• Welcome to Fearless Friday Bulletin Boards. Please login or sign up.

 FF is powered by:        Do Not Sell My Personal Information

CLUB SOCCER RUMORS IN LITTLE ROCK

Started by michu, March 26, 2013, 09:40:37 am

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

michu

Quote from: Sockers Kid on May 01, 2013, 11:28:46 pm
Michu, you okay? You need a hug? Don't be so sensitive. Its going to be okay, tough guy! No one is bashing kids. Just starting facts about the '95-'96 team, since they were used as an example. Don't feed us that Sour Kool-Aid that since Rush is the biggest club from an organization stand point, that they're legit or something. "Give me a break!" We're taking about the Arkansas Rush! Not the Colorado Rush. 

Explain to me why Nathan Hunt (The Rush Director) coaches 5 different teams??? yeah... that's definitely quality coaching and just what your kid needs.... a coach that's stretched real thin. You really think for a second those kids are getting the detail attention they need from an overwhelmed coach?

Why doesn't LRFC, BlueBirds, Rush etc merge and create something great. The same goes for NWA with Lighting & Comets! You can't tell me that the coaching at Arkansas Rush is top notch, because its definitely behind the BlueBirds & Comets organizations. I've been to numerous Rush games and the coaching and play is below average at best.

For one... the BlueBirds has three USSF 'A' Lic coaches and two of them played professionally in England. They're doing great things with their young program. Light years ahead of Rush.

Iranian National Team

Humor me with your staff's qualifications. Bottom line... It's all about coaching (which means a qualified coaching staff) that can provide player development. Don't take it personal. And  why don't you get over yourself about feeding parents a bunch false information from a rogue club. All of these silly stats about The Rush winning or doing well at "Presidents Cup" is Absolutely Hilarious! Are you serious???That's where you hang your hat and measure your success??? Your talking about a silver level Mickey Mouse tourney. Play with the big boys and girls and face off against the top teams in the state... the '95 Lighting Girls Team, '96 Comets Team, '97 Comets Girls Team, '00 Comets Boys Team... All of these teams are playing and competing at the regional level. They're not get crushed like your typical Rush team at the ECNL league. I don't here of any Rush or LR teams currently competing with these teams. Feel free to help me out, because I'd love to hear that there's teams from LR or Rush that are doing well, besides your local tourney at Burns Park. With the numbers you have in LR, why isn't there more success from the club level? The fact is, your still way behind the curve!
Lets start from the top. I am always looking for a good hug and will always come to the defense of kids trying to better themselves. These girls have the ability to play in the ECNL and are getting the chance through the Rush program. No other club in Arkansas can give kids that opportunity which also includes US Soccer's Academy Development on the boys side. Two of these girls will be participating in the PDP this weekend. No need to google Soccer Kid, I will explain. It's the ODP program for ECNL players. They set up camps all over the country and invite the top players from the league to train and play games. National team scouts are there to observe. So not only are these girls good enough to participate in the ECNL, but two are strong enough players to be invited to this event.

What is so wrong with a proven club that has produced regional and national champions (not President's Cup) around the country plus developed many kids participating with our youth national program coming into central Arkansas to try to make a difference? There has never been a team from Arkansas win the Southern Regionals, so a proven club wanting to come into our market is a welcome site to many of us.

Does the Rush even have 5 classic teams participating in Spring soccer? From what I have been told, they not only want to add players in central Arkansas, but they also want/will need to add staff. You have no clue to the level of training provided by the Rush, just making assumptions. Provide us real information and maybe we will pay more attention.

The best thing that could ever happen in LR is for all the local clubs to merge their classic programs. Talent pool is too thin to support all of these programs, but you also need the right coaches, and a system/curriculum to follow. The Rush is the only club that offers a structured classic program which includes style of play, training curriculum, and both player and coaching opportunities. I am sure you understand the importance of a clubs structure described above with your vast club experience around the country.

The Bluebirds have a very knowledgable staff, but their focus is on two teams that contain the son and daughter of the person signing their checks. It's a wealth of soccer knowledge but unfortunately it's not being spread effectively throughout their club. They do a good job of teaching kids how to win soccer games, but it's not very pretty. Your comment regarding Bluebirds obviously tells us that you prefer winning over development.

