|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Jan 19, 2015 21:35:20 GMT -6
Moved posts from the when to stop scoring thread to here that were about the different topics of school issues like fees and money, location, club players, fundraising, etc... Right now I think everyone should remember that if we grow the HS game, it will be from the lowest enrollment up, not from the top down. These tiny teams that are getting walloped are the future chances to see soccer actually played in A class just like football. The more schools that play the better it is for all of us, so remember that when you feel like dropping a nine spot on a weak team--maybe thats the last straw for some of these kids who will just give it up rather than keep getting embarrassed. You get the same power points for winning 1-0 as 10-0. Unless of course you are playing for the polls............... Or, playing for "stats"....
I've always said that soccer will truly be "established" when schools like Many, Winnfield, St. Mary's, etc. establish soccer programs.
However, even the more rural soccer programs that have been established for years are still weak teams.
And why is that? (The exceptions may be the ones with a substantial Hispanic population)
I think the simple answer is, soccer isn't a priority at these schools. These teams are filled with largely multi sport athletes that view soccer as just an activity/participation sport.
The landscape of high school sports (especially at the smallest schools) hasn't changed that much in the last 20 years.
Boys play football in the fall, basketball or in some cases soccer in the winter, and track/baseball in the spring.
I'm not against a kid playing more than one high school sport. (In theory) But, I no longer believe that simply fielding more teams is somehow going to improve soccer's profile/standing in the grand scheme.
The key in my opinion to improve both participation and popularity is to do it at the grass roots level. Which means local rec leagues that ultimately benefit the local high school teams. Not to mention the players themselves.
And while I hate unnecessarily running up the score on the weaker teams, I don't see any evidence of schools dropping their soccer programs. Southwood, Haughton, Bastrop, Minden continue to field teams year after year.
Now, I can buy into a serious, committed player quitting his high school team because of the team's lack of success or commitment. Because it makes no sense to them. It's like having an honor student in remedial level classes.
They get frustrated or bored.
Ever been to Beau Chene? Not much more rural than us... And if we can do what we have done over the past 9 seasons since restarting the program... Anyone can. The obstacles we overcame to get it back up and running were nearly insurmountable. It takes a lot of work and dedication and discipline. But it is extremely possibly. North Vermillion is another example of an up and coming program that is very rural. I do know what you meant... It is usually easier in non rural areas, especially by large cities with good clubs. We are blessed to have dedicated parents and players that have played or are still playing club ball year round. But that was by working hard at our feeder schools for years to identity our future players and those who had the talent to play... And get them in a competitive environment as soon as they could. I'm not disagreeing with you... A lot of rural schools are weaker ones... But it can be done and should be done right if the school wants to take it on. I always offer my services to a new public school program to show them how we do it and our booster club is set up and what it takes to make it successful on and off the field. |
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Jan 20, 2015 4:23:50 GMT -6
I am assuming your year round club players forego American football. Was this a challenge?
We were talking about this in the stands the other night. Our school needs more year round club players but probably at least 50% play other sports.
