Changes to Youth Soccer

http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2011/02/08/17190891.html

So, let the debate begin. Is this good or bad? Just to get the facts straight, the model is that individual games will be scored, there will be a winner, but standings will not be maintained, nor will there be "Championship" games for the U9 to U12 ages.

From my perspective, this is not good....its great. Too many coaches and parents trying to re-live thier lives vicariously through their kids. Focus on developing individual skill, not winning. Keep in mind that our present system for U9 players is that they must register at their home cc, so teams are formed based on who signs up, not on committment, skill level or anything else.

Whats wrong with having championship games....

No...it's TERRIBLE.

One of the biggest things I was disappointed in with my daughter's team last summer (U6) was that there was no score kept, and now way to gauge the effectiveness of the coaching/skills of the players.

Plus, there was no "loss factor" for the kids to deal with...and at THAT age, it is one of the most important things to be taught...how to lose graciously.

I like one of the comments on the Sun site...about kids growing up thinking they are "entitled" to certain things, without having to EARN it.

I know when I played soccer at age 8, the winning team for the season got the trophies, the other teams got little medals to hang around their necks.

Now...they want to give EVERYONE a trophy...even the kid who only showed up for one game and sat on the field picking dandelions.

question though..

"all bodies funded by Sport Manitoba are mandated to implement Sport Canada’s Long Term Athlete Development plans by 201"

what funding?

It puts the focus on winning, rather than devleoping. We do not have a tiered system within WYSA, so if we looking at matching the "best" players against each other, that just doesn't happen at the U9-12 ages.

Remember, U9 only has a "recreational" league, administered by community centres, so how does that equate to an actual challenge.

heh.. dont forget to click the "hockey too" tab
http://www.winnipegsun.com/news/winnipeg/2011/02/08/17190891.html#/news/winnipeg/2011/02/08/pf-17192486.html

snicker.. I wonder if the president of manitoba hockey has been to any youth games?

""I think generally the vast majority is in favour of just having the
young kids out there and skill development, having fun and not being
worried about the scoreboard," Franklin said. "It goes a long way to
helping retain kids for the next level too.""

Deank wrote:question though..

"all bodies funded by Sport Manitoba are mandated to implement Sport Canada’s Long Term Athlete Development plans by 201"

what funding?

This Long Term Athlete Development Program is coming from Sport Canada, through the provincial sport associations (Sport Manitoba) to the individual sport bodies (soccer, hockey, basketball, etc) Approximately 15% of the Manitoba Soccer Association budget is derived from grants from Sport Manitoba.

Besides, its just good for the development of the players and the sport.

" Approximately 15% of the Manitoba Soccer Association budget is derived from grants from Sport Manitoba."

okay.. fine..but what impact does that have on say.. my son's 9 year old team?

zero? oh.. well then they can go stuff it. ( you can see the arguments from parents starting right?)

I can also see quite quickly just like when we implemented 3 per side mini soccer on a smaller pitch that many community centres (or groups of parents anyway) will say.. STUFF IT.. and go and join the alternative leagues.

What do you mean "what funding" Dean?

Sport Manitoba puts money into any registered sport in Manitoba. They provide equipment, maintenance, training, referees, etc. as required/requested by whoever is running the sport.

If you haven't been to their new building...go take a look. Walk the halls on the 3rd & 4th floor, there's dozens of "sports" being sponsored and run through there.

Freeman wrote:It puts the focus on winning, rather than devleoping. We do not have a tiered system within WYSA, so if we looking at matching the "best" players against each other, that just doesn't happen at the U9-12 ages.

Remember, U9 only has a "recreational" league, administered by community centres, so how does that equate to an actual challenge.

No it doesn't, it puts the focus on IMPROVING.
What's the point for these kids to develop skills? if they are just going to go out there and kick a ball around without improving anything?
The POINT of a sport/game is to WIN the game...plain and simple.
The drive to get that WIN encourages teamwork, skill improvement, and player development.

The POINT of the sport/game is also to teach the players about sportsmanship...which includes winners, losers, and dealing with the stress associated with the play and finish.

