Youth Soccer Rotation - Help (1 Viewer)

[General Malaise]

If you want to make the sport at younger ages more about playing and having fun, then that's great. Every kid can play in a scrimmage. I liked scrimmaging as much as games when I was a kid because I just wanted to play and be free of organized drills, etc. But if you're playing a "game," the context is that you're playing to win. I don't know. I know where you guys are coming from. I don't want my kid to be obsessed with winning and be one of those kids that flips #### if they lose...but at the same time, I want my kid to WANT to win like I did when I was a kid. I practiced my ### off. I was "that kid" at a younger age that was just better than everyone in my county's rec league. I remember scoring 5+ goals a game and then being forced to play goalie.

I do agree 100% with what El Floppo said re. being "that one kid" not helping anyone though. I was so much better than everybody at like age 9 through probably 14...then, when we started playing outside of our county, I had my ### handed to me by guys who had to face real competition most of the time, while I relied on speed and a good shot. I didn't have the fundamentals.

I guess my thing is that if you don't want competition, don't call them games.

There are various levels of soccer out there, even for kids who are 6. Rec soccer is supposed to be fun and provide opportunities for all kids to play and coaches need to let all the kids get on the field and play. It's hard to give every kid equal playing time, but it's not hard to make sure they ALL get in and play quite a bit, even if that means taking out your best players and giving them rest.

If your son/daughter is designed just like you were, then he/she should be playing in classic or select soccer at the developmental level where it's more serious business and less about fun. It will cost you more, but if that's what you're after, it's out there for you.

My oldest son is not very gifted athletically and chances of him making a HS team are slim to none. But he loves soccer and its the only team sport he plays. Thankfully, he can keep playing rec soccer until he goes to college and there will always be a roster spot for him through our league. The top players will be playing for HS or club teams, but that's a very small number of the players out there. Heck, I wish I had that when I was growing up. I was a good player, but I wasn't going to get significant time on the HS team, which was uber competitive. I chose to swim instead and was good at that, but I really missed soccer and wish I had a rec team to play on through my HS years.

 

[General Malaise]

I guess my thing is that if you don't want competition, don't call them games.

What should we call it when two different teams get on a field wearing their uniforms and try to score goals on each other?

You call it a game...and you put your best kids out there to try and win.

If you're not trying to win, it's practice, drills, scrimmages, etc.

How many kids do you have now, what are their ages and how much coaching have you done in youth sports?

 

[El Floppo]

That's fair...but how do you keep that kid motivated then? Honest question. Because if his "ability" is capped, the odds of him getting bored are a lot higher. It's akin to why sometimes really smart kids in school have problems b/c they're just bored and seek bad outlets for their energies.

I coached 6 year olds last year in a rec league.

we had a bunch of kids who were of various athletic abilities, and then we had Nick (his name was actually Nick). Nick scored as many goals a game as he wanted- he was just another level above every kid in the league; great agility, quick, fantastic ball skills and soccer awareness. even when I put him in goal, he was just a great athlete and could stop most shots. little fella too.

we ran away with every game for the first part of the season- I talked with his parents and the league about putting him in the non-rec league, as his presence wasn't really doing anybody any good, even though he was young enough to enjoy going out and doing whatever he wanted against kids who didn't know how to tie their own shoes. parents didn't have the time or $ resources to commit to him playing in the elite team, so the league just shuffled him to the worst team. Let me rephrase- they were the worst team, until we lost Nick and they go him. then they were the best team and we were the worst team. at the least, Nick should have been moved to the older rec league- but they were full.

I think kids this young need to just go out and have fun, learning the sport along the way as best as possible. 7-8, I think they're better equipped developmentally (physically and emotionally) to handle the increase of commitment to playing more competitively if they have minimals. once they commit to playing more competitively- they commit to getting PT as deserved, IMO. utnil then, stay in the rec leagues where fun, basic development and participation are more important than winning (to me).

Valid points all around...but let me ask you this...do you think Nick would be a better player in 1 year by playing the 7-8 year-olds or by staying in the 6 y/o group and dominating? That's what I guess I get at with the whole challenge thing. It conveys an odd lesson to Nick that he gets pulled from a game and told to go sit down so some other kid can learn to kick a ball.

I'd still argue that if you need equal development at 6, and I'm fine with that, then you don't organize your league with games. You don't formalize it. Think of it likea soccer "camp," where you get different groups together and play, do drills, etc. No formal teams, no uniforms, etc.

he's not "pulled from the game". he's subbing in and out like everybody else- that's the deal and not a reflection on anybody's capabilites. when he's in, he's dominating. and he grows his game by playing against older kids and not by dominating kids who are terrible. if dominating is the end goal- then sure, keep him where he is. if making him a better player is the end goal- time to move on. I was like you with sports and especially soccer- but I decided to play HS varsity as a freshman and play in the local men's league before I could drive. absolutely invaluable lessons from both that wouldn't have been learned "dominating" against JV scrubs.

but I agree with you. I have my son, now 7, in a brazilian style "class" now instead of that league. what was worse about that particular league is that, aside from 15 minutes of drills run by a coach before the games, there was NO practice. I was the coach- but my only coaching was subbing players in and out. in retropsect, the league was useless and I can see how much more my son enjoys getting to go out and play competitions that revolve around soccer skills, but not just games. I see his abilities growing more too.

