Eagle33
PREMIER
Not sure if I'm understanding you correctly....
18 players - 2 of them goalkeepers.
You want 18 players plus 2 goalkeepers? 20 players?
Ideal roster size
- Thread starter Surf Zombie
- Start date
18 players - 2 of them goalkeepers.
You want 18 players plus 2 goalkeepers? 20 players?
Desert Hound
DA
I think at the older ages 18 is about the right number.
You always see injuries and/or school conflict, family commitments, etc.
Now if the coach is one that doesn't sub, then being towards the end of the bench is not a good thing.
You always see injuries and/or school conflict, family commitments, etc.
Now if the coach is one that doesn't sub, then being towards the end of the bench is not a good thing.
I was editing when i timed out. I think 18 total with keeper that can play field.
Both of my kid's ECNL teams are carrying 21 players. They are both older so the likelihood of injuries is high. Not sure how that is going to play out this season. It may not even matter at this point as the fall season seems less and less of a possibility.
Eagle33
PREMIER
21 players on a team is clearly about money, not about players. The argument will be "but we getting them ready for college" or to your point, "injuries will happen". Yes, in colleges they have about 30 on the roster, with around 12-14 that will never get a game time.
Injuries is a weak argument -what if they will not happen?
Question is, unless your kid is a starter, would you join a team with 21 players?
If your kid is not regularly on the starting roster or at least a frequent sub (or perhaps a key position player like backup GK), look for another team.
College teams sometimes have huge rosters, but they limit the number who travel to save money, and sometimes limit the game roster if a conference rule states so.
1/4 is subjective. We played with 15 last year 11v11. 1 broke her arm before season even started, one had recurring knee issues Patellofemoral pain after a bad tackle early in the season and was on and off with PT, one sprained ankle, 2 or 3 with Osgood–Schlatter disease off and on, plus family vacations, events and etc. It was rare we had all 15 at one time, most of the time it was 12 to 13 and we ended up having to borrow players from other teams to have a full roster for tournaments. Would have been better if they simply rostered 16 or 17. There are always other teams wanting to borrow so opportunities for playing time are there.
I wouldn't but both my kids are starters. If my player was at the bottom 1/3 of the roster, I would probably put them on the B team to maximize playing time. But you have to be very honest with yourself about your kid's ability and how they compare with the rest of the team. I know plenty of parents that think their kids are the next big thing but clearly they are not.
Two different scenarios, pay for play and sponsored.
For p2p anything over 18 for 11v11 is not ideal. 16-18 is fine in most cases if not can always bring in other players for within a club.
Sponsored well that's more subjective, some leagues allow 20+ on the roster and 18 game day but depending on the sub rules 15-16 actually play so really need to train & perform in games to earn, keep that playing time. Not for everyone like p2p and the players should be the ones discussing playing time with the coaches. If you're singing up for a sponsored team and concerned about potential playing time might be better served looking at some of the alternatives.
For p2p anything over 18 for 11v11 is not ideal. 16-18 is fine in most cases if not can always bring in other players for within a club.
Sponsored well that's more subjective, some leagues allow 20+ on the roster and 18 game day but depending on the sub rules 15-16 actually play so really need to train & perform in games to earn, keep that playing time. Not for everyone like p2p and the players should be the ones discussing playing time with the coaches. If you're singing up for a sponsored team and concerned about potential playing time might be better served looking at some of the alternatives.
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
Eagle is spot on; 21 is clearly about money. IMO anything above 18 is unnecessary and just about bringing in money (likely to cover scholarships of 'top' players). If you are a starter, I guess it doesn't matter how many are on the roster for games but even if you are the best player on the team, your practice is likely impacted by having more than 18 players.
I see this first-hand with my HS program. Our rosters are around 22 players and having that many involved in a practice makes it difficult. IMO 16-18 is an ideal number for practice although the amount of field space available along with assistant coaches/helpers means that more players is possible (if you have space and extra coaches). If you just run standard drills, it's ok to accommodate 20+ players; if you are working on game-specific situations with lots of decision making, having 20+ players means trying to rotate some in/out and it's just not workable. My subjective opinion.
@lafalafa makes some good points and I'm still strongly of the opinion that if you clearly aren't going to see much playing time (if you are towards the bottom of the roster, you should be aware of it), you should find another team. Practicing (even if the team is very strong) but not playing much (if at all) in games is foolish and won't work out for anyone in the long run.
Wouldn't two full teams be better (if you have the space)? Or do you practice the starting offense against the starting defense?
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
With two full teams (if you have space) it can work but without multiple coaches, again it’s tough to manage everything. For me, ideally you need at least one coach looking at the tactical and decision making elements and then another looking at behavioral elements (focus, effort, communication etc).
And yes, often I’ll have offense vs defense in game scenarios and work on specific elements with one or the other (trying to focus on everything isn’t effective IMO). I’m talking from a position of only having half a field to work with (my guess is the majority of teams don’t have a full field to themselves).
Eagle33
PREMIER
HS is different. In HS you have take into consideration not only injuries but also ineligibility. With too many games and practices every day, injuries/being out sick will happen. Plus you also want to have 11v11 game in the end of each session (ideally). So having 22-24 players on the roster is normal. Running sessions with 22 players and up is no problem as long as coach knows what he/she is doing. All it takes is little bit of planning and, of course, a good assistant or 2.
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
Maybe I don't know what I'm doing then. Thanks for helping me realize that Eagle.
The 11v11 'game' (or whatever is it) isn't supposed to be at the end of each session btw; coaches get caught up in that too often, "we can play a game at the end." Game situations are where coaching/learning takes place and they should happen consistently throughout practice; it's not a reward at the end of a session, despite what coaching courses might teach you.
Eagle33
PREMIER
seems like you being overly sensitive. I never said 11v11 game is a reward or you don't know what you doing. However I don't see any issue with training 22 and up players. The more the merrier.Maybe I don't know what I'm doing then. Thanks for helping me realize that Eagle.
The 11v11 'game' (or whatever is it) isn't supposed to be at the end of each session btw; coaches get caught up in that too often, "we can play a game at the end." Game situations are where coaching/learning takes place and they should happen consistently throughout practice; it's not a reward at the end of a session, despite what coaching courses might teach you.
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
Haha not sensitive; a bit sarcastic and light hearted. It's not always understood in person so via text is even more difficult....no worries!
The more the merrier is fine; you just miss out on lots of the nuance required for in-depth learning with too many players IMO.
Haha not sensitive; a bit sarcastic and light hearted. It's not always understood in person so via text is even more difficult....no worries!
The more the merrier is fine; you just miss out on lots of the nuance required for in-depth learning with too many players IMO.
You can have a "game", but use the whistle to stop and replay situations or question players on their tactics;
"You were offside on that run - back it up and try again staying onside."
"You lost the ball because you were double-teamed - where was your open man?"
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
Of course, no issue with that. Doing it with 22+ players impacts the quality and depth of learning unless you have lots of coaches which isn't the case for the majority of teams.