoccer (Apr 24, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Looks like my son is going to jump on the United bandwagon.  Really good team....surprised how good they are....just whipped the silver team that dinged him earlier and most have only been together a month (silver teams been together a year).  Not run and shoot kickballers either....my son being brought on board because of his ability to play the back....coach didn't even look at his punting during trials.  Am optimistic.


Happy for you to find a place for him. If you mean AYSO United, we are there too and very happy with the choice we have made! Good luck to you!


----------



## MakeAPlay (Apr 24, 2018)

FlashDrive said:


> where are u guys getting 3K per year??  You're insane if u think it's just club fees
> 
> more like 5-7K total with uniforms, tournament/scrimmage/ref fees, travel (hotel/gas/food) etc
> 
> ...


I spent a little over $31k over my player's club career from U10-U18 and we have already recouped that expense.  Had she decided to go to Stanford we would have recouped double that amount in the first year!  The most expensive years were U16/17 then U15 followed by U14.  The cheapest was U18.  That is an average of $3400 a year.  Her scholarship has more than paid for it but I would do it again even if she decided that she wanted to run track, or ride horses (she's actually a good western and English rider) or if she just wanted to focus on her studies.  Every season before I would write a check I would ask her if she still wanted to do it (including her senior year when I didn't write a check).  I also demanded straight A's if I was going to spend any money at all on extracurricular activities.  I will say that all of the years of traveling and having to study on the road has translated to excellent study habits.  In the end, it was worth it to our family.

Good luck to you and your player.


----------



## coachsamy (Apr 25, 2018)

The rising costs of clubs have to do with parents egos and the smaller size rosters of U littles. 

The parents ego come into place when they feel ashame of being in a "lower" prestige club or AYSO affiliate team and take their kid to the big box to ride the pine on a A or B team, or just a simply worst team they were in. On their way out they trash the rep of the former team only because its important for them to tell the people within their social environment that they play for certain tracksuit wearing club and they are paying all this money because that club promises them the moon, the stars and a trip with Elon Musk to Mars!

Then there is the smaller size rosters of U12 and below. Good coaches are needed to provide a positive environment to the Ulittles and that costs money, and that has to come from somewhere.

And I forgot to mention that joining these Rec leagues that continue showing up charge clubs for the admission of each team. More unnecessary costs.

Only DA is worth the cost, the rest is pure non-sense.


----------



## ItsCalledSoccer (Apr 25, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> The rising costs of clubs have to do with parents egos and the smaller size rosters of U littles.
> 
> The parents ego come into place when they feel ashame of being in a "lower" prestige club or AYSO affiliate team and take their kid to the big box to ride the pine on a A or B team, or just a simply worst team they were in. On their way out they trash the rep of the former team only because its important for them to tell the people within their social environment that they play for certain tracksuit wearing club and they are paying all this money because that club promises them the moon, the stars and a trip with Elon Musk to Mars!
> 
> ...


Yes, as a parent involved in AYSO United, I can tell that the value of our car stickers versus other clubs is a significant difference to some people. Our $200 uniform package for both uniforms, training uniforms and jackets/pants/bags etc are laughed at because they aren't nike or Adidas.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Apr 25, 2018)

ItsCalledSoccer said:


> Yes, as a parent involved in AYSO United, I can tell that the value of our car stickers versus other clubs is a significant difference to some people. Our $200 uniform package for both uniforms, training uniforms and jackets/pants/bags etc are laughed at because they aren't nike or Adidas.


"to some people" perhaps, but most of us are simply trying to find the best situation for our own kids.  I've never noticed what uniforms the other team were wearing.  I'm a parent in my 40's, not in high school 

Here is my perspective on the cost.  My U-little DD had a fabulous coach for the past three years, and I consider the $2,000 per year money well spent.  I once paid $110 for an AYSO U5-Jamboree soccer for my DS and it was completely unorganized, and for whatever reason our local AYSO hired some "UK coaches" that never showed up.  I have more problem parting with that $110 than the $2K I paid for my DD.

If you were able to find a good situation/coach in AYSO United for your kid, and save $1,500 a year, congrats.


----------



## coachsamy (Apr 25, 2018)

ItsCalledSoccer said:


> Yes, as a parent involved in AYSO United, I can tell that the value of our car stickers versus other clubs is a significant difference to some people. Our $200 uniform package for both uniforms, training uniforms and jackets/pants/bags etc are laughed at because they aren't nike or Adidas.