 

[General Malaise]

That's fair...but how do you keep that kid motivated then? Honest question. Because if his "ability" is capped, the odds of him getting bored are a lot higher. It's akin to why sometimes really smart kids in school have problems b/c they're just bored and seek bad outlets for their energies.

I coached 6 year olds last year in a rec league.

we had a bunch of kids who were of various athletic abilities, and then we had Nick (his name was actually Nick). Nick scored as many goals a game as he wanted- he was just another level above every kid in the league; great agility, quick, fantastic ball skills and soccer awareness. even when I put him in goal, he was just a great athlete and could stop most shots. little fella too.

we ran away with every game for the first part of the season- I talked with his parents and the league about putting him in the non-rec league, as his presence wasn't really doing anybody any good, even though he was young enough to enjoy going out and doing whatever he wanted against kids who didn't know how to tie their own shoes. parents didn't have the time or $ resources to commit to him playing in the elite team, so the league just shuffled him to the worst team. Let me rephrase- they were the worst team, until we lost Nick and they go him. then they were the best team and we were the worst team. at the least, Nick should have been moved to the older rec league- but they were full.

I think kids this young need to just go out and have fun, learning the sport along the way as best as possible. 7-8, I think they're better equipped developmentally (physically and emotionally) to handle the increase of commitment to playing more competitively if they have minimals. once they commit to playing more competitively- they commit to getting PT as deserved, IMO. utnil then, stay in the rec leagues where fun, basic development and participation are more important than winning (to me).

Valid points all around...but let me ask you this...do you think Nick would be a better player in 1 year by playing the 7-8 year-olds or by staying in the 6 y/o group and dominating? That's what I guess I get at with the whole challenge thing. It conveys an odd lesson to Nick that he gets pulled from a game and told to go sit down so some other kid can learn to kick a ball.

I'd still argue that if you need equal development at 6, and I'm fine with that, then you don't organize your league with games. You don't formalize it. Think of it likea soccer "camp," where you get different groups together and play, do drills, etc. No formal teams, no uniforms, etc.

Floppo did the right thing by trying to move him up or into a competitive bracket and frankly, there SHOULD be scholarship available for kids like this who cannot afford the next level, although even if they provide scholarship, the parents may not be able to afford the travel time and expense to go to his games.

Little Nick will be fine. He knows he's a stud. At some point, he'll find the right league/level and his game will continue to develop. If you just leave him in there to dominate the other kids, there's a risk that the other kids will get dejected and not want anything to do with soccer. And that is NOT what you want at age 6 youth soccer. I promise. Go coach it. Go read the rule books. Go sit in the classes they have for coaching.

There's rec soccer. Classic soccer. Select soccer. Soccer for all. Rec is for fun. The end.

 

[El Floppo]

other part of Nick was that the entire team would just stop and let him do everything. it really wasn't helping anybody (other than the 2 sets of parents who had plastic surgerized faces- couldn't tell them apart- and who seemed to be experiencing sports for the first time... yelling to their kids to "just give it to Nick for chrissakes!"... these were NYC private school type a horror-shows)

 

[The Gator]

other part of Nick was that the entire team would just stop and let him do everything. it really wasn't helping anybody (other than the 2 sets of parents who had plastic surgerized faces)

Chelsea fans obviously

 

[Fat Nick]

If you want to make the sport at younger ages more about playing and having fun, then that's great. Every kid can play in a scrimmage. I liked scrimmaging as much as games when I was a kid because I just wanted to play and be free of organized drills, etc. But if you're playing a "game," the context is that you're playing to win. I don't know. I know where you guys are coming from. I don't want my kid to be obsessed with winning and be one of those kids that flips #### if they lose...but at the same time, I want my kid to WANT to win like I did when I was a kid. I practiced my ### off. I was "that kid" at a younger age that was just better than everyone in my county's rec league. I remember scoring 5+ goals a game and then being forced to play goalie.

I do agree 100% with what El Floppo said re. being "that one kid" not helping anyone though. I was so much better than everybody at like age 9 through probably 14...then, when we started playing outside of our county, I had my ### handed to me by guys who had to face real competition most of the time, while I relied on speed and a good shot. I didn't have the fundamentals.

I guess my thing is that if you don't want competition, don't call them games.

There are various levels of soccer out there, even for kids who are 6. Rec soccer is supposed to be fun and provide opportunities for all kids to play and coaches need to let all the kids get on the field and play. It's hard to give every kid equal playing time, but it's not hard to make sure they ALL get in and play quite a bit, even if that means taking out your best players and giving them rest.

If your son/daughter is designed just like you were, then he/she should be playing in classic or select soccer at the developmental level where it's more serious business and less about fun. It will cost you more, but if that's what you're after, it's out there for you.