Samir is from Kuwait, not Iran.

The fact is the entire state is behind in youth soccer. Nobody is feeding parents with false information. They (Rush) are wanting to make a push in Little Rock because that is where the majority of classic players reside. They have a program that has worked around the country and hopefully adding the stronger local players will stregthen player development and ultimatly team results.

Finally, your tone appears to be one that is intimidated by the potential of the Rush. I don't speak for all central Arkansas parents, but we are excited about something new and different. We have been doing the same thing for years and it has obviously not worked. Change is good. They also want to develop an outreach program for minorities which is awesome. I think the biggest reason NWA has passed central Arkansas is due to the Hispanic participation in their clubs. We have to do the same here and they (Rush)have a plan to do just that. 

What else you got?

coach cleats

Iraq I think. As for the two superstars they had little impact in state cup matches against NWAL95 and comets 97.

Sockers Kid

Clap-Clap! Well done Michu! And well said. Nothing is wrong with what Rush is doing. It's their program and they can run it anyway they please. Going back to the "Viable Options" comment... It's apparent that players are being sacrificed for the betterment of several good players. Those quality players did not make any such impact whatsoever in games that i witnessed vs. the '95 Lightning or '97 Comets (since this topic has been about the greatness of the '95-'96 Rush team).

I can say for a fact that out of those teams I previously mentioned, all have the best players from LR playing for them. Most are from LRFC. Why would those teams have the best players from the LR area? According to you, Rush is the best Viable Option? Really??? Is that true? The reality is, the best option for players seem to be commuting all the way up to NWA. I don't hear of a single player that has left one of the top teams in the NWA area to play in the central. Why is that? And why do the Rush continue to Recruit Hard from those teams like there is no tomorrow? Once again, because they can not develop players. All these teams that have been mentioned have one fantastic coach that is committed to their team and provides top notch training all year. Each coach has built a style of play, philosophy, continuity & commitment to what each team is doing (the exact opposite with what AR Rush is doing). It's completely evident when you watch those teams play. As a matter of fact, there isn't even competition in the state for any of these teams, because other teams and clubs can not keep a competitive team in the age group. It's sad that teams and clubs continue to short cut!

The reason why were even having this discussing is because of the love and passion for the greatest sport on earth.  Kids play & want to be coached by some who truly cares about them and their development! True coaches who understand the game and mentors do it for the satisfaction of seeing their kids improve day in day out. It's for the betterment of the game and DEVELOPMENT OF PLAYERS!

Rush and every other club (for the most part) are about the older ages (except for Bluebirds & Comets). Terrible to run a youth organizations that way. It's about the word "YOUTH"! Your alliance to Rush is tremendous... And thats great! good for you! Its no different then being a Barca, Real, ManU or Bayern fan. I personally don't have a team or club out here that root for. I could careless who wins or succeeds. I call it the way I see it because I enjoy watching high quality youth Football, because I'm from Europe. My two boys are all grown up and playing. One currently a freshmen at one of the top division 1 programs in the country & my oldest in Europe playing professionally. 

Are there better and viable options besides a club that is pulling the wool over the typical non educated parent. For example: lets go ahead and have team(s) that share four different age fouls for the sake of having a team so we don't lose numbers. Very Lame!

Your up? Whatcha got???

Sportsaholic94

If you don't mind me asking, where does your son play?

Sockers Kid


Sportsaholic94


michu

I'm not sure who spoke about the greatness of the 95'-96' Rush team, but pretty sure it wasn't me. My point was about a few girls getting an opportunity not offered by any other local club. Pure and simple.

Your comments about Little Rock soccer and kids commuting to NWA is exactly why we are in need of change. From what I understand and I could have been misled, is that the Rush has never made a big push for classic level players in the classic age groups in Little Rock. Currently, they don't even have teams in central Arkansas (Conway) in the U12-U14 age groups. They have decent numbers in the high school age groups, but not enough in each age group to make a team. They simply put all the kids together so they can play local games. Is it ideal, probably not, but they do what they can with what they have. Why are these high school kids gravitating to the Rush program? It would be great to hear from a parent, but I assume they feel the Rush program will provide the best opportunity in developing players wanting to play beyond high school and also provide the best opportunities to be seen by college coaches. Parents?