When my DD played for AYSO Matrix our yearly fees was a whooping $275 including uniforms and believe me people were like yucks about it. I also worked out some very good sponsorship deals to pay for tournaments. I paid about $4k for my DD's entire soccer career which spanned for about 11 years, and even her top of the line Magistas paid for themselves! Nike's warranty is a lovely thing!


----------



## MakeAPlay (Apr 25, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> The rising costs of clubs have to do with parents egos and the smaller size rosters of U littles.
> 
> The parents ego come into place when they feel ashame of being in a "lower" prestige club or AYSO affiliate team and take their kid to the big box to ride the pine on a A or B team, or just a simply worst team they were in. On their way out they trash the rep of the former team only because its important for them to tell the people within their social environment that they play for certain tracksuit wearing club and they are paying all this money because that club promises them the moon, the stars and a trip with Elon Musk to Mars!
> 
> ...


I watched my first GDA game last night and I don't see any difference in style of play.  I was appalled at the keeper play and I saw them have the keeper pass to the defenders off a goal kick a total of zero times.  This was the 1st place vs the 3rd place team in the SW division.  GDA is just a fancy name nothing more.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 25, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> When my DD played for AYSO Matrix our yearly fees was a whooping $275 including uniforms and believe me people were like yucks about it. I also worked out some very good sponsorship deals to pay for tournaments. I paid about $4k for my DD's entire soccer career which spanned for about 11 years, and even her top of the line Magistas paid for themselves! Nike's warranty is a lovely thing!


Yes, their warranty is the best kept secret in youth soccer.


----------



## coachsamy (Apr 25, 2018)

MakeAPlay said:


> I watched my first GDA game last night and I don't see any difference in style of play.  I was appalled at the keeper play and I saw them have the keeper pass to the defenders off a goal kick a total of zero times.  This was the 1st place vs the 3rd place team in the SW division.  GDA is just a fancy name nothing more.


Regardless of level of play, any even matchup will call for jungle ball! Whether it is AYSO Core Rec, USWNT against Germany or Japan, MLS or LigaMX, they turn a notch up on their kickball. Possession ONLY happens when one team is vastly superior than the other.


----------



## MakeAPlay (Apr 25, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> Regardless of level of play, any even matchup will call for jungle ball! Whether it is AYSO Core Rec, USWNT against Germany or Japan, MLS or LigaMX, they turn a notch up on their kickball. Possession ONLY happens when one team is vastly superior than the other.


I disagree.


----------



## MakeAPlay (Apr 25, 2018)

https://twitter.com/abrammadridista/status/951287794080546817

Please click the above link and tell me it isn't possible.  This is in the college Cup and the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the country with numerous pros and national team players.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Apr 25, 2018)

MakeAPlay said:


> I disagree.


Playing kickball under pressure in your defensive third against a superior team is fine.  But if there is not even a single attempt to pass from GK to fullbacks on goal kicks, then I will also have to respectfully disagree.


----------



## coachsamy (Apr 25, 2018)

MakeAPlay said:


> https://twitter.com/abrammadridista/status/951287794080546817
> 
> Please click the above link and tell me it isn't possible.  This is in the college Cup and the 2nd and 3rd best teams in the country with numerous pros and national team players.


UCLA is by far a much better team than Duke, secondly Duke was parking the bus with one or 2 players in their own attacking side allowing UCLA to move the ball around without any major challenge to their possession and the reasoning for it, they needed to maintain the line stacked up so whenever the UCLA girls beat them in the line at least take their shooting angle out. If Duke attempted to play high pressure and build up, UCLA would had beat them senseless.

Just watch the highlights of the Liverpool Roma game yesterday and you will see possession gone wrong on both of Mo Salah goals. Maintaining possession and making meaningful accurate passes display great technical skills, however the purpose of the game is to score more goals than the other team, not who controls the ball more.


----------



## pulguita (Apr 25, 2018)

MakeAPlay said:


> I disagree.


Ditto!


----------



## pulguita (Apr 25, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> Regardless of level of play, any even matchup will call for jungle ball! Whether it is AYSO Core Rec, USWNT against Germany or Japan, MLS or LigaMX, they turn a notch up on their kickball. Possession ONLY happens when one team is vastly superior than the other.