My oldest son is not very gifted athletically and chances of him making a HS team are slim to none. But he loves soccer and its the only team sport he plays. Thankfully, he can keep playing rec soccer until he goes to college and there will always be a roster spot for him through our league. The top players will be playing for HS or club teams, but that's a very small number of the players out there. Heck, I wish I had that when I was growing up. I was a good player, but I wasn't going to get significant time on the HS team, which was uber competitive. I chose to swim instead and was good at that, but I really missed soccer and wish I had a rec team to play on through my HS years.

So this may be where my small-town upbringing bites me. We had one league. Rec league. Until you got to HS athletics. That's it.

 

[El Floppo]

Yeah- Nick... fo real. the sport (and sports in general based on what I'm hearing about baseball and basketball) has changed a ton with how leagues are set up from our day.

 

[Fat Nick]

I guess my thing is that if you don't want competition, don't call them games.

What should we call it when two different teams get on a field wearing their uniforms and try to score goals on each other?

You call it a game...and you put your best kids out there to try and win.

If you're not trying to win, it's practice, drills, scrimmages, etc.

How many kids do you have now, what are their ages and how much coaching have you done in youth sports?

I'm NOT trying to say I'm an expert here...I'd never go against "the pundits," so this is just my humble beliefs. I also look back at how -I- was coached, and I feel like I turned out OK.

I have 1 kid so far. He's 10 months old. He can crawl, and appears to be athletic thus far, especially considering he's a premie. (joking)

I was an assistant coach for 4 years when I was in college. Basically, after I got back from school each year, I helped coach our junior division team (roughly ages 12-14). I've never coached very small kids.

 

[Short Corner]

You play 8's in first grade? How many balls do they play with? :softball:

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I started losing kids from my rec team to Academy teams in second grade. The world is very different from when I was a kid.

 

[Fat Nick]

Yeah- Nick... fo real. the sport (and sports in general based on what I'm hearing about baseball and basketball) has changed a ton with how leagues are set up from our day.

I'm realizing that more and more. I just hear horror stories about parents demanding their kids play, and leagues with all these rules, and it just makes me less and less inclined to try and coach when my kid gets older. I remember my Dad coaching my team. He was also the commissioner of our park league for a long time. I always wanted to do that with my kid someday because I remember staying late with him and kicking the ball around, or if he was coaching another team with older kids, going and playing with them after my practice was over. I feel like these days everything is handcuffed with rules and regulations and equal-opportunity stuff to the point that nobody is "allowed" to truly be great at anything.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I'm NOT trying to say I'm an expert here...I'd never go against "the pundits," so this is just my humble beliefs. I also look back at how -I- was coached, and I feel like I turned out Ok.

It is not all about you.

 

[El Floppo]

Yeah- Nick... fo real. the sport (and sports in general based on what I'm hearing about baseball and basketball) has changed a ton with how leagues are set up from our day.

I'm realizing that more and more. I just hear horror stories about parents demanding their kids play, and leagues with all these rules, and it just makes me less and less inclined to try and coach when my kid gets older. I remember my Dad coaching my team. He was also the commissioner of our park league for a long time. I always wanted to do that with my kid someday because I remember staying late with him and kicking the ball around, or if he was coaching another team with older kids, going and playing with them after my practice was over. I feel like these days everything is handcuffed with rules and regulations and equal-opportunity stuff to the point that nobody is "allowed" to truly be great at anything.

opposite is true too.

leagues are soo serious/segmented/over-coached that it's tough for kids to just go out and play.

 

[El Floppo]

and like GM and others have said- there are various leagues for various abilities. the more serious/advanced leagues aren't going to be doing any equal opportunity stuff, so unruffle the panties.

 

[Fat Nick]

I'm NOT trying to say I'm an expert here...I'd never go against "the pundits," so this is just my humble beliefs. I also look back at how -I- was coached, and I feel like I turned out Ok.

It is not all about you.

<-- Me kicking a rock better than any 6 y/o.

 

[General Malaise]

Yeah- Nick... fo real. the sport (and sports in general based on what I'm hearing about baseball and basketball) has changed a ton with how leagues are set up from our day.

I'm realizing that more and more. I just hear horror stories about parents demanding their kids play, and leagues with all these rules, and it just makes me less and less inclined to try and coach when my kid gets older. I remember my Dad coaching my team. He was also the commissioner of our park league for a long time. I always wanted to do that with my kid someday because I remember staying late with him and kicking the ball around, or if he was coaching another team with older kids, going and playing with them after my practice was over. I feel like these days everything is handcuffed with rules and regulations and equal-opportunity stuff to the point that nobody is "allowed" to truly be great at anything.

No offense, but I do think you are making a lot of assumptions about something you don't currently have first hand experience with and it's not making you sound very intelligent. If you aren't currently coaching youth soccer at the rec level then you aren't in a position to make comments like the one I bolded above.

 

[General Malaise]

I started losing kids from my rec team to Academy teams in second grade. The world is very different from when I was a kid.

I had 3 kids move up to classic soccer and subsequently come back to me after a miserable season spent at the 'next level'. No surprise that my team took a steep nose dive when they left and has been performing quite well since they came back.

