Sandbagging Fall League Teams

R

Rollonyoubears

SILVER
Our 2018 San Diego Fall League flight 3 bracket includes top 50 (in CA) Surf and SD Force, as well as #67 ranked City SC San Marcos. Shame on SoCal, these coaches, and clubs for letting these teams, who have won flight 2 tournaments, play in flight 3 league. I get that the rankings are informal, but these teams have goal differentials through 7 games of 59, 40, and 55 goals.

Our team is competitive for sure, and I like them playing tougher teams, but I would never want my kid's team dominating their division. It's not good for anyone's development. This age should be about proper competition levels and fun.

Rant over.
 
I would yell/shame these opposing parents and coaches that are playing down and blowing out teams by 7 goals per game. If I'm a parent on the winning side I would not be happy as well since my kid is not developing playing against lower competition.
 
rainbow_unicorn said:
I would yell/shame these opposing parents and coaches that are playing down and blowing out teams by 7 goals per game. If I'm a parent on the winning side I would not be happy as well since my kid is not developing playing against lower competition.
Click to expand...
And they will do it for State Cup as well, so what's the point of registering... To all those who will think we should stop whining and play better, I agree to some extent. However, there are flights for a reason, and while SoCal will let you petition to play down or up based on PTS/GM, you know damn well they won't be monitoring these teams that sandbag. And just so it's more clear, Surf is averaging 10.1 GF and 1.7GA.
 
Rollonyoubears said:
Our 2018 San Diego Fall League flight 3 bracket includes top 50 (in CA) Surf and SD Force, as well as #67 ranked City SC San Marcos. Shame on SoCal, these coaches, and clubs for letting these teams, who have won flight 2 tournaments, play in flight 3 league. I get that the rankings are informal, but these teams have goal differentials through 7 games of 59, 40, and 55 goals.

Our team is competitive for sure, and I like them playing tougher teams, but I would never want my kid's team dominating their division. It's not good for anyone's development. This age should be about proper competition levels and fun.

Rant over.
Click to expand...
Horrible to hear. The dumb GDA league was wrose. Teams from Socal driving to Utah and beating teams 12-0. No fun for either team. I think some parents like to watch their kids score 6 goals in one game for double hattrick
 
If a club has multiple teams at that level, it makes intuitive sense that they'd try to put one team in flight 1, one in flight 2, one in flight 3, etc. to keep any intramural official league matches to a minimum. If they do a decent job of assessing/assigning kids to teams, it generally works out. But if instead they have multiple teams that happen to be at the exact same bracket - and one of them is beating up on another one 16-0 - something is really wrong. The coaches/administrators of the club did a poor job of placing the teams in the brackets where they felt there would be the best fit for the upcoming season. Yes - the league does the final placement, but the clubs are the ones giving them all of the necessary information as the brackets are being formed and approved, especially with the very youngest.

If a club knowingly placed their team with lower competition so that they could steamroll the opposition, it's crap for them doing it, and it's crap for the league to go along with it. But from what I've seen, it's more common for the top clubs to play their top teams up a year in the youngers to give them harder competition, rather than playing their own age. If their second or third teams are playing their own age, are in the top bracket for that age, and are demolishing the competition - there's not much to fault with the club. The general advice to "get gud" and stop complaining seems to apply.
 
RandomSoccerFan said:
If a club has multiple teams at that level, it makes intuitive sense that they'd try to put one team in flight 1, one in flight 2, one in flight 3, etc. to keep any intramural official league matches to a minimum. If they do a decent job of assessing/assigning kids to teams, it generally works out. But if instead they have multiple teams that happen to be at the exact same bracket - and one of them is beating up on another one 16-0 - something is really wrong. The coaches/administrators of the club did a poor job of placing the teams in the brackets where they felt there would be the best fit for the upcoming season. Yes - the league does the final placement, but the clubs are the ones giving them all of the necessary information as the brackets are being formed and approved, especially with the very youngest.

If a club knowingly placed their team with lower competition so that they could steamroll the opposition, it's crap for them doing it, and it's crap for the league to go along with it. But from what I've seen, it's more common for the top clubs to play their top teams up a year in the youngers to give them harder competition, rather than playing their own age. If their second or third teams are playing their own age, are in the top bracket for that age, and are demolishing the competition - there's not much to fault with the club. The general advice to "get gud" and stop complaining seems to apply.
Click to expand...
Is there no flight 1 in SD at that age? Odd
 
Rollonyoubears said:
And they will do it for State Cup as well, so what's the point of registering... To all those who will think we should stop whining and play better, I agree to some extent. However, there are flights for a reason, and while SoCal will let you petition to play down or up based on PTS/GM, you know damn well they won't be monitoring these teams that sandbag. And just so it's more clear, Surf is averaging 10.1 GF and 1.7GA.
Click to expand...
I thought there was a play up requirement (by bracket based upon league performance)… maybe that was more of a suggestion than a requirement.
 