Guess you never saw the Beach 98' Academy team play 13', 14', 15', and 16'.  Further, there are 3 style of play - possession, direct and kickball.  Please note I differentiated between direct and kickball.  There has been only one team in world football in the last decade at any level that played possession regardless of situation - Barca the years of Pep.  Sometimes to a detriment.   The new Barca plays possession but also will play direct when the situation is "on".  Kickball is chance oriented.  Possession and direct are not.


----------



## MakeAPlay (Apr 25, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> UCLA is by far a much better team than Duke, secondly Duke was parking the bus with one or 2 players in their own attacking side allowing UCLA to move the ball around without any major challenge to their possession and the reasoning for it, they needed to maintain the line stacked up so whenever the UCLA girls beat them in the line at least take their shooting angle out. If Duke attempted to play high pressure and build up, UCLA would had beat them senseless.
> 
> Just watch the highlights of the Liverpool Roma game yesterday and you will see possession gone wrong on both of Mo Salah goals. Maintaining possession and making meaningful accurate passes display great technical skills, however the purpose of the game is to score more goals than the other team, not who controls the ball more.


Mo Saleh is tearing it up and in great form!  Egypt is likely to come second in their group in June.  

Regarding the game that I posted a link to.  I was at the game and UCLA was definitely the better team and yes Duke for the most part sat back but that was because early on they almost got stung when they tried to pressure UCLA.  My point was that UCLA was still able to connect passes.  In the games against Stanford both teams played possession although UCLA possessed better the first time and Stanford possessed the ball more in the final.  Both games were excellent, technical games with elite athletes all over the field.


----------



## MakeAPlay (Apr 25, 2018)

pulguita said:


> Guess you never saw the Beach 98' Academy team play 13', 14', 15', and 16'.  Further, there are 3 style of play - possession, direct and kickball.  Please note I differentiated between direct and kickball.  There has been only one team in world football in the last decade at any level that played possession regardless of situation - Barca the years of Pep.  Sometimes to a detriment.   The new Barca plays possession but also will play direct when the situation is "on".  Kickball is chance oriented.  Possession and direct are not.


I saw that team and you are correct.  Jeff and Mauricio had them playing excellent soccer for years.


----------



## coachsamy (Apr 25, 2018)

MakeAPlay said:


> Mo Saleh is tearing it up and in great form!  Egypt is likely to come second in their group in June.
> 
> Regarding the game that I posted a link to.  I was at the game and UCLA was definitely the better team and yes Duke for the most part sat back but that was because early on they almost got stung when they tried to pressure UCLA.  My point was that UCLA was still able to connect passes.  In the games against Stanford both teams played possession although UCLA possessed better the first time and Stanford possessed the ball more in the final.  Both games were excellent, technical games with elite athletes all over the field.


We are on the same page, you just don't see it and going back to your original comment I can see why you felt disappointed of the GDA.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Apr 26, 2018)

I have seen my DD (U-little centerback) simply heave the ball when I, as a spectator, thought she had enough time to map out a pass and connect.  I've also seen her give away balls in the defensive third when attempting to build out from the back.  I'm ok with either of these scenario as long as she is the one making those decisions on the spot.  I would have an issue if she is told to boot it every time while under pressure.

I'm probably more annoyed by the "great job" from my wife whenever my DD heaves one aimlessly, but I keep my mouth shut


----------



## MakeAPlay (Apr 26, 2018)

Messi>CR7 said:


> I have seen my DD (U-little centerback) simply heave the ball when I, as a spectator, thought she had enough time to map out a pass and connect.  I've also seen her give away balls in the defensive third when attempting to build out from the back.  I'm ok with either of these scenario as long as she is the one making those decisions on the spot.  I would have an issue if she is told to boot it every time while under pressure.
> 
> I'm probably more annoyed by the "great job" from my wife whenever my DD heaves one aimlessly, but I keep my mouth shut


My player has played centerback full time since the end of U14.  I have seen many errors and many great plays.  I only get upset when the play isn't appropriate to the situation.  Most of the time that I get upset is because she will pass the ball instead of dribbling forward.  Most teams don't know how to defend her team when she breaks the first two lines of pressure with her dribble.  Focusing on the process versus the results is usually best for young players at this critical position.

Good luck to you and your player.


----------



## outside! (Apr 26, 2018)

It is also important to remember that the view of the player on the field is much different than our view from the sideline/stands. The players are making split second decisions when they are out of breath and possibly somewhat oxygen deprived. I have asked DD sometimes about a certain part of the game when reviewing video. Sometimes she just messed up, had a bad pass, funny bounce or whatever. Other times she was so tired towards the end of a game that she felt it better to pass the ball than dribble for fear of being dispossessed. Some of the time she points out things that I could not see or know from my viewpoint like another player closing down an angle more quickly than is obvious from the stands or being blinded by the sun.