Rec soccer costs about $90 per season and the kids are required to buy a jersey that they can re-use until the league changes sponsors or they outgrow them. I don't care if they wear pink shorts or neon green socks, but they have to wear the jersey. Most games are within a 30 minute drive. We practice once a week in the spring, twice a week in the fall and there's only one game a week on Saturday. We play a lot of games that have little to do with soccer, once a season have a rootbeer float practice where we goof off and ruin appetites. I've got great players and I've got less than great players and I do what I can to make sure everybody gets to play at least 35 minutes, which can be tough as I have 18 boys on my roster (play 11).

Next level up is Classic (I think, it might be select, I don't know...my kids have my genes, so they'll likely never sniff it). It costs about $400 a season, maybe more, maybe less. Uniforms are very expensive and you need matching everything. Games are sometimes an hour to two hours away and they can be on Saturday or Sunday and there's not always a firm game schedule to send out well in advance. It isn't uncommon to get an email from your coach saying "We need to be at the Oregon Coast tomorrow morning at 8am for a game". There's not grabasssssss, no rootbeer floats, no guarantee that your kid will get at least 35 minutes of game time and if your child loves playing center mid, he might be stuck at right fullback. BUT...those are the kids who will be battling for varsity spots at the HS level, supposedly, though sometimes, there are better kids playing rec soccer because they find it to be more to their liking, as do their parents.

 

[Blick]

You play 8's in first grade? How many balls do they play with? :softball:

Most kids (particularly at the rec level) this age have no spatial awareness. They are not team oriented and have only one goal, to score a goal. Playing 8 aside is crazy. Very small sided (4v4, 5v5) are way more beneficial in that is provides them a little space without them knowing how to create it themselves.

To the question at hand, I put my players on a lose clock depending on level of fitness and game situation. Some kids aren't in the greatest of shape. They need breaks more often. By game situation, I don't mean chances of winning. Instead, when I see a group of kids doing something really well, I'll let them in a little longer. Transversely, when I see a group playing very poorly, I'll try to wait until something "good" happens before I take them off. By this method, I'm sure they don't get to play an exact even amount. However, I think its a much better approach developmentally.

Also, I use "positions" at this age not to teach responsibility. I use it to try to start thinking about shape. Everyone plays offense and everyone plays defense.

The success of a rec. coach should be measured on the percentage of kids that come back to play soccer the following season.

 

[El Floppo]

GM- that sounds identical to what I did as a kid... a couple of years ago.

we had a "house league", which was recreational, all players and games were from within the town. but we got full unis- shorts and socks even. I did that my first year playing (when I was 10) and then got picked for the house or town team, which were players selected from the house league teams. I have no idea where "house" came from- shakespeare? the house teams played against other towns- that team travelled around the county and neighboring county (marin and sonoma) which made up our 'district'.

while you played on your house or town team, from there you were selected to also play on the 'district' team that played against other districts in the state. California was split into two states for soccer- so we'd play up to humboldt and down to fresno. i think bakersfield was in the south. don't remember any players or teams coming from the sierra or parts west. but weekends were full with both club and district games. from there you were selected to the state team and played against other states. from there, to the regional team (4 regions) to play against the other regions. and then national team. I was 4 years on the state team, made the regional team once and made the maccabi national team (oy) which I foolishly thought was a sham and opted out of playing in the maccabi pan-am games in venezuela because they were going to make us pay our own ways (meshuganas).

 

[Fat Nick]

Yeah- Nick... fo real. the sport (and sports in general based on what I'm hearing about baseball and basketball) has changed a ton with how leagues are set up from our day.

I'm realizing that more and more. I just hear horror stories about parents demanding their kids play, and leagues with all these rules, and it just makes me less and less inclined to try and coach when my kid gets older. I remember my Dad coaching my team. He was also the commissioner of our park league for a long time. I always wanted to do that with my kid someday because I remember staying late with him and kicking the ball around, or if he was coaching another team with older kids, going and playing with them after my practice was over. I feel like these days everything is handcuffed with rules and regulations and equal-opportunity stuff to the point that nobody is "allowed" to truly be great at anything.

No offense, but I do think you are making a lot of assumptions about something you don't currently have first hand experience with and it's not making you sound very intelligent. If you aren't currently coaching youth soccer at the rec level then you aren't in a position to make comments like the one I bolded above.

So to be completely honest, this general belief extends beyond organized sports. I'll be the first to admit, especially after reading this thread, that youth soccer is a long way from when I was involved in it (as a player, certainly, and also as a coach). But in general, I find a trend in the world towards worrying more about making sure nobody's feelings get hurt and that everyone gets to participate, which I think is a good thing, UNLESS it's at the expense of the experience of others.

We can jump into a whole social welfare program debate, but that's probably another thread. I'm not expecting people to agree with me. And I've already admitted I'm not a soccer or youth coaching expert. I am very aware of trends in society that I think are a little "soft" on kids sometimes, and have read articles stating the same.

 

[Lehigh98]

It is first grade. All kids should play equal and everywhere.

exactly

No offense, but this is exactly what I meant when I said I'd have issues coaching these days. I played soccer in 1st grade. I played maybe 10 minutes a game. The next year, I played more...and from then on out, I was a starter and played organized soccer until I graduated HS.

Why is a kid with lesser skills not getting the same playing time as a kid with better skills so bad? The flip side is that the kid with better skills has LESS playing time than he otherwise would. What about that kid?