Really curious to see how you handle this.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Jan 20, 2015 7:36:15 GMT -6
I am assuming your year round club players forego American football. Was this a challenge? We were talking about this in the stands the other night. Our school needs more year round club players but probably at least 50% play other sports. Really curious to see how you handle this. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards Most do. But I also have a BUNCH of club players (not near Lafayette or ACADIANA Numbers, but very impressive for a rural school) who only recently quit to do other high school sports. Usually they try to do it all the first year or so and then just give club up and play high school sports by u16 if they aren't getting any college looks or if they are comp2. Our schools biggest obstacle for a while was itself. We have a great AD/football coach now that enforces sharing athletes and no coach is to ever discourage a player from playing another sport. It's helped us all. He believes that soccer and basketball can make his players faster and more dynamic, and track makes everyone faster, while, football makes everyone stronger and more physical by nature. A benefit of having a younger new school AD/Forball coach. More in touch with modern physical fitness and training methods as well as the well rounded athlete and different training needed for each... Instead of the old school guy who thinks soccer ruins his off season weight lifting and football field. We may only be talking a few players here or there, but I lost opevious CSC, LFC, and now dynamo players cause of our own high school coaches refusing to let them play more than one sport. Our new AD came in last year and changed all that. I benefitted with a former a couple CSC players coming back to play soccer along with their other sport. The worst thing a school can do is keep players from being well rounded. Of course the more club players you have, the better off you will be... That's the facts of this sport. But even having those with a good base of club that onky recently quit around u15 or u16 is still great for high school soccer, especially when they are well rounded by playing other sports also. |
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Jan 20, 2015 8:47:49 GMT -6
Great that the coaches are willing to work together. That may be case at our school- not sure. My kid is the type who won't join anything if she isn't sure she can make everything. Probably a self imposed limitation on her part. She probably misses out on a lot but is fully committed to her activities and grades.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2015 11:30:51 GMT -6
I am assuming your year round club players forego American football. Was this a challenge? We were talking about this in the stands the other night. Our school needs more year round club players but probably at least 50% play other sports. Really curious to see how you handle this. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards Most do. But I also have a BUNCH of club players (not near Lafayette or ACADIANA Numbers, but very impressive for a rural school) who only recently quit to do other high school sports. Usually they try to do it all the first year or so and then just give club up and play high school sports by u16 if they aren't getting any college looks or if they are comp2. Our schools biggest obstacle for a while was itself. We have a great AD/football coach now that enforces sharing athletes and no coach is to ever discourage a player from playing another sport. It's helped us all. He believes that soccer and basketball can make his players faster and more dynamic, and track makes everyone faster, while, football makes everyone stronger and more physical by nature. A benefit of having a younger new school AD/Forball coach. More in touch with modern physical fitness and training methods as well as the well rounded athlete and different training needed for each... Instead of the old school guy who thinks soccer ruins his off season weight lifting and football field. We may only be talking a few players here or there, but I lost opevious CSC, LFC, and now dynamo players cause of our own high school coaches refusing to let them play more than one sport. Our new AD came in last year and changed all that. I benefitted with a former a couple CSC players coming back to play soccer along with their other sport. The worst thing a school can do is keep players from being well rounded. Of course the more club players you have, the better off you will be... That's the facts of this sport. But even having those with a good base of club that onky recently quit around u15 or u16 is still great for high school soccer, especially when they are well rounded by playing other sports also. great thing for BC is that they are close enough to decent quality club soccer. Fairly large player pool factoring in the entire Acadiana region.
Now, I'm not against playing multiple sports at all. And I think soccer benefits gridiron players. Good cross training. And I think basketball (junior high of course..can't do both in hs) aids 1v1 defending/agility.
And track benefits all athletes. I think a gridiron football player can make a good high school level defender in most cases.
All that said, I don't think it is possible to be an exceptional soccer player by putting the ball away for 8-9 months. We are getting to the point where to be successful at soccer you need to play more on a year round basis. Shreve had a great run last year with a handful of club players. (Mainly in key roles.)
Having great control/first touch is imperative for midfielders and attacking players in general.
I fully understand that at the d2/d3 divisions you have a higher percentage of multi sport athletes. Just the nature of the beast.
A high school coach can only work with what he has. And you can't play tiki taka if you don't have 10 technical players. Just doesn't work. And you also need a keeper with great feet. But good overall athletes generally fill most keeper slots. (I think tight ends and wide receivers make good keepers.)
I know BC is rural but it isn't as isolated in a soccer sense as say, a Natchitoches Central. Or a Bastrop.
With all that in mind, I have to give Chad a lot of respect for building a very strong program.
|
|
|
|
Post by raiderfan on Jan 21, 2015 16:24:51 GMT -6
My point is that, for whatever reason, a lot of these perennial 'weaker' teams obviously either don't have committed players or the rosters are made up of players with below average ability. And the fact is that a lot of the smaller schools are largely made up of multi sport athletes. (Either based on need or preference.)
In other words, they use soccer for fun or a cross training activity. Nothing wrong with that.
I have nothing against kids playing multiple sports.
But the reality is, if it isn't a priority, then sometimes these lopsided results are inevitable. I think you're a little off-base with the assumption that, if you don't play soccer year-round, then you're not a "committed" or "serious" player and are only doing it for a "fun or cross training activity." It may not be the case everywhere, but club soccer can be a pretty significant money and travel commitment and is just not that easy for every family to handle. I know at our school, there are some students who really love soccer, and treat it as their primary sport, and participate in some other sports, like cross-country, in order to cross-train and stay in shape for the soccer season. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2015 16:59:08 GMT -6
My point is that, for whatever reason, a lot of these perennial 'weaker' teams obviously either don't have committed players or the rosters are made up of players with below average ability. And the fact is that a lot of the smaller schools are largely made up of multi sport athletes. (Either based on need or preference.)