----------



## mirage (Apr 26, 2018)

outside! said:


> .........The players are making split second decisions when they are out of breath and possibly somewhat oxygen deprived............Other times she was so tired towards the end of a game ............


You do realize some coaches train for these situations, right?  My older kid had two different coaches from different clubs purposely do possession drills after they were exhausted.  One in particular had them run 5k in Claremont Trails on a hot day, then regular training for 2 hours, followed by possession drills getting ready for a big tournament.

Completely agree about how its different for the players than observers.  Having played sports growing up and throughout my adult life, it really is not the same.


----------



## outside! (Apr 26, 2018)

You can train all you want, but you will never push yourself as hard as you will in a game/race. I used to race bikes. No matter how hard I trained, race day was just different. I would find myself practically hallucinating trying to keep up with the fast guys. Needless to say my decision making was somewhat impaired. I no longer pay money to feel like crap, I can do that for free.


----------



## Paul Spacey (Apr 26, 2018)

mirage said:


> You do realize some coaches train for these situations, right? My older kid had two different coaches from different clubs purposely do possession drills after they were exhausted. One in particular had them run 5k in Claremont Trails on a hot day, then regular training for 2 hours, followed by possession drills getting ready for a big tournament.
> 
> Completely agree about how its different for the players than observers. Having played sports growing up and throughout my adult life, it really is not the same.


I see the idea of the coaches’ approach and commend them for thinking outside of the box but it is ultimately flawed. Why? If it’s not game-specific, it won’t help in a game. Nobody does a 5k before playing (although I see the idea behind it) and the 2-hour training thing followed by possession drills is not game-specific; not to mention impossible to maintain the intensity that you are looking for in a game. A better approach would be a practice of the same length as the actual game with an intensity (dictated by coach and pushed by players) and decision making setup (including pressure) which mimics the game directly. ‘Drills’ are a long-established way of coaching soccer but slowly coaches and clubs are realizing that this traditional approach isn’t the most effective way to coach young players. 

When you watch any team/coach, you should ask yourself one question; does it look like the real game? If not (i.e passing back and forth with zero decision making or jogging around the field perimeter), then your kid isn’t being effectively served.


----------



## mirage (Apr 27, 2018)

outside! said:


> You can train all you want, but you will never push yourself as hard as you will in a game/race. I used to race bikes. No matter how hard I trained, race day was just different. I would find myself practically hallucinating trying to keep up with the fast guys. Needless to say my decision making was somewhat impaired. I no longer pay money to feel like crap, I can do that for free.


I used to race motocross, but not BMX - too much peddling for me....


----------



## mirage (Apr 27, 2018)

Paul Spacey said:


> I see the idea of the coaches’ approach and commend them for thinking outside of the box but it is ultimately flawed. Why? If it’s not game-specific, it won’t help in a game. Nobody does a 5k before playing (although I see the idea behind it) and the 2-hour training thing followed by possession drills is not game-specific; not to mention impossible to maintain the intensity that you are looking for in a game. A better approach would be a practice of the same length as the actual game with an intensity (dictated by coach and pushed by players) and decision making setup (including pressure) which mimics the game directly. ‘Drills’ are a long-established way of coaching soccer but slowly coaches and clubs are realizing that this traditional approach isn’t the most effective way to coach young players.
> 
> When you watch any team/coach, you should ask yourself one question; does it look like the real game? If not (i.e passing back and forth with zero decision making or jogging around the field perimeter), then your kid isn’t being effectively served.


Of course both you and outside is right about not being the same pressure as a real game.  However, it it does put the body and mind into a fatigue condition, where decisions have to be made.  The whole purpose of these kind of training is not about simulating the game conditions, but to train players to make decisions when fatigued.  

While it may not involved hallucinating, mistakes are more prone to happen and mental strength is weakened.  From that perspective, it does what's intended.


----------



## Paul Spacey (Apr 27, 2018)

mirage said:


> Of course both you and outside is right about not being the same pressure as a real game.  However, it it does put the body and mind into a fatigue condition, where decisions have to be made.  The whole purpose of these kind of training is not about simulating the game conditions, but to train players to make decisions when fatigued.
> 
> While it may not involved hallucinating, mistakes are more prone to happen and mental strength is weakened.  From that perspective, it does what's intended.