Not that I don't believe clubs are playing teams down a level for wins. This is a tried and true way to make parents happy so they stay engaged and keep sending in checks. Which is how you stay employed as a youngers coach.

However, there's a good chance with youngers level 3 teams that players have moved on and coaches dont really know what they've got with the new players until the first couple of games.
 
N00B said:
Is there no flight 1 in SD at that age? Odd
Click to expand...

Yes, there is certainly Flight 1. Here's what Surf San Diego looks like at the 2018B level:

surf 2018.jpg

Screenshot 2025-10-07 231755.png


Their top team is #1 in state, and probably could play up a year. Their #2 team is doing well in flight 2, and their #3 team is dominating flight 3. Their #4 team is doing OK in Flight 4, but the other two teams are struggling in that (lowest) flight. Their top team shows *15 goals stronger* than their bottom team. It certainly does seem that the #3 team could hold its own in Flight 2, and I'd be surprised if Surf didn't put them there the next chance they get in spring season. Of the 6 teams, it's the only one of the 6 that stands out as being in the "wrong" flight at the moment.
 
RandomSoccerFan said:
Yes, there is certainly Flight 1. Here's what Surf San Diego looks like at the 2018B level:

View attachment 32054

View attachment 32055


Their top team is #1 in state, and probably could play up a year. Their #2 team is doing well in flight 2, and their #3 team is dominating flight 3. Their #4 team is doing OK in Flight 4, but the other two teams are struggling in that (lowest) flight. Their top team shows *15 goals stronger* than their bottom team. It certainly does seem that the #3 team could hold its own in Flight 2, and I'd be surprised if Surf didn't put them there the next chance they get in spring season. Of the 6 teams, it's the only one of the 6 that stands out as being in the "wrong" flight at the moment.
Click to expand...
I was looking at the girls 2018’s that don’t have a flight 1 bracket. You’re right about the boys division.
 
N00B said:
I was looking at the girls 2018’s that don’t have a flight 1 bracket. You’re right about the boys division.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean. Yes, looks like the top bracket down in SD is Flight 2 - and that's where the top Surf team is playing (and dominating). By the next year, there is a Flight 1 in SD for U9, so it's fortunately only a temporary issue. Right now all of the top SD 2018G teams that want to play their age in the highest bracket - that is Flight 2.
Screenshot 2025-10-08 084554.png
 
rainbow_unicorn said:
I would yell/shame these opposing parents and coaches that are playing down and blowing out teams by 7 goals per game. If I'm a parent on the winning side I would not be happy as well since my kid is not developing playing against lower competition.
Click to expand...
I feel this way with MLS2, but it's more the other teams not pulling their weight. Some of the weaker sides are basically Flight 1 level.
 
RandomSoccerFan said:
If a club has multiple teams at that level, it makes intuitive sense that they'd try to put one team in flight 1, one in flight 2, one in flight 3, etc. to keep any intramural official league matches to a minimum. If they do a decent job of assessing/assigning kids to teams, it generally works out. But if instead they have multiple teams that happen to be at the exact same bracket - and one of them is beating up on another one 16-0 - something is really wrong. The coaches/administrators of the club did a poor job of placing the teams in the brackets where they felt there would be the best fit for the upcoming season. Yes - the league does the final placement, but the clubs are the ones giving them all of the necessary information as the brackets are being formed and approved, especially with the very youngest.

If a club knowingly placed their team with lower competition so that they could steamroll the opposition, it's crap for them doing it, and it's crap for the league to go along with it. But from what I've seen, it's more common for the top clubs to play their top teams up a year in the youngers to give them harder competition, rather than playing their own age. If their second or third teams are playing their own age, are in the top bracket for that age, and are demolishing the competition - there's not much to fault with the club. The general advice to "get gud" and stop complaining seems to apply.
Click to expand...
From my understanding, the coaches had to choose their flight for fall league earlier than normal this year (or at least with our club) so the idea that you don't quite know what you have is valid for many teams. As much as SoCal says they try to fairly flight teams for league and state cup, it's not happening obviously. It's fair to say these teams should be competing in flight 2. Some of our team is flight 2 skill level and some are more like flight 4, so that's why we are in flight 3. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to be 7-0 and dominating right now vs. teams that realistically should be in flight 4 and not being challenged. So, I guess after all is said and done, maybe i'm totally fine with it! LOL.
 
rainbow_unicorn said:
I would yell/shame these opposing parents and coaches that are playing down and blowing out teams by 7 goals per game. If I'm a parent on the winning side I would not be happy as well since my kid is not developing playing against lower competition.
Click to expand...
Far too frequently the issue is not the winning team but the losing club and parents. Everyone seems to be all to eager to see their kids play in a higher bracket and they feel that their kids should move up. If you are losing with high margins it is quite likely the losing team is flighted too high OR the club sold the parents that their child is ready to play club as opposed to staying in rec. I have seen plenty of teams that destroy flight 2 opposition but similarly get destroyed in flight 1 (feel free to the flights to just be +/- 1). This is the unfortunate truth about the sport. Frequently relegation threaten teams in the top flight can be coasting in the lower division.