The problem with what you described concerning coaches having philosophies, style of play, etc.. is each coach probably has different views of the game. Not sure about the landscape in NWA, but it's very rare for a team to have the same coach for more than a couple of seasons. Don't see the continuity when each coach has it's own philosophy of play, training, etc. Top clubs around the country have a club style of play, training curriculum, etc., but I am sure you were aware of that. The Rush has just that and it's something new to the Little Rock area.

You are obviously clueless to the Bluebird soccer program. The focus is on a couple of kids and the younger teams are simply siblings to older Bluebird players. These younger teams are coached by parents.

I am about something new that has potential to make a difference in what we are putting out on the field in central Arkansas. I don't see how anybody is trying to pull the wool over anyone. There are over 42,000 kids playing in the Rush system, so they must be doing something right. I think us parents in central Arkansas or more specifically Little Rock, hope to see them make a difference for our kids.

How was that?

Sockers Kid

Fair enough! Well said. Always appreciate a good debate. And your right... I probably am clueless on the BlueBirds program... shouldn't of spoken so soon. Thanks for the vine and good luck to you, your club and your kids. Absolutely no harm intended, just a healthy debate.

michu

Couldn't agree more. Nothing wrong with a good debate on a topic that is obviously important to us all. Good luck to your boys as well. Must be a proud parent with one in college and the other living the dream. That is awesome!

sevenof400

May 04, 2013, 07:08:15 pm #109 Last Edit: May 04, 2013, 07:11:34 pm by sevenof400
Well, here's another development in our corner of the club soccer world.
Justin Hawkins is the new DOC with LRFC. 

It appears Hawkins may be continuing in his present position as CBC men's and women's soccer coach - but that is not confirmed as of yet. 

Certainly an interesting development.....

Sportsaholic94

Ouch. Terrible for Central Arkansas soccer...

Brownclown

Quote from: Sportsaholic94 on May 04, 2013, 09:14:15 pm
Ouch. Terrible for Central Arkansas soccer...

My understanding is he will transition his duties full time to the DOC.  I think it's a great hire.  '94, why do you think this is a bad thing?

The name will be changed to Arkansas United with a new logo and colors.  Plus, new training that will be administered by Coerver.
http://www.coerver.com/

The Academy program has produced excellent results for those kids that have been in it from the beginning.  This next step should make it that much better.

sevenof400

Quote from: Brownclown on May 05, 2013, 09:54:21 am
..The name will be changed to Arkansas United with a new logo and colors. 

Just to be clear, is LRFC changing it's name to Arkansas United? 

Sportsaholic94

From what I've heard is he is not a very nice guy and not too good of a coach. That could be totally false. Just what I heard. Everyone that I've talked to that played for him at CBC hated him. Said he was somewhat of a "snake"

Brownclown

May 05, 2013, 11:23:49 am #114 Last Edit: May 05, 2013, 11:36:53 am by Brownclown
Quote from: sevenof400 on May 05, 2013, 10:28:05 am
Quote from: Brownclown on May 05, 2013, 09:54:21 am
..The name will be changed to Arkansas United with a new logo and colors. 

Just to be clear, is LRFC changing it's name to Arkansas United?

Correct.  Legally, it's always been Riverdale Soccer Association, but sometime in the 90's they changed the name to Little Rock Futbol Club as a d/b/a.  The club was due for a kit change this year, so they decided with the new direction that it would be a good time to change the name, look, etc.,

Brownclown

May 05, 2013, 11:31:59 am #115 Last Edit: May 05, 2013, 11:38:48 am by Brownclown
Quote from: Sportsaholic94 on May 05, 2013, 10:41:02 am
From what I've heard is he is not a very nice guy and not too good of a coach. That could be totally false. Just what I heard. Everyone that I've talked to that played for him at CBC hated him. Said he was somewhat of a "snake"

I can't speak for anyone at CBC, but all the kids that played for him in Classic loved him.  He's coached my son in Academy and against him.  I thought he was an excellent coach and the kids definitely like him.  So on that level, I think it's a great hire.  Time will tell.
On a stability level, I also think he's the right person.  His family is happy here and his kids are in school, so he should be around for awhile.

builtolast

I agree.  He is going to be here and that's what is needed. 