I agree with you that there are benefits to training decision making under physical and mental fatigue so you’re right, it does a job to an extent.

To clarify though, coaches should always be trying to simulate game conditions as closely as possible. The closer the simulation, the better the transfer into real games and that’s ultimately what you are looking for; better game performance. 

This isn’t the way most coaches and clubs I watch actually practice because traditionally lots of isolated drills have been the norm. Coaching courses (and coaches) are improving in that regard though and this will benefit players longer term as more integrated, game-like practices are developed and isolated training becomes less prevalent.


----------



## Grace T. (Apr 27, 2018)

Paul Spacey said:


> This isn’t the way most coaches and clubs I watch actually practice because traditionally lots of isolated drills have been the norm. Coaching courses (and coaches) are improving in that regard though and this will benefit players longer term as more integrated, game-like practices are developed and isolated training becomes less prevalent.


This is actually the central push behind the curriculum of US Soccer....training should be realistic and game like.  I actually don't fully agree with the approach.  Training must be both technical and realistic.  A kid is never going to learn the basics (or clarify the small technical errors) for such core skills like juggling, first touch, passing, goal kicks or crossing under pressure, and the coach won't be able to give each kid the individual attention and corrections then need to improve technique.  Kids also benefit tremendously from applying those skills in realistic settings whether 1 v 1, small sided, game scenarios or scrimmage.  Training should be a blend of technical and realistic, shifting to less of the technical and more of the realistic as the kids perfect their technique and move up the age and ability ladders.  My problem with the US Soccer approach (even after the broke up the E license into specific age related categories) is that it seems to think all kids at all ages should be taught the same....it's why I actually think the AYSO curriculum is just better for the younger ages (it's flaw being largely that it is usually imperfectly taught).


----------



## Paul Spacey (Apr 27, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> This is actually the central push behind the curriculum of US Soccer....training should be realistic and game like.  I actually don't fully agree with the approach.  Training must be both technical and realistic.  A kid is never going to learn the basics (or clarify the small technical errors) for such core skills like juggling, first touch, passing, goal kicks or crossing under pressure, and the coach won't be able to give each kid the individual attention and corrections then need to improve technique.  Kids also benefit tremendously from applying those skills in realistic settings whether 1 v 1, small sided, game scenarios or scrimmage.  Training should be a blend of technical and realistic, shifting to less of the technical and more of the realistic as the kids perfect their technique and move up the age and ability ladders.  My problem with the US Soccer approach (even after the broke up the E license into specific age related categories) is that it seems to think all kids at all ages should be taught the same....it's why I actually think the AYSO curriculum is just better for the younger ages (it's flaw being largely that it is usually imperfectly taught).


There is no perfect right or wrong answer and it’s a complex issue. I don’t want to hikack this thread as we could talk about it for hours and go down the skill acquisition rabbit-hole along with cognitive training and decision making.

I agree there will always be room for technical training. Mostly through individual work though. Isolated technique training isn’t the right choice for a team setting, primarily because there is no opponent or game scenario in which to learn from. The process is completely different cognitively when passing a ball back and forth or doing it in relation to opponents, teammates and space in a designed game for practice.

Juggling isn’t a core skill btw. It’s good for individually working on control (not as good as using a ball and a wall) but it’s not required to be able to play the game (Johan Cruyff talked about this and a circus). Some High schools have juggling as part of tryouts (truly bizarre) and I’m surprised at how much value is placed on it. Juggling on your own is fine; juggling in a team practice is never, ever acceptable (unless the coach has no idea what else to do).

I agree with you completely on the flawed approach of teaching all kids the same way, despite their age. This is a huge mistake and again, I agree with you that some of the AYSO approach at very young ages is excellent. The implementation by coaches with little knowledge of the game is often an issue unfortunately.


----------



## Grace T. (Apr 27, 2018)

Paul Spacey said:


> I agree there will always be room for technical training. Mostly through individual work though. Isolated technique training isn’t the right choice for a team setting, primarily because there is no opponent or game scenario in which to learn from. The process is completely different cognitively when passing a ball back and forth or doing it in relation to opponents, teammates and space in a designed game for practice.


