Guarantee to play 50% and small rosters?

[espola]

I guess I need make my point clearer. It is not about what the best option is. It's about how to take advantage of every teaching moment to give players to the most options tomorrow. If all a coach cares about is winning, the safest option is to kick it out of bounds when passing back to the keeper is not an option. Effectively the coach limits his players options to two: passing back the keeper or kicking it out of bounds. He deprives his player of a chance to learn a third option: dribbling out of the jam himself. Or passing to another teammate. More generally, he deprives his players of a chance to develop comfort on the ball, which endures confidence in such pressure situations. I once even saw a coach instructing his player to kick a FK directly out of bounds, because the game was tied with 2 minutes left and he didn't want to risk losing. That's why a lot of defenders in youth soccer don't have the requisite ball skills to make it to the next level. The higher level you go, the more converted defenders you see.

We have more youth players than Germany and England combined. Yet, we struggle to qualify for WC and have never been a contender. This winning-today mentality is a main reason.

"A lot of" nonsense.

 

[timbuck]

We've played against "kick it out. And kick it as far out as possible so that our team can all get back and defend" teams.
It is sooooo frustrating to have a throw in every 45 seconds.
My assistant coach used to love teaching the "kick it out" method. It's safe. If works. It's easy.
He's no longer coaching with me. We won a few more games when he was around. But now our keepers get a ton of balls played back to them. It hasn't directly cost us a goal. But the first touch and decision making of my backline has improved a ton.

 

[socalkdg]

Passing to an open teammate in a better position then you should always be a top consideration. This includes the keeper. Very few teams we have played this year do it. Our team is still a work in progress as a few girls played a couple years not doing it and that isn't their first inclination. My daughter needs to be more vocal reminding them that she is open and a good option. Its the first year for many of them under this system, playing support, passing more than dribbling. Kicking the ball out of bands should be one of the last options.

I notice when you are coaching from the sideline, watching live or on tv it seems so easy to see all the options that are available, but for a player on the field that has to look 360 degrees in an instant and make the correct decision, it is easy to see why the right choice isn't always made. I think it is why practice can look so good, but in a game the experience isn't quite there yet to always make the right decisions.

 

[Deadpoolscores!]

Based off the feedback it seems that there should be clause for the AYSO United...if the players does not commit as much as they should they should play less and not be rewarded that minimum playing time. Also selecting well experience coaches not newbies would help as well. Hopefully whoever are the Director of Coaches for each area does a good job in selecting good coaches...also pricing something I didn't touch base. I agree that is something they should be making more affordable. Great job everyone on feedbacks, so it looks like AYSO United has its work cutout.

Well it looks like the DOC for AYSO United (Central "Chino Hills" & Empire "Riverside") has been selected, Tom Lancaster from NOMADS. He will be hiring the coaches and possibly his staff as well. What are your thoughts, is he the right man for the job knocking on the doors on multiple clubs such as Legends, Arsenal, IE Surf etc.?

 

[seesnake]

Will there be a San Diego area option?

 

[Deadpoolscores!]

Will there be a San Diego area option?

According to the website, presently no but there may be in the future.

 

[ThtGoaldnKeeper]

Ok everyone what are you thoughts on this one...if there was a club out there that would guarantee that your son/daughter will play 50% and the roster size would be small. Would you join that club? Or wouldn't because of the name of the club? I recently came across this and was surprised about this http://aysounited.org/ It claims that the coaches will be licensed just like any club, will be competing in the same league just like other clubs(league TBD), pay referees just like all the clubs. Would you join or just simply not because of the organization. This is something that just started and is going to grow next year...so what's more important now? What are your thoughts.

In the end it's still AYSO. All AYSO teams "guarantee" 50 percent playing time. It is not a club. There are very few AYSO teams that become top level teams (Thousand Oaks played about Flight 2 level last year). If you want your kid to do good and get better, you HAVE to move to club. I'm not saying that good players do not exist in the AYSO circuit, especially not in the boys, however, your kid will not go past high school or that level if all they do is play AYSO. It is not the name AYSO that causes people to choose club, it's the fact that AYSO is soccer's version of rec ball.
The decision to play club is the same as a baseball player's to move to travel ball instead of rec ball. It's the same as a swimmer's to join a club instead of just doing high school. The commitment is higher. The competition is higher. The speed of play and the strength. The thing about guaranteeing play is that that mindset prohibits a player's work ethic. If they are guaranteed to play, there is no reason to work harder and harder at practice. To work on your own fitness. Work to please and impress your coach. It takes the competitiveness out of soccer. These kids probably won't be taken seriously. The soccer scope is too big. When you have kids, who in the same 2017-2018 season will be playing ECNL, DA, and Flight 1 teams, and get playing time, how would a kid playing a newly formed AYSO "club" that doesn't force the kids to earn time. It's unrealistic. It doesn't work like that in college, in the real world. Things have to be earned.
It's a fantastic idea, nevertheless. But, I do think this would be the better option for those looking to transition into the club soccer scene rather than be a permanent home. These are just my thoughts on it .

 

[jrcaesar]

If they are guaranteed to play, there is no reason to work harder and harder at practice. To work on your own fitness. Work to please and impress your coach. It takes the competitiveness out of soccer.

I agree to a point. But ... on any club team, a good coach should find a way for kids to play half of the time or those players are on the wrong team (wrong club, wrong tier, wrong coach, too many rostered players, etc.). Even Flight 1 players/parents should have that expectation most games. Now there's a big difference between playing 50% of a game and being a starter and playing all 60-70 minutes ... the AYSO "club" team is the same as others in this regard.

 

[Grace T.]

In the end it's still AYSO. All AYSO teams "guarantee" 50 percent playing time. It is not a club. There are very few AYSO teams that become top level teams (Thousand Oaks played about Flight 2 level last year). If you want your kid to do good and get better, you HAVE to move to club. I'm not saying that good players do not exist in the AYSO circuit, especially not in the boys, however, your kid will not go past high school or that level if all they do is play AYSO. It is not the name AYSO that causes people to choose club, it's the fact that AYSO is soccer's version of rec ball.

Having been through both the Extras and Club tryout season this year for my son (ultimately he got an offer for an Extras team and a club team and we went club), the other problem with the AYSO club/extras program is that they still rely on volunteer coaches. Though the knowledge base is higher than the regular AYSO rec program, it's still not the same as our club staff. Granted, I'm sure there are some AYSO coaches out there that are better than some individual club coaches. But overall, the system of relying so heavily on volunteers (whether coaches or refs) does carry a downside for player development. And because the team is only together for the season (at least in theory) it also seems to put pressure on the staff to put together a team of the fastest and biggest legs, rather than the players with the most soccer knowledge (because it's one season and then out...you aren't trying to build any brand loyalty there).