LR_Dad

So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

Rey Pygsterio

I love this thread. It has everything -- club vs. club, LR vs. NWA, overzealous parents, and even a debate on the Mighty Bluebirds.

For those saying NWA is such a dominant force, I suggest you take a look at which region has won the overwhelming majority of 7A boys high school soccer championships in the last 15 years.

michu

This discussion has to do with club soccer, not high school soccer. Currently, NWA CLUB teams seem to be enjoying much more success than than central Arkansas.

Sir Alex

Quote from: Rey Pygsterio on May 06, 2013, 10:36:22 am
I love this thread. It has everything -- club vs. club, LR vs. NWA, overzealous parents, and even a debate on the Mighty Bluebirds.

For those saying NWA is such a dominant force, I suggest you take a look at which region has won the overwhelming majority of 7A boys high school soccer championships in the last 15 years.

I don't disagree with what region has won more stae championships in the 7a, but I think that is comparing apples to oranges.  Little rock has fewer 7a schools that attract quality soccer players, mainly Central and Catholic and Conwy has only one 7a school.  Whereas the northwest region has a bunch of schools which dilutes the player pool a bit.  Just my opinion.

Brownclown

May 06, 2013, 12:00:48 pm #121 Last Edit: May 06, 2013, 12:15:53 pm by Brownclown
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 09:31:50 am
So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

I've heard the Academy age will be raised to 8 or 9.  I'm not sure what the reason is for that.  I hadn't heard that it will be eliminated though.  I have heard that the Rec teams will also go by the Coerver syllabus also.  Apparently all Rec teams will have to attend one practice per week facilitated by a Coerver coach.  Its manditory that the Rec coach attends as well.  This is a great option for kids that want to play 2 sports, such as baseball in the spring and soccer in the fall.  The idea is to close the skills gap between those that want to have the same coach while playing with their friends until they get to Classics. Why lose good athletes to other sports when they can be encouraged to keep their foot on the ball for a few more years. 
By then they'll realize that soccer is so much more fun than baseball! Haha!

sevenof400

I've always liked the idea of one larger (combined) practice/training with several teams so that players can regularly measure their abilities against as many other players as possible.   

ruserious?

Quote from: michu on May 06, 2013, 11:15:14 am
This discussion has to do with club soccer, not high school soccer. Currently, NWA CLUB teams seem to be enjoying much more success than than central Arkansas.


From the State Cup this past November (U15-U19) both Champions and Presidents Cup divisions

BOYS:

    U15 Champions Division - Little Rock FC '98B (winner) & Ft. Smith Express 98 Boys (finalist)
    U16 Champions Division - Little Rock FC '97B Elite (winner) & NWA Lightning Strikers 97B (finalist)
    U16 President's Division - Maumelle SC River City United (winner) & Arkansas Rush Nike 97B (finalist)
    U17 Champions Division - Arkansas Comets FC 96B Premier (winner) & Little Rock FC '96B (finalist)
    U17 President's Division - Berryville Aztecas 96B (winner) & Bryant United 96/97 Boys (finalist)
    U18 Champions Division - Berryville Aztecas 95B (winner) & Bryant United 94/95 Boys (finalist)


GIRLS:

    U15 Champions Division - Arkansas Comets FC 98G Premier (winner) & NWA Lightning Strikers 98G (finalist)
    U16 Champions Division - Arkansas Comets FC 97G Premier
    U16 President's Division - ASC Dragonflies 97 (winner) & NWA Lightning Strikers 97G (finalist)
    U17 Champions Division - Little Rock FC '96G (winner) & NWA Lightning Strikers 96G (finalist)
    U17 President's Division - Arkansas Rush Nike 96G
    U18 Champions Division - NWA Lightning Strikers 95G
    U19 President's Division - Bryant United '95G (winner) & Searcy Livewires (finalist)


Not sure what the youngers are shaping up to look like but for the olders, in the NW vs Central AR debate it looks  fairly even.

arsoccer

Here's how things look with the younger ages according state league and some results found on gotsoccer.