I guess I just don't get why having to pay your dues and learn a sport before you get full playing time is a bad thing.

They're 6 years old, what do you think they're out running windsprints at midnight to "Eye of the Tiger"?

Once they've all actually had some playing and practice time they'll begin to show separation in desire and skill.

At this point, everyone's learning and needs time to play and develop.

So no kid is better than the others? And no kid is worse than the others? If this is the case, then fine...play is commensurate with ability...but even at 6, there are kids who are good at things, and kids who aren't.

I get what you're saying - and agree that at that age, it's mostly about learning. My main view though, is that organized practice should be where you learn. Even at 6. You get to play in every game, but the mandate that every kid plays an equal amount seems overkill.

Of course there are kids "better" than the others. Faster kids, more aggressive kids, kids with stronger legs, kids with birthdays earlier in the year that are bigger, etc. Scoring goals at this age has more to do with physical ability and attitude than practiced ball skills. You do realize that kids change and grow as they age right? You want to chase the smaller kids off to another sport and just play the more physically developed kids? If your kid is so good and so bored just play them up a year, that's what my 6 year old has been doing.

Kids that aren't that good yet aren't the problem for me, you work with them and make them better. That's the challenge and the rewarding part of coaching. If you just want to go out and win games by a ton of goals, I think you may want to let someone else coach.

The frustrating part for me are the kids who just don't want to be there and their parents are making them play. Or they just want to be on a team but they have no interesting in getting better or even playing in the games. That's what you get at 6 though, starting to see that fall off as my other son is moving into U10.

 

[Lehigh98]

Yeah- Nick... fo real. the sport (and sports in general based on what I'm hearing about baseball and basketball) has changed a ton with how leagues are set up from our day.

I'm realizing that more and more. I just hear horror stories about parents demanding their kids play, and leagues with all these rules, and it just makes me less and less inclined to try and coach when my kid gets older. I remember my Dad coaching my team. He was also the commissioner of our park league for a long time. I always wanted to do that with my kid someday because I remember staying late with him and kicking the ball around, or if he was coaching another team with older kids, going and playing with them after my practice was over. I feel like these days everything is handcuffed with rules and regulations and equal-opportunity stuff to the point that nobody is "allowed" to truly be great at anything.

No offense, but I do think you are making a lot of assumptions about something you don't currently have first hand experience with and it's not making you sound very intelligent. If you aren't currently coaching youth soccer at the rec level then you aren't in a position to make comments like the one I bolded above.

So to be completely honest, this general belief extends beyond organized sports. I'll be the first to admit, especially after reading this thread, that youth soccer is a long way from when I was involved in it (as a player, certainly, and also as a coach). But in general, I find a trend in the world towards worrying more about making sure nobody's feelings get hurt and that everyone gets to participate, which I think is a good thing, UNLESS it's at the expense of the experience of others.

We can jump into a whole social welfare program debate, but that's probably another thread. I'm not expecting people to agree with me. And I've already admitted I'm not a soccer or youth coaching expert. I am very aware of trends in society that I think are a little "soft" on kids sometimes, and have read articles stating the same.

I don't think you're going to be able to change society just by benching some six year olds, sorry.

 

[Ned]

We have friggin' rep teams for 6yr old here. I think it's ridiculous to shell out $1k for 6yr olds to play on a rep team.

My son was a "Nick" when he was 5, so when he turned 6 we moved him up to U8. It's turned out to be a great decision. He's well ahead of most of the U8 boys, but he's now got enough competition that he loves. As tempting as it is to stroke the ego and put him on a rep team, I don't think it's appropriate at this age.

As I type this, I'm watching him from my office window out front juggling on his own.

 

[General Malaise]

Yeah- Nick... fo real. the sport (and sports in general based on what I'm hearing about baseball and basketball) has changed a ton with how leagues are set up from our day.

I'm realizing that more and more. I just hear horror stories about parents demanding their kids play, and leagues with all these rules, and it just makes me less and less inclined to try and coach when my kid gets older. I remember my Dad coaching my team. He was also the commissioner of our park league for a long time. I always wanted to do that with my kid someday because I remember staying late with him and kicking the ball around, or if he was coaching another team with older kids, going and playing with them after my practice was over. I feel like these days everything is handcuffed with rules and regulations and equal-opportunity stuff to the point that nobody is "allowed" to truly be great at anything.

No offense, but I do think you are making a lot of assumptions about something you don't currently have first hand experience with and it's not making you sound very intelligent. If you aren't currently coaching youth soccer at the rec level then you aren't in a position to make comments like the one I bolded above.

So to be completely honest, this general belief extends beyond organized sports. I'll be the first to admit, especially after reading this thread, that youth soccer is a long way from when I was involved in it (as a player, certainly, and also as a coach). But in general, I find a trend in the world towards worrying more about making sure nobody's feelings get hurt and that everyone gets to participate, which I think is a good thing, UNLESS it's at the expense of the experience of others.

We can jump into a whole social welfare program debate, but that's probably another thread. I'm not expecting people to agree with me. And I've already admitted I'm not a soccer or youth coaching expert. I am very aware of trends in society that I think are a little "soft" on kids sometimes, and have read articles stating the same.