Maybe instead of yelling and screaming at the opposing team maybe do some constructive communication with your own club and force them to re-balance the teams at your own club to make the team more competitive and/or see if your child is benefitting from these blow out games (winning or losing). If not move your child. Your allegiance and primary focus should be your own child and his/her development. Even though you have a signed contract and expense with the club that should not out weigh your child mental health and growth both in and out of the sport. Additionally, even if you have paid, you are able to get a refund from your club if you dont see the benefit by getting a doctors evaluation that these imbalanced settings are severely hampering your child's mental health.

Make this about your child and their wellbeing and dont blame the opposition. These kind of gaps exist in the professional and international level too.
 
socaldad10 said:
Take a look at these scores.... City SWSC, not a good look.. kids quite after a game like this

Click to expand...

Dang, that was the first team I thought about, too.
That Bush team is a mid/high F2 team, low F1. SoCal only had an F1/2 and an F3 bracket for this age group. City SW probably did not want too many of their teams in the same bracket, along with some of the teams being 2019s, has created this type of imbalance.
 
Rollonyoubears said:
From my understanding, the coaches had to choose their flight for fall league earlier than normal this year (or at least with our club) so the idea that you don't quite know what you have is valid for many teams. As much as SoCal says they try to fairly flight teams for league and state cup, it's not happening obviously. It's fair to say these teams should be competing in flight 2. Some of our team is flight 2 skill level and some are more like flight 4, so that's why we are in flight 3. On the other hand, I wouldn't want to be 7-0 and dominating right now vs. teams that realistically should be in flight 4 and not being challenged. So, I guess after all is said and done, maybe i'm totally fine with it! LOL.
Click to expand...
In my experience, coaches don't purposely take a F2 team and play down in F3. There is not much upside to it:
-Parents always want kids to play a higher flight. Taking a F2 team down to F3 will drive many players to leave.
-Difficult to recruit strong players to join a F3 team next year.
-As many have said, playing subpar competition helps no one.
-Parents don't care about huge wins after a couple of games. Every parent is now thinking how can I move my kid to a F1 team next year.

Coach in question probably just miss-judged how good his team could be. After all, these are teams of six or seven year old boys. If the team is the 3rd best team within its club, it's quite typical for it to play F3.
 
Rollonyoubears said:
As much as SoCal says they try to fairly flight teams for league and state cup, it's not happening obviously.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but make sure that we're not comparing it to some hypothetical completely fair bracket where everyone is close to equal, everyone has a chance, and nobody is exceptional. All teams are at .500, so they can flip a coin at the end of the season to see who gets to take home the trophies.
In all brackets, at all levels, there are going to be 1 or 2 dominant teams at the top, and 1 or 2 struggling teams at the bottom. It's not fun to get your face blown off every weekend, but it's only slightly less painful to win in such a way that the kids aren't challenging or even enjoying themselves. This is going to be common all the way through the youngers, a little less pronounced in the olders.

ColdPizza said:
Dang, that was the first team I thought about, too.
That Bush team is a mid/high F2 team, low F1. SoCal only had an F1/2 and an F3 bracket for this age group. City SW probably did not want too many of their teams in the same bracket, along with some of the teams being 2019s, has created this type of imbalance.
Click to expand...
If there really is that limited a choice for brackets for them, IMO they (and the league) should really consider allowing them to play up an age group. Looking at these game results in hindsight, there's no excuse to have teams so far apart from each other in a single bracket - especially considering they are from the same club and should know better.
 
MochaRulz said:
If you are losing with high margins it is quite likely the losing team is flighted too high
Click to expand...
This is a really good point.

Looking at one of the flight 4 brackets (there are 3 for this age group in SD) - the average CA rank is 126 with a range of 126 to 207.

For the Flight 3 bracket OP is talking about, the average CA rank is 122 with a range of 45 to 202. The bottom 6 teams fall within the ranking range of the flight 4 bracket. So as the @MochaRulz pointed out, this could be just as much about these bottom 6 teams playing in too HIGH of a bracket.

The other problem might be the lack of Flight 1 and 2 teams and brackets. There is only one Flight 1 bracket, one Flight 2 bracket. The flight 2 bracket in particular is listed as "SD Central" whereas the others are listed as "SD". So maybe there wasn't the option for the top Flight 3 teams to play in a Flight 2 bracket based on geography or available teams?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top