U11 Boys
ASC-1
LRFC-2
I understand ASC lost some players.  Not sure if they were big contributors to this team or not.

U12 Boys
Comets Premier-1
Comets-2
I saw teams in this age group play recently and Fort Smith and Bluebirds seem to be coming on strong as well.

U13 Boys
Comets Premier-No one else is even close IMO.

U14 Boys
Bluebird and NWA played in premier league with NWA finishing higher.  LRFC is hitting their stride recently.  These 3 teams are all beating eachother.  Not sure about Ft. Smith.

U11 Girls
Bluebirds-1
Comets-2

U12 Girls
Bluebirds-1
Comets-2
These two teams have seemed to separate themselves from the rest of the pack.

U13 Girls
Bluebirds-1
Comets-2
Not a very strong age group in the state IMO.

U14 Girls
LRFC-I don't think anyone else is close.

LR_Dad

Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 12:00:48 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 09:31:50 am
So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

I've heard the Academy age will be raised to 8 or 9.  I'm not sure what the reason is for that.  I hadn't heard that it will be eliminated though.  I have heard that the Rec teams will also go by the Coerver syllabus also.  Apparently all Rec teams will have to attend one practice per week facilitated by a Coerver coach.  Its manditory that the Rec coach attends as well.  This is a great option for kids that want to play 2 sports, such as baseball in the spring and soccer in the fall.  The idea is to close the skills gap between those that want to have the same coach while playing with their friends until they get to Classics. Why lose good athletes to other sports when they can be encouraged to keep their foot on the ball for a few more years. 
By then they'll realize that soccer is so much more fun than baseball! Haha!

The Coerver idea is great...heard that also.  We have participated in both rec and academy....wasn't much of skills gap between the two.  In fact a couple of rec teams were quite skilled.  I hope the combined training sessions come to fruition. I believe it would be good for the kids .

Brownclown

May 06, 2013, 02:31:10 pm #126 Last Edit: May 06, 2013, 02:49:36 pm by Brownclown
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 01:00:03 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 12:00:48 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 09:31:50 am
So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

I've heard the Academy age will be raised to 8 or 9.  I'm not sure what the reason is for that.  I hadn't heard that it will be eliminated though.  I have heard that the Rec teams will also go by the Coerver syllabus also.  Apparently all Rec teams will have to attend one practice per week facilitated by a Coerver coach.  Its manditory that the Rec coach attends as well.  This is a great option for kids that want to play 2 sports, such as baseball in the spring and soccer in the fall.  The idea is to close the skills gap between those that want to have the same coach while playing with their friends until they get to Classics. Why lose good athletes to other sports when they can be encouraged to keep their foot on the ball for a few more years. 
By then they'll realize that soccer is so much more fun than baseball! Haha!

The Coerver idea is great...heard that also.  We have participated in both rec and academy....wasn't much of skills gap between the two.  In fact a couple of rec teams were quite skilled.  I hope the combined training sessions come to fruition. I believe it would be good for the kids .
You didn't think there was a skills gap between the kids that have been in the Academy program and those in Rec?  Really?  We must be watching different soccer then because the 9 and 10 year olds are light years ahead of ANY Rec team that I've seen play; at least the boys.  My son's Rec coach played in college and coached Catholic to a few state championships, so he's no slouch.  Needless to say, my son had an excellent base of soccer that has gotten much better in the Academy by playing with and against better competition.

I can say that the "A" Academy boys went to the Russellville jamboree a few Saturdays ago and did quite well.  I haven't seem a boys Rec team do half of the things these boys can do.  I'm not saying that I think the LRFC Academy is perfect by any means, but I think it gets it 80% right.

michu

How do we truly know if a clubs academy and or rec program is getting it right? What are we using as a basis for measurement? I could be wrong, but I don't think results in Russellville, AR is a very good standard of measurement.
So many factors measure quality of rec soccer, but I think the most important factor is helping these young kids develop a love for the game. Once these kids love getting out on the field with a ball, then you have to make sure the right program is in place to develop properly.
The kids that take off with this game are the players who touch the ball off the practice field. They do it on their own.
Clubs that can develop a players love for the game where those players constantly have a ball at their feet are doing the best job. Just my opinion.