I hear what you're saying, but the world is still a VERY competitive place. Stanford and Yale haven't lowered their standards of acceptance to cater to the general tone you are saying permeates our country. Top jobs aren't hiring lesser talent to avoid hurting feelings. High school varsity teams aren't letting lesser players onto the squad so everybody can participate. Hell, try to get your small child into a top private pre-school and I assure you the "soft on kids" manra does NOT apply.

But buddy, this is RECREATIONAL soccer for 6 year olds. It is supposed to be fun for ALL kids. And as stated here numerous times, your job as a coach isn't to win or turn them into Real Madrid; it's to get them to come back for another season.

Lastly, my very favorite coaching moments don't involve wins or great play by my best players; it's when I see the lightbulb come on for a kid who doesn't have the best speed or a strong leg or have much athletic ability. That's what keeps me on the sideline more than anything else. Watching a kid who has never scored get their first goal is a thing of beauty.

 

[Blick]

We have friggin' rep teams for 6yr old here. I think it's ridiculous to shell out $1k for 6yr olds to play on a rep team.

My son was a "Nick" when he was 5, so when he turned 6 we moved him up to U8. It's turned out to be a great decision. He's well ahead of most of the U8 boys, but he's now got enough competition that he loves. As tempting as it is to stroke the ego and put him on a rep team, I don't think it's appropriate at this age.

As I type this, I'm watching him from my office window out front juggling on his own.

6 year olds playing for the love of soccer or any sport is a wonderful thing. Congrats!

 

[gianmarco]

When in doubt play the kids with the best looking moms the most,

Actually, this is backwards.

You bench the kids with the best looking moms the most. Then they are more likely to approach you with some fire and spunk asking what needs to happen for their kids to play more. Hopefully you can figure out the rest.

 

[Fat Nick]

Guys, I'm not trying to make this into a big deal. I simply came in and stated that I didn't fundamentally like the concept of having to play all the kids equally. This is based in my past (and now admittedly dated) experience of how youth sports were for me, and if you want to branch it further, what I percieve to be a general softening of how kids are brought up these days. Put that in a different context and in a different thread, and I'm sure many would agree with me. We've had threads about that in the past.

For those of you putting words in my mouth, I haven't said crap about MY kid other than I have always wanted to coach him someday. MY kid might be the kid who wouldn't get to play were it not for these playing time allocations. I'd still stand by my statement that if that is my kid, I'd encourage him to practice harder if he wants to keep playing. Please don't put words in my mouth here either and make me out to be some Tiger-Dad who forces my kid to play sports. He can play if he wants. All I ask is that if he decides to play, he commits to a full season, and that he gives it his all. That's it. I don't want my kid to think it's OK to quit. I don't want my kid to think it's OK not to try.

I'm getting the feeling that my view isn't shared with the majority here...which further affirms my first post that as much as I want to coach my kid when he gets old enough, I know I'll take issue with how some of the rules are these days. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.

 

[Lehigh98]

Guys, I'm not trying to make this into a big deal. I simply came in and stated...

16 times so far

I'm getting the feeling that my view isn't shared with the majority here...which further affirms my first post that as much as I want to coach my kid when he gets old enough, I know I'll take issue with how some of the rules are these days. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.

I think you and we are all in agreement that if you still maintain your current view of coaching six year olds when your kid is that old than you may be better off not coaching a team.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Guys, I'm not trying to make this into a big deal. I simply came in and stated that I didn't fundamentally like the concept of having to play all the kids equally. This is based in my past (and now admittedly dated) experience of how youth sports were for me, and if you want to branch it further, what I percieve to be a general softening of how kids are brought up these days. Put that in a different context and in a different thread, and I'm sure many would agree with me. We've had threads about that in the past.

For those of you putting words in my mouth, I haven't said crap about MY kid other than I have always wanted to coach him someday. MY kid might be the kid who wouldn't get to play were it not for these playing time allocations. I'd still stand by my statement that if that is my kid, I'd encourage him to practice harder if he wants to keep playing. Please don't put words in my mouth here either and make me out to be some Tiger-Dad who forces my kid to play sports. He can play if he wants. All I ask is that if he decides to play, he commits to a full season, and that he gives it his all. That's it. I don't want my kid to think it's OK to quit. I don't want my kid to think it's OK not to try.

I'm getting the feeling that my view isn't shared with the majority here...which further affirms my first post that as much as I want to coach my kid when he gets old enough, I know I'll take issue with how some of the rules are these days. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.

I don't think anybody's been putting words in your mouth, we're just disagreeing with stuff you've posted. And I hope maybe you'll change your perspective a little and give coaching a try. Just like GM, I've found it to be really rewarding for me and my kid. And the world needs more good youth coaches. I see plenty of crappy ones.

 

[Fat Nick]

Guys, I'm not trying to make this into a big deal. I simply came in and stated that I didn't fundamentally like the concept of having to play all the kids equally. This is based in my past (and now admittedly dated) experience of how youth sports were for me, and if you want to branch it further, what I percieve to be a general softening of how kids are brought up these days. Put that in a different context and in a different thread, and I'm sure many would agree with me. We've had threads about that in the past.