I think we agree more than disagree.  I personally think isolated technique training is appropriate when the team is still small and the kids are young but should disappear gradually as the kids get up in ranks and high school ages.  The thing that irritates me is that US Soccer does tend to agree with you that this should be "mostly through individual work though" but won't come out and say it.  I'll repeat it again what I've posted before: I was reprimanded by my instructor during my elicense for putting together a level 2 exercise on crossing using just 1 attacker, 1 receiver and 1 goalkeeper (no pressure, with pressure added with 2 defenders on the level 3) in an exercise geared for 8-9 year old bronze levels.  They felt it wasn't game like and even the youngest players need to learn to cross under pressure.  I asked "well, where do they learn their technique...you know how to actually physically cross the ball and with accuracy?".  They answered "that's what trainers are for".  But that's not what most club parents out there think....they think the kid is on their team and that's pretty much all I need because it's the coach's job to teach them.  If that's really the philosophy that US Soccer is going for, then they should just come out and say every kid [at least on the younger end] should have a private trainer, parent who knows how to teach, or academy to work on their individual skills (but they can't because they are already under fire for accessibility and rising costs).

As for juggling, every team except the current one my son is on in their try outs [both this year and last] that he attended had a juggling session.  And, per the advice of this board, he didn't go to any of the cattle call try outs.  It's an easy way for the coaches at the younger levels to weed out those who have ball control v those that don't.


----------



## Paul Spacey (Apr 27, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> I think we agree more than disagree.  I personally think isolated technique training is appropriate when the team is still small and the kids are young but should disappear gradually as the kids get up in ranks and high school ages.  The thing that irritates me is that US Soccer does tend to agree with you that this should be "mostly through individual work though" but won't come out and say it.  I'll repeat it again what I've posted before: I was reprimanded by my instructor during my elicense for putting together a level 2 exercise on crossing using just 1 attacker, 1 receiver and 1 goalkeeper (no pressure, with pressure added with 2 defenders on the level 3) in an exercise geared for 8-9 year old bronze levels.  They felt it wasn't game like and even the youngest players need to learn to cross under pressure.  I asked "well, where do they learn their technique...you know how to actually physically cross the ball and with accuracy?".  They answered "that's what trainers are for".  But that's not what most club parents out there think....they think the kid is on their team and that's pretty much all I need because it's the coach's job to teach them.  If that's really the philosophy that US Soccer is going for, then they should just come out and say every kid [at least on the younger end] should have a private trainer, parent who knows how to teach, or academy to work on their individual skills (but they can't because they are already under fire for accessibility and rising costs).
> 
> As for juggling, every team except the current one my son is on in their try outs [both this year and last] that he attended had a juggling session.  And, per the advice of this board, he didn't go to any of the cattle call try outs.  It's an easy way for the coaches at the younger levels to weed out those who have ball control v those that don't.


We agree on a lot, yes! 

US Soccer should be straight and come out and say it, again we agree there. I guess the transition from the outdated traditional model of coaching has been tough for the federation and for coaches and coach educators, so they are taking baby steps. Progress is being made which is the main thing.

As for the juggling at tryouts if I were a parent and a tryout had kids juggling, I’d take my kid somewhere else without taking a breath, maybe after asking the coach before I left, “remind me when my kid needs to juggle in a game again?”


----------



## watfly (Apr 27, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> I asked "well, where do they learn their technique...you know how to actually physically cross the ball and with accuracy?".  They answered "that's what trainers are for".


So who trains and certifies the trainers? (that's a rhetorical question).  More evidence that our youth programs tend to be more about developing teams than players.


----------



## Grace T. (Apr 27, 2018)

Found this video by this cute 8 year old goalkeeper playing for a local league in England.  Not sure if this is really typical, but from the look of both teams apparently the English play lot's of kickball at young ages too.


----------



## Paul Spacey (Apr 27, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Found this video by this cute 8 year old goalkeeper playing for a local league in England.  Not sure if this is really typical, but from the look of both teams apparently the English play lot's of kickball at young ages too.


yes, some teams play kickball in England (and many other countries) because that’s the way they are coached. “Kick it out” and “get it away” being two of the most common things you will hear. 

It’s not an English or American thing; it’s just a safety first mentality that I’ve seen from so many coaches of lots of nationalities. It’s unfortunate because these coaches have no idea how to actually help young players develop the calmness under pressure and decision making skills they require to have long term success and enjoyment in the game (success doesn’t mean winning to me, it means competing).

It’s a huge issue here in SoCal youth soccer and there is no doubt that part of the problem is the parental pressure of having to be the best and having to win because it’s part of the youth sports culture. Thankfully not everyone has this approach.


----------

