In a perfect world it would be really nice and your absolutely on point, however in a normal So Cal world (pre-COVID) it would be very difficult.
You are opening a big can of worms taking into consideration pay-to-play, scholarship etc into player number equation.
Even for olders, I’m not looking for a team that only plays the top kids. I have no problem with cuts, but don’t put someone on the team who isn’t good enough to put on the field.
and right there that's it. If a kid is not strong enough to play for a team, don't add them. Yes, I know it's $'s when you add a player but as a coach it causes you playing time headaches and from a players' perspective, it's simply unfair. If someone tries out and they are not at the required standard for your team, don't add them and smile about the $'s...point them in the direction of another team that is likely a better fit. Simple enough.
If you want to make a long term bet on work ethic, that’s fine.
I understand what you are saying but that wasn't my point. I will always invest time and patience into developing any player but my point was this; if they are clearly not at the level for the team, don't add them to 'fill a spot' and bring in some cash. It happens a lot, we all know that and we also know what happens 95% of the time; the kid hardly plays and their time is wasted.
That was the issue in my sons 2011 team. The team was a flight 1 team but since they only had 8 plus full time goalie (parents was force to have he’s kid play goalie) they filled in spot with one kid who unbalance the team when it came it to game time and another who was too young(2012) to be playing up a year. Just to fill spots , you’re right if they can’t be at the level of the team why fill that spot. Work with what you have. Player need to learn to work hard in practice and not think they can just play because their parents paid and same goes for the parents. I just started coaching this last year flight 3 team. I tell the parents straight out your son has to work hard no positions are set no players are guaranteed full playing time. Yes developing is key but if the player/s bring the level of the team down. The players need to work hard in order to be set to play a game. Kids get frustrated at times when a player Can’t keep up at a certain level. The team moral goes down and they just give up.
How does one determine if a kid is good enough? I’m trying to get into US soccer but it’s hard. Most games at the MLS/NWSL level are overly physical and lack skill. The lack of skill is even more prominent in the youth game. The majority of the games I see consist of someone booting the ball downfield and then a foot race ensues.
This right here IS THE KEY to any roster size
Weak players bring the level of the game down. True enough, but are we talking about Bundesliga or 8 year old kids?
I like this but not sure 16 is enough. Have seen Girls u14 and up take multiple ACL injuries in a season and then as players play more minutes they become susceptible. One team last year had 4 girls all out for the season with ACL. With a team of 16 that leaves one sub in 11v11. I would say boost that to 17 or 18 as the games and seasons get longer or have a semi permanent set of players to borrow.
It really depends. If you have a second team for the same age group, it is better to carry less. Especially if you are adding just for numbers, and not players that could help the team. In case of injury, you move up 1, 2 or even 3 players to help fill in. Usually, there won’t be much difference between the top players on the second team, and the bottom players of the top team.