LR_Dad

Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 02:31:10 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 01:00:03 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 12:00:48 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 09:31:50 am
So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

I've heard the Academy age will be raised to 8 or 9.  I'm not sure what the reason is for that.  I hadn't heard that it will be eliminated though.  I have heard that the Rec teams will also go by the Coerver syllabus also.  Apparently all Rec teams will have to attend one practice per week facilitated by a Coerver coach.  Its manditory that the Rec coach attends as well.  This is a great option for kids that want to play 2 sports, such as baseball in the spring and soccer in the fall.  The idea is to close the skills gap between those that want to have the same coach while playing with their friends until they get to Classics. Why lose good athletes to other sports when they can be encouraged to keep their foot on the ball for a few more years. 
By then they'll realize that soccer is so much more fun than baseball! Haha!

The Coerver idea is great...heard that also.  We have participated in both rec and academy....wasn't much of skills gap between the two.  In fact a couple of rec teams were quite skilled.  I hope the combined training sessions come to fruition. I believe it would be good for the kids .
You didn't think there was a skills gap between the kids that have been in the Academy program and those in Rec?  Really?  We must be watching different soccer then because the 9 and 10 year olds are light years ahead of ANY Rec team that I've seen play; at least the boys.  My son's Rec coach played in college and coached Catholic to a few state championships, so he's no slouch.  Needless to say, my son had an excellent base of soccer that has gotten much better in the Academy by playing with and against better competition.

I can say that the "A" Academy boys went to the Russellville jamboree a few Saturdays ago and did quite well.  I haven't seem a boys Rec team do half of the things these boys can do.  I'm not saying that I think the LRFC Academy is perfect by any means, but I think it gets it 80% right.

Let me clarify...we're just now to U8 (headed into U9).  We were in academy and had a pretty good experience.  My son got to play with the older boys and that probably helped him improve.  I'm not an academy "hater" at all...we participated. Our son just didn't enjoy it....and he loves soccer.

However, I didn't see much advantage because some of the academy coaches were frankly disappointing.  We had one or two that just "checked out" during the games...provided no instruction to the kids...weren't really paying attention.  We found a rec team with a dad that played college soccer and happened to be a good coach.  He taught our boys a LOT and kept it fun.  They're skills have certainly improved and we have enjoyed a lot of success.

We were not alone in our decision....I know of several kids (some on our team) that left academy for the same reasons.  I'm glad your U9-U10 academy teams have done well.  We played academy teams this year and won easily. 


Each to his own, but I think LRFC (or whatever they'll be called) is merging academy/rec for a reason.  I'm sure they will find a way to provide opportunities for the better players....I hope they do.  But academy wasn't accomplishing what they'd hoped.





Brownclown

Quote from: michu on May 06, 2013, 03:31:46 pm
How do we truly know if a clubs academy and or rec program is getting it right? What are we using as a basis for measurement? I could be wrong, but I don't think results in Russellville, AR is a very good standard of measurement.

Were you in Russellville to see any of the matches?  How would you know if it was an accurate standard of measurement?  I saw smart passing, possession soccer and that group of boys truly like being on the same team.  These results were against NW Arkansas traditionally dominant teams.
Most of the boys that my son plays with watch and record professional soccer matches as well as play it during recess at school.  I'd say that's a good start!

My complaint with the Academy is that many of the A group and some of the more interested B group of kids have gotten bored.  Also, they like to be on teams with their friends and with kids that are as interested in soccer as they are.

As for the rest of your statement, I completely agree.



michu

The point of my statement was not intended to refer to those particular set of games, but looking at a basis of measurement within the state of Arkansas in general. We need to be looking at what's going on in the larger and more developed soccer cities like Dallas, St. Louis, So Cal, etc... How are those clubs doing things with the younger age groups. We just need to start setting the standards a little bit higher.
I am sure those kids were playing good soccer in Russellville that day, so sorry to offend. Also great to hear they are also watching the game on TV. Another great way to learn. Keep it up. Sounds like you guys are doing a good job.

Rey Pygsterio

Quote from: michu on May 06, 2013, 11:15:14 am
This discussion has to do with club soccer, not high school soccer. Currently, NWA CLUB teams seem to be enjoying much more success than than central Arkansas.