AA.. I mean exactly that.. what funding. go ahead tell a parent of under 13 ANY SPORT that we need this building.. and that we are benefiting from training... go ahead... try to explain it to them. The response. Then what the frick am I paying for? It MY MONEY you cant tell me how my son will play.

Trust me on this AA I have WAY WAY WAY more experience then you in this matter. I am playing Devils advocate for Freeman. Hell Our organization (NW/FC NW) was one of the first to push for these changes, at the mini level we simply mandated the change.. right? wrong. it took over a year and about 50 hours of discussion... always with people responding just like that. AND it was only for MINI SOCCER.

I really don't see the point. The parents that cause most of the problems will resort to their own method of stat's-keeping. They will still harangue the coach, opposing players, referees... So what changes?

Giving the kids a championship to fight for helps the children develop character and spirit. It gives them life-long memories.

I think this is just another example of an inefficient bureaucracy throwing out the baby with the bathwater. If the real problem is overly-competitive parents (and coaches) get rid of them...

AGEsAces wrote:

Freeman wrote:It puts the focus on winning, rather than devleoping. We do not have a tiered system within WYSA, so if we looking at matching the "best" players against each other, that just doesn't happen at the U9-12 ages.

Remember, U9 only has a "recreational" league, administered by community centres, so how does that equate to an actual challenge.

No it doesn't, it puts the focus on IMPROVING.
What's the point for these kids to develop skills? if they are just going to go out there and kick a ball around without improving anything?
The POINT of a sport/game is to WIN the game...plain and simple.
The drive to get that WIN encourages teamwork, skill improvement, and player development.

The POINT of the sport/game is also to teach the players about sportsmanship...which includes winners, losers, and dealing with the stress associated with the play and finish.

very wrong.

since there is no ranking of kids and separating them based on skill what invariably ends up happening is that one or two kids end up carrying the team, coaches will use them more then others, they will put the "bad" kids in spots that get less play, parents will demand the win and are willing to sacrifice other kids for it. The focus is on play play play and many parents think it is okay to completely miss practice and go screaming to the club president the minute that Johnny is benched for a game because they never came to practice. Hell some teams only practice once per week because with two games a week there is no time to practice.. which just feeds the loop of the Best kids getting the best time and position

some changes need to be done... some dont. where that ends up being is what the group will decide.

sure dont like this MANDATE because of kids are an unhealthy weight and such though. UH... guess what? the 'unfit' kids are already not playing sports... this wont make them play.

you've been pushing for a non-competitive sport?
or pushing about some kind of funding?

we have been pushing for proper focus on development.

then the change needs to be made at the coaching level.

want some GOOD recommendations?
Here's some that will benefit EVERYONE
For recreational leagues

All registered players are entitled to play a minimum of 25% of every game they attend. This would include any playoff or championship games.
(I know for my daughter's team, they had 3 shifts of kids if they all showed up, otherwise most the kids get to play at least 1/2 the game).

All teams are required to have a practice a week in addition to the games. This is for skill development, team building, etc.
(For the league my daughter was in, they had a 15-minute "practice" before each game...for the slightly older kids, perhaps make that a 1/2 hour? or have an additional day?)

Parents should be asked (or even required) to participate in one practice session per season.
I'll be coaching my daughter's team this summer, and I'm going to issue a letter to each kid's parents asking them to be "assistant coach" for one of the games throughout the season...let them signup for it.
They are already required to bring a "halftime snack"...so might as well ask them to do something else.

And coaches (even volunteer ones at this level) should be required to do some kind of coaching & skill-building session before being allowed to coach. Something that outlines some things to do with the kids, as well as some psychology of helping them develop.

Once fully implemented, any group can do what they want, they just won't be part of the "sanctioned" sport under the auspices of the provincial association.

The funding issue is irrelevant at the younger ages, but becomes an issue when kids are at the U14 level, as thats when provincial all-stars and provincial championships begin.

DeanK hit the nail on the head, a "winning" team may consist of only a couple of players who carry the entire team. So how do the other players develop? Keep in mind that we are talking at the U9 to U12 level. We lose far too many players because they end up on teams that get the sh1t kicked out of them by double digits by teams that have been "selected". Wheres the competition in that?