For those of you putting words in my mouth, I haven't said crap about MY kid other than I have always wanted to coach him someday. MY kid might be the kid who wouldn't get to play were it not for these playing time allocations. I'd still stand by my statement that if that is my kid, I'd encourage him to practice harder if he wants to keep playing. Please don't put words in my mouth here either and make me out to be some Tiger-Dad who forces my kid to play sports. He can play if he wants. All I ask is that if he decides to play, he commits to a full season, and that he gives it his all. That's it. I don't want my kid to think it's OK to quit. I don't want my kid to think it's OK not to try.

I'm getting the feeling that my view isn't shared with the majority here...which further affirms my first post that as much as I want to coach my kid when he gets old enough, I know I'll take issue with how some of the rules are these days. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.

I don't think anybody's been putting words in your mouth, we're just disagreeing with stuff you've posted. And I hope maybe you'll change your perspective a little and give coaching a try. Just like GM, I've found it to be really rewarding for me and my kid. And the world needs more good youth coaches. I see plenty of crappy ones.

I have such fond memories of my Dad coaching that I honestly can't see a way I don't at least give it a try...my guess is that given my work schedule and my commute, I'll probably be more of an assistant coach. It'd probably be better as I'm far more interested in just helping kids learn and bonding with my son than I am getting involved in the "politics" of youth sports.

 

[General Malaise]

Guys, I'm not trying to make this into a big deal. I simply came in and stated that I didn't fundamentally like the concept of having to play all the kids equally. This is based in my past (and now admittedly dated) experience of how youth sports were for me, and if you want to branch it further, what I percieve to be a general softening of how kids are brought up these days. Put that in a different context and in a different thread, and I'm sure many would agree with me. We've had threads about that in the past.

For those of you putting words in my mouth, I haven't said crap about MY kid other than I have always wanted to coach him someday. MY kid might be the kid who wouldn't get to play were it not for these playing time allocations. I'd still stand by my statement that if that is my kid, I'd encourage him to practice harder if he wants to keep playing. Please don't put words in my mouth here either and make me out to be some Tiger-Dad who forces my kid to play sports. He can play if he wants. All I ask is that if he decides to play, he commits to a full season, and that he gives it his all. That's it. I don't want my kid to think it's OK to quit. I don't want my kid to think it's OK not to try.

I'm getting the feeling that my view isn't shared with the majority here...which further affirms my first post that as much as I want to coach my kid when he gets old enough, I know I'll take issue with how some of the rules are these days. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.

Might want to spend some time with 6 year olds, GB. They want to eat candy and dig in the dirt. A message like "I'd encourage him to practice harder if he wants to keep playing" just isn't going to resonate at that level.

 

[Fat Nick]

Guys, I'm not trying to make this into a big deal. I simply came in and stated...

16 times so far

I'm getting the feeling that my view isn't shared with the majority here...which further affirms my first post that as much as I want to coach my kid when he gets old enough, I know I'll take issue with how some of the rules are these days. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.

I think you and we are all in agreement that if you still maintain your current view of coaching six year olds when your kid is that old than you may be better off not coaching a team.

I get it. You disagree with me. That's fine. I appreciate the constructive discussion of your 1st post. The ones since really haven't been anything but jabs.

 

[Fat Nick]

Guys, I'm not trying to make this into a big deal. I simply came in and stated that I didn't fundamentally like the concept of having to play all the kids equally. This is based in my past (and now admittedly dated) experience of how youth sports were for me, and if you want to branch it further, what I percieve to be a general softening of how kids are brought up these days. Put that in a different context and in a different thread, and I'm sure many would agree with me. We've had threads about that in the past.

For those of you putting words in my mouth, I haven't said crap about MY kid other than I have always wanted to coach him someday. MY kid might be the kid who wouldn't get to play were it not for these playing time allocations. I'd still stand by my statement that if that is my kid, I'd encourage him to practice harder if he wants to keep playing. Please don't put words in my mouth here either and make me out to be some Tiger-Dad who forces my kid to play sports. He can play if he wants. All I ask is that if he decides to play, he commits to a full season, and that he gives it his all. That's it. I don't want my kid to think it's OK to quit. I don't want my kid to think it's OK not to try.

I'm getting the feeling that my view isn't shared with the majority here...which further affirms my first post that as much as I want to coach my kid when he gets old enough, I know I'll take issue with how some of the rules are these days. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.

Might want to spend some time with 6 year olds, GB. They want to eat candy and dig in the dirt. A message like "I'd encourage him to practice harder if he wants to keep playing" just isn't going to resonate at that level.

Guess I'll find out when I get there...Having a kid is obviously a new experience thus far...

 

[El Floppo]

Guys, I'm not trying to make this into a big deal. I simply came in and stated that I didn't fundamentally like the concept of having to play all the kids equally. This is based in my past (and now admittedly dated) experience of how youth sports were for me, and if you want to branch it further, what I percieve to be a general softening of how kids are brought up these days. Put that in a different context and in a different thread, and I'm sure many would agree with me. We've had threads about that in the past.