This BOARD has to do with high-school soccer.

Lowguards

"I am sure those kids were playing good soccer in Russellville that day, so sorry to offend. Also great to hear they are also watching the game on TV. Another great way to learn. Keep it up. Sounds like you guys are doing a good job."

LOL. A bit patronizing and passive aggressive, but your other posts do make good points about investigating what bigger metros are doing and trying to emulate their approach. While Russellville certainly is not a soccer hub like Dallas or St. Louis, it is a good central location that accommodates teams from all over AR. It would be great if the best players from the state could have the opportunity to train and compete in places where the high level soccer is the norm. I'm sure an environment like that would test their love for the game and their competitive spirit. Some would flourish and others would flounder. If memory serves, a few players have left the state to test the mettle outside our borders. I think they all ended up back in Arkansas, some sooner than others. However, for most, that isn't an option and so we are left playing in places like Russellville, Arkansas. I congratulate the kids that choose to take the field and represent their respective clubs. And I applaud the parents that drive them all over the place so that they can play the game. Perhaps a standardized curriculum, developed by Coerver or Rush, is a positive step for youth development in Central Arkansas? Too bad the clubs in that area can't pool their resources and truly serve the soccer community with a great product.

Brownclown

May 06, 2013, 10:22:51 pm #133 Last Edit: May 06, 2013, 11:16:29 pm by Brownclown
Quote from: michu on May 06, 2013, 04:15:09 pm
The point of my statement was not intended to refer to those particular set of games, but looking at a basis of measurement within the state of Arkansas in general. We need to be looking at what's going on in the larger and more developed soccer cities like Dallas, St. Louis, So Cal, etc... How are those clubs doing things with the younger age groups. We just need to start setting the standards a little bit higher.
I am sure those kids were playing good soccer in Russellville that day, so sorry to offend. Also great to hear they are also watching the game on TV. Another great way to learn. Keep it up. Sounds like you guys are doing a good job.

I think the Academy program is an attempt to emulate what other clubs around the world are doing to develop their younger players.  I think it's done a reasonable job so far and the Coerver training should add to that.

I'm not offended, but to make a blanket statement that games played against teams from central Arkansas, NW Arkansas and the Russellville area aren't  good measuring sticks for 9 & 10 year olds is odd.  They have to start somewhere. 

Brownclown

May 06, 2013, 11:04:07 pm #134 Last Edit: May 07, 2013, 08:40:04 am by Brownclown
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 03:36:20 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 02:31:10 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 01:00:03 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 12:00:48 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 09:31:50 am
So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

I've heard the Academy age will be raised to 8 or 9.  I'm not sure what the reason is for that.  I hadn't heard that it will be eliminated though.  I have heard that the Rec teams will also go by the Coerver syllabus also.  Apparently all Rec teams will have to attend one practice per week facilitated by a Coerver coach.  Its manditory that the Rec coach attends as well.  This is a great option for kids that want to play 2 sports, such as baseball in the spring and soccer in the fall.  The idea is to close the skills gap between those that want to have the same coach while playing with their friends until they get to Classics. Why lose good athletes to other sports when they can be encouraged to keep their foot on the ball for a few more years. 
By then they'll realize that soccer is so much more fun than baseball! Haha!

The Coerver idea is great...heard that also.  We have participated in both rec and academy....wasn't much of skills gap between the two.  In fact a couple of rec teams were quite skilled.  I hope the combined training sessions come to fruition. I believe it would be good for the kids .
You didn't think there was a skills gap between the kids that have been in the Academy program and those in Rec?  Really?  We must be watching different soccer then because the 9 and 10 year olds are light years ahead of ANY Rec team that I've seen play; at least the boys.  My son's Rec coach played in college and coached Catholic to a few state championships, so he's no slouch.  Needless to say, my son had an excellent base of soccer that has gotten much better in the Academy by playing with and against better competition.

I can say that the "A" Academy boys went to the Russellville jamboree a few Saturdays ago and did quite well.  I haven't seem a boys Rec team do half of the things these boys can do.  I'm not saying that I think the LRFC Academy is perfect by any means