What makes the A team of clubs so much better?

Grace T. said:
The bad news is because of the academies mls next and the now expanded mls 2 are unlikely to go grade year. So this might benefit the girls where ecnl dominates but not the boys (at least in SoCal where mls dominates)

My son was in the same boat. More good news bad news. Size and age is pretty much everything in the earlier ages and for boys it last until about 16 when it finally levels out (give or take a year). The problem is by then your kid will probably be ground down with frustration if they want to play at the highest level and will have to nose to grindstone it to stay competitive. It’s why so many kids who aren’t close to the birth line or early bloomers drop out by high school: the effort to get there isn’t worth it to them and there’s not a whole lot they can do to rebalance things in the early years.
Click to expand...
We’re thinking of putting him in MLS Next as a bio band player for next season, and I’ve already spoken to a few coaches about this. Alternatively, we might spend a season in F1 Socal while playing on a second team in the CSL until ECNL makes the grade-year changes for 2026.

He’s turning 13 in September, and his appetite has increased significantly over the last 6 months, so we’re hoping for a growth spurt this year. If that doesn’t happen, we’re perfectly fine playing down until he physically develops more. He’s still putting in work with a personal trainer, and some backyard training. He understands now that coaches tend to value taller, faster, and stronger players early on, so he’s fully aware that this is a marathon, not a sprint.
 
Socal-Soccer-Dad said:
At our club, when there are - for whatever reason - limited number of available fields for that week, the A teams still train on whatever field is still available while B team trainings get cancelled..

And A team plays in better more prestigious tournaments.

And A team usually gets the "better" coaches although this is very subjective as you can imagine.

YMMV club to club and if all that's even worth it. I'd imagine if you can more or less be in the starting lineup on the A team more than 50% of the time, it's probably worth it...
Click to expand...
There are not even enough great coaches to cover all the A teams for all the age groups. B teams with a great coach is extremely rare. This is a huge headwind unfortunately and I think a reason why US is behind in soccer. A players with access to the scarce resource burnout or do not have the genetics when older. The kids who might have a chance never got access to the top level coaching.
 
Derek1800 said:
There are not even enough great coaches to cover all the A teams for all the age groups. B teams with a great coach is extremely rare. This is a huge headwind unfortunately and I think a reason why US is behind in soccer. A players with access to the scarce resource burnout or do not have the genetics when older. The kids who might have a chance never got access to the top level coaching.
Click to expand...
I agree top level players burn out: the burnout is more in the form that you see in this thread and the mls one, heavier on the boys than girls side (perhaps due to scholarship numbers or gridiron football), that when they get to late middle school or high school they decide mls next is not for them (because it makes sense for college admissions only if you are going the college recruitment route and need the scholarship or are applying to a handful of institutions you need the admissions bump for). The pros on the boy side also all go through academies and a handful of other institutions and that’s decided for the most part by middle school on the boys side. The bigger issue on the non mls next side is the number of hours. You simply aren’t going to match European academies if you aren’t doing it non stop every day and the reality is few non academy players are working on things on their own every day for hours (to be fair neither are Europeans except for the academy players who are structured for those hours)
 
JeterwastheBEST said:
It's "Slobodan's" sliced and diced "rights" world, were all just living in it....
Click to expand...
Here's a friendly tip: When you've gone over your data minutes and grandma let's you back online 3 days later, fast forward to the most recent page. That way it's not as obvious you're a clown.
 
Grace T. said:
I agree top level players burn out: the burnout is more in the form that you see in this thread and the mls one, heavier on the boys than girls side (perhaps due to scholarship numbers or gridiron football), that when they get to late middle school or high school they decide mls next is not for them (because it makes sense for college admissions only if you are going the college recruitment route and need the scholarship or are applying to a handful of institutions you need the admissions bump for). The pros on the boy side also all go through academies and a handful of other institutions and that’s decided for the most part by middle school on the boys side. The bigger issue on the non mls next side is the number of hours. You simply aren’t going to match European academies if you aren’t doing it non stop every day and the reality is few non academy players are working on things on their own every day for hours (to be fair neither are Europeans except for the academy players who are structured for those hours)
Click to expand...
Burnout certainly plays a role, but I think in a lot of cases there are just more, and arguably better, athletic options for kids when they get to HS.
 
Slobodan said:
Here's a friendly tip: When you've gone over your data minutes and grandma let's you back online 3 days later, fast forward to the most recent page. That way it's not as obvious you're a clown.
Click to expand...
"Slobodan" your attempts at comedy are almost as bad as your soccer comments and karaoke choices...
 
Too many parents are blinded into thinking that playing on the “A” team will accelerate development simply because they’re playing against the “elite” players.

If development is what is truly desired, then they would select a team (regardless of club) that trains twice as much than the “A” team of any other club.

Development occurs mostly during proper trainings, not games. The proper training ratio should be 4:1, not the other way around. If your “B” team trains four times a week, and the “A” team trains two times a week, then the “B” team would be better choice for individual player development.

In my experience, “A” teams mostly do not develop - they recruit. They entice parents with shiny objects and bells and whistles and recruit the players who were developed elsewhere and palm them off as their own. When those players finally make the “A” team, their development trajectory flattens to the same pace as the other “A” team players.

Most “A” teams train just twice a week, or possibly three times a week. If they do train a third day, then that session is usually nothing more than Speed & Agility, which does nothing to develop technical ball control.
 
Carlsbad7 said:
B teams, both players and parents are usually more fun to be around.

A teams everyone is always worried about minutes, position, coach, other parents, etc, etc, etc.

It all depends on what you want out of playing and what you're willing to do to get it.
Click to expand...
Yes, 100%. The parents are so conspiratorial and paranoid about the status of their kids. Ridiculous.
 
CoachReed68 said:
Too many parents are blinded into thinking that playing on the “A” team will accelerate development simply because they’re playing against the “elite” players.

If development is what is truly desired, then they would select a team (regardless of club) that trains twice as much than the “A” team of any other club.

Development occurs mostly during proper trainings, not games. The proper training ratio should be 4:1, not the other way around. If your “B” team trains four times a week, and the “A” team trains two times a week, then the “B” team would be better choice for individual player development.

In my experience, “A” teams mostly do not develop - they recruit. They entice parents with shiny objects and bells and whistles and recruit the players who were developed elsewhere and palm them off as their own. When those players finally make the “A” team, their development trajectory flattens to the same pace as the other “A” team players.

Most “A” teams train just twice a week, or possibly three times a week. If they do train a third day, then that session is usually nothing more than Speed & Agility, which does nothing to develop technical ball control.
Click to expand...
In my experience, an A team trains 3 times a week. What team trains more than that?
 
CoachReed68 said:
Yes, 100%. The parents are so conspiratorial and paranoid about the status of their kids. Ridiculous.
Click to expand...

We had a combined NL/RL team for the "trapped" middle schoolers this year that attended a tournament, and the biggest difference was the parents: there was a sizeable group of NL parents that seemed genuinely pissed when a kid - not their own, of course - did something they disagreed with, and would happily tell anyone within earshot. They gave off definite "your kid's bringing my kid's level down" vibe, though the team did really well. They didn't attend any team meals either.

The RL parents were way more chill and social in comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top