In other words, they use soccer for fun or a cross training activity. Nothing wrong with that.
I have nothing against kids playing multiple sports.
But the reality is, if it isn't a priority, then sometimes these lopsided results are inevitable. I think you're a little off-base with the assumption that, if you don't play soccer year-round, then you're not a "committed" or "serious" player and are only doing it for a "fun or cross training activity." It may not be the case everywhere, but club soccer can be a pretty significant money and travel commitment and is just not that easy for every family to handle. I know at our school, there are some students who really love soccer, and treat it as their primary sport, and participate in some other sports, like cross-country, in order to cross-train and stay in shape for the soccer season. Well, you indirectly kind of proved my point.
Now I understand that club soccer is or can be a serious undertaking. (It is for my son. He trains an hour away with a club team out-of-state.)
And it is possible to be a decent player without having to play 'club'. Everyone has their own definition of being 'committed'. To me, at a minimum it means playing on some level (whether it's pickup, rec, indoor, etc.) outside of the very short high school soccer season.
It's fine to play other sports. I'm not against that. I think it can even be beneficial in a lot of ways. But if you are only getting touches on the ball during the high school season, then sorry, to me that doesn't fit the definition of being serious/committed.
And with the possible exception of American football (and even that's debatable) the same applies to serious commitment to most team sports.
|
|
|
|
Post by raiderfan on Jan 21, 2015 18:32:35 GMT -6
Seems you either missed or ignored my point that the cost of club soccer puts it out of reach for many families.
|
|
warrior16
Data Expert 
Michael Stein - Volunteer Assitant
Posts: 2,169
|
Post by warrior16 on Jan 21, 2015 18:45:57 GMT -6
It's a tough thing to pinpoint exactly, but when you look at the top 5 teams in every division, and really the top 10 for D-I , I know for a fact every one of those teams is filled with guys who play the sport year-round at a very high level.
The only exception to that might be ESA, since they are such a small school, but they still tend to get a few CSC players and their coach is one of the best coaches at CSC.
The only player in our starting rotation this year that doesn't play at BRSC year-round is our goalkeeper and this is the deepest amount of club players we've ever had, so make of that what you will...there is definitely a correlation between success and having dedicated club players.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2015 9:11:59 GMT -6
Seems you either missed or ignored my point that the cost of club soccer puts it out of reach for many families. No I didn't.
There are plenty of ways/venues to play soccer outside of the high school season that don't have to be club soccer.
There are plenty of Hispanic kids here in NW La that are decent to exceptional players that don't play club. Either by choice or necessity. A 16 yr old can play in a fairly competitive adult league. I've seen 14-15 yr olds playing in competitive Hispanic leagues. Add to that indoor, rec or just playing pickup can help a player maintain and even improve technique outside of the high school season.
And, as far as money, high school soccer isn't exactly cheap either. I think it costs most hs players $250-$300 just in upfront fees. (At least where we live.) Add in fundraising and other costs and a family can easily shell out $500-$600 for basically 3 1/2 months of hs soccer.
So it's hard for me to buy into the "money" argument. Besides, if a kid is good there are few clubs that won't try to accommodate the player/family with costs.
And if a kid is playing other high school sports I am assuming there's costs associated with participating in those sports as well.
So, again, I'm not being critical of the multi sport student athlete. I'm simply saying that you get out of the game what you put into it. And if you're only playing soccer (organized or not) 3-4 months a year, it's very hard to be a good to exceptional player.