"All registered players are entitled to play a minimum of 25% of
every game they attend. This would include any playoff or championship
games."

entitlement eh? What if the kid dont come to practice. What if the kid is simply not putting an effort in? What if the kid shows up late?


As for practice. Read the article, that is one of the things they want to increase. But its damn near impossible on some teams since kids are "guaranteed" to play, parents just dont bring their kids and then complain when they are benched. Practice should be at a minimum 2 hours to 1 hour of game play for older kids... but 15 minutes before hand for 6 and under is really sufficient since the "game" is not supposed to be focusing on winning its supposed to be focused on introduction to game play.

AA, the other part of the LTPD program is changes to the coaching levels. The coaching levels will coincide with the developmental levels of the players (Active Start, FUNdamentals, and Training to Train). This is the level that most players and coaches will focus on. The higher levels will be for the higher end (provincial, national type players) In order ot implement this, more individuals will be trained at the Club level to deliver the clinics, rather than at the provincial level. More trainers = more training for coaches.

At some point, the organization of the sport has to be an issue. The mandate is coming from the sport bodies who have researched this, consulted professionals, etc, not from the parents.

Currently, at the U9 level, there are 2 games per week (outdoor season) and maybe one practice.

At U10, an option for players to be part of the Developmental Program exists, with 1 game per week and at least 2 training sessions, but usually more. These are the kids attending camps and clinics, out of town tournaments, and looking at becoming a provincial all star or even a shot at the national team.

HOw many 9 year old players does it take to put one player on the national team at U17?

"HOw many 9 year old players does it take to put one player on the national team at U17"

I will guess.. 20,000?

As a fun story for people to keep things in perspective.

When I was the mini soccer director for NorthWest Winnipeg we after many hours decided to implement 3v3 soccer.. most of us wanted it for all 8 and under.. but because of kids already having played and to placate some clubs who did not agree we made 7 year old 5v5 and 8 year old 6v6 instead of the 7v7 they were traditionally playing at ALL age levels and the same size field. We also reduced the field size

I had one mother call and complain that her 5 year old son was used to the game from the year previous and this new 3v3 if we never switched it back, she would pull her son out.

Her reason? The kids were running around too much and he was exhausted at the end of a game.

This whole delusion that the "selected" teams are any different than the "pool" teams is ridiculous.

At EVERY level of sports...there are support players, useless players, and standouts.

It doesn't matter if you're talking U6 or Superbowl NFL players.

And giving some kids more playing time isn't going to make a difference at the younger age groups...because some of them just WON'T play.
On my daughter's team...there were about three kids you put on the field, and they wanted to just sit there...or go back to their mom on the sidelines.
There were a couple of kids who would dominate the play and carry the ball through their time on the field.

The skill of a good coach is to recognize who those kids are...and play them for the player.
ie. take those SKILLED players, and put them all on together to dominate the field...and then take the UNWILLING players, and put them all on together so they feel they are contributing.

I agree, the game at that level should not be just about winning/losing, but having that component adds to the player development.

Coaching is a skill...one that is improved and developed, and is about 90% psychology/sociology and 10% sport knowledge. I've met some of the best coaches at all ages/levels in several different sports. I've seen the arrogant idiots who believe they are good and aren't, and those who quietly manage their teams to successful seasons and championships.

And not all players require the same kind of coach to perform well. Some kids can join a team and be terrible, then get put with a new coach and become an all-star.

But the basic factors of a game is that there are rules to follow, and a score to be kept to gauge the effectiveness of the training. It's also why so many people in the world are willing to sit through 2 hours of a professional soccer match with NO SCORE...because the game itself and skill involved are so interesting when played well.

But if they aren't going to keep score, if they aren't going to track the effectiveness of the skill development...why bother having goals? or sidelines? or a ball? just send the kids into the field and have them run around for 1/2 an hour.

so on one hand you are arguing for more soccer just like they play it at the youth level in Europe and Africa and South America ... and on the other you are saying its crap?

you do realize that the reason so few Canadians make it to the "big game" of world soccer is our outdated training model right?

do kids in Africa play in a championship at age 11?