For those of you putting words in my mouth, I haven't said crap about MY kid other than I have always wanted to coach him someday. MY kid might be the kid who wouldn't get to play were it not for these playing time allocations. I'd still stand by my statement that if that is my kid, I'd encourage him to practice harder if he wants to keep playing. Please don't put words in my mouth here either and make me out to be some Tiger-Dad who forces my kid to play sports. He can play if he wants. All I ask is that if he decides to play, he commits to a full season, and that he gives it his all. That's it. I don't want my kid to think it's OK to quit. I don't want my kid to think it's OK not to try.

I'm getting the feeling that my view isn't shared with the majority here...which further affirms my first post that as much as I want to coach my kid when he gets old enough, I know I'll take issue with how some of the rules are these days. I don't expect anyone to agree with me. Just stating my opinion.

I think we all probably agree that society shouldn't be set up so that everybody wins and gets a trophy.

it's a healthy discussion- but trying to impose those views into a thread specifically about 6yo rec soccer, especially when you and your kid haven't gone through it yet... . kids and development... it takes some time for these things.

you'll see- some kids are ready, competitive and capable when they start walking. others need a lot of time. I used to coach soccer camps in the summers- I'd get kids of all ages and abilities... and even the older ones (teens) would have these light-bulb moments, either physically or mentally, that made the idea of coaching amazing.

 

[JB Breakfast Club]

To get back to the OP. I suggest you decide how many rotations you will have and then make a spreadsheet for yourself that sets the rotations. You'll need a sheet that gives you rotations based on 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, or 14 kids showing up. Then just write down the kids names as they show up for the game. To show a very simple example, let's say your play quarters and only sub between quarters (four rotations). You'd have something like this. Kids who show up early get an extra shift in most cases...teaches punctuality as an added bonus.

1________ D F x D

2________ D F x D

3________ D F x D

4________ D F x F

5________ F x D F

6________ F x D F

7________ F x D F

8________ F x D G

9________ G x F x

10_______ x D F x

11_______ x D F x

12_______ x D F x

13_______ x D G x

14_______ x G x D

 

[Lehigh98]

To get back to the OP. I suggest you decide how many rotations you will have and then make a spreadsheet for yourself that sets the rotations. You'll need a sheet that gives you rotations based on 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, or 14 kids showing up. Then just write down the kids names as they show up for the game. To show a very simple example, let's say your play quarters and only sub between quarters (four rotations). You'd have something like this. Kids who show up early get an extra shift in most cases...teaches punctuality as an added bonus.

1________ D F x D

2________ D F x D

3________ D F x D

4________ D F x F

5________ F x D F

6________ F x D F

7________ F x D F

8________ F x D G

9________ G x F x

10_______ x D F x

11_______ x D F x

12_______ x D F x

13_______ x D G x

14_______ x G x D

This is pretty much exactly what I do. I don't do it at random though, I know what positions the kids like and let them play where they want for the most part. Of course, if everyone wants to play forward or mid, that gets split up more and kids have to spend some time on D too. I had one kid on a U12 team that just wanted to play defense so let him play back there most of the time but sent him up a few times too for experience.

There was a question about goalie earlier too. If kids want to play goal I'll rotate them and that counts as a quarter for them. I had one team where no one wanted to play goal so that didn't count as a quarter for them and was extra time on the field so I was able to get some volunteers.

 

[JB Breakfast Club]

To get back to the OP. I suggest you decide how many rotations you will have and then make a spreadsheet for yourself that sets the rotations. You'll need a sheet that gives you rotations based on 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, or 14 kids showing up. Then just write down the kids names as they show up for the game. To show a very simple example, let's say your play quarters and only sub between quarters (four rotations). You'd have something like this. Kids who show up early get an extra shift in most cases...teaches punctuality as an added bonus.

This is pretty much exactly what I do. I don't do it at random though, I know what positions the kids like and let them play where they want for the most part. Of course, if everyone wants to play forward or mid, that gets split up more and kids have to spend some time on D too. I had one kid on a U12 team that just wanted to play defense so let him play back there most of the time but sent him up a few times too for experience.

There was a question about goalie earlier too. If kids want to play goal I'll rotate them and that counts as a quarter for them. I had one team where no one wanted to play goal so that didn't count as a quarter for them and was extra time on the field so I was able to get some volunteers.

Sure, as the kids get into their third and fourth years of playing, they'll develop preferences, and you adjust to give them time where they enjoy playing (U-10 for some kids; U-12 for most). U-6 should be about experiencing every spot of the field and playing with a variety of teammates.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

Soccer is the one sport where I know that the "wussification of America" crowd are full of #### (I only suspect it with other sports). Because none of the countries that beat the pants off of us at developing good soccer players give a #### whether their 6YO soccer teams win games or not. They care about making sure that every kid gets reps and is expected to make decisions on the ball.

Which, when you think about it, is the much more demanding philosophy. Its stressful for a kid who isn't there yet to be expected to play. I'm sure a lot of those kids are perfectly happy to hide and only play in garbage time at whatever position they think they'll have to do the least. But a good development program will try to make those kids comfortable enough on the ball so that they continue playing and taking responsibility. Because one of those kids is at least as likely to be a good player at 15 as the fastest kid on the team at 6.