You don't have to spend thousands of dollars a year to be a good hs soccer player.
|
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Jan 22, 2015 9:31:31 GMT -6
I was really surprised by the cost to play high school soccer. We only pay $100- same as any other high school sport but I have friends at public school that pay $300.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2015 10:20:23 GMT -6
Definitely not cheap. With all the extras factored in.
|
|
|
|
Post by raiderfan on Jan 22, 2015 10:32:36 GMT -6
Definitely not cheap. With all the extras factored in. Obviously, it varies considerably from school to school. We don't have much cost at all, beyond a one-time investment in the uniform kit. That's not an annual expense, though. Of course, you have to replace cleats and shin-guards from time to time. But it is, for us, relatively cheap. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 22, 2015 11:36:04 GMT -6
Definitely not cheap. With all the extras factored in. Obviously, it varies considerably from school to school. We don't have much cost at all, beyond a one-time investment in the uniform kit. That's not an annual expense, though. Of course, you have to replace cleats and shin-guards from time to time. But it is, for us, relatively cheap. That's good to hear. Really.
|
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Jan 22, 2015 16:41:36 GMT -6
Our kids buy their own pre game shirts, warm ups, and game socks. They keep them. It's theirs so they are buying something. They also fundraiser by selling a minimum number of ads or sponsorship signs. Besides that... We may do a donut sale or something. Besides that... Parents are required to work our tournament. No registration fee charged.
|
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Jan 22, 2015 16:45:53 GMT -6
I saw one of your players I assume wearing a really cool Beau Chene shirt. I can't remember exactly what it said but it had a saying on the back. I want to say that it said something about commitment or hard work.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Jan 22, 2015 17:05:42 GMT -6
That's another thing we do is sell a team shirt or hoodie each year to parents, students, and players. The seniors and leaders pick a slogan or goal for the year and we make a shirt. Last year was "a team above all, above all a team." This years is "excellence" and an awesome definition of it on the back. The company that makes it finds a cool way to incorporate our logo into the word Futbol with the o being our badge. We make a little $ on that too, but not much.
|
|
|
|
Post by chelsea007 on Jan 22, 2015 18:53:15 GMT -6
Chad,
We are in the same boat. Our guys buy pregame shirts, socks, and shorts. We pay for or assist those in need. Our JV uses our school PE shorts. We buy the JV their socks. While certainly not flush with cash, limited fundraising goes along way. The bottom line, if you want to field a squad, it can be done at a reasonable expense. Our freshmen squad used jerseys that were 10 years old at the St. Paul freshmen tourney and not one kid complained. They were quite happy with just getting to play. Slow growth is better than no growth. If a school is struggling financially, keep the faith. Get creative (like our JV), and shop online for deals (our JV socks were two bucks!). The sport will be better off in our state over time as we continue to promote the sport we love. Good luck and good health.
|
|
|
|
Post by methuselah on Jan 25, 2015 5:46:18 GMT -6
Here is a nice article I stumbled across regarding single sport v. multiple sport athletes: One Sport Athletes
I think the bottom line is there really is no perfect answer. On the one hand, I think it is irrefutable that that schools at the very top of the pyramid (talking final, semi-final and maybe even quarter-final teams) will be teams with a lot of kids that play "year round". And while there are other venues such as indoor, small sided, summer, etc., for most intents and purposes, at this level I think year round=club. Any time you have a competitive situation, those entities willing to go to the furthest extreme will pretty much set the bar. Kind of a version of "lowest common denominator" principle but maybe a phrase like "most committed denominator" or "most extreme denominator" would be better ways to put it. On the other hand, I think that, in the long run, allowing kids to participate in multiple sports, if they want to, probably makes for a much more rewarding and enriching overall high school experience. It can keep them more well rounded and, along with an emphasis on academics, I think it may well be worth the price of what is given up in the chase for the holy grail of a title. Bottom line is probably to let the kids figure out what is right for them. There will be some that love the sport and really just want to concentrate on it and be the best they can be at it. There are others who may just want to try another sport here or there. And there are some who want to play more than one sport to a significant degree throughout their high school years. Just give them the facts as best as you know them of the pluses and minuses of each scenario and let them make the most informed decision they can. |
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Jan 25, 2015 9:17:55 GMT -6
Our soccer coach posted this on Facebook. Sometimes I wonder if my daughter is missing out by only playing soccer. She somewhat enjoys volleyball and basketball. She is considering track next year as she found out she has flexibility with that sport in attending meets.
Also I see a flaw in this graph. They are talking about football. Is there much opportunity to play football year around? So one sport football players may be only playing a sport during that season....
I would be interested to see this for other sports which have select teams and more opportunities to play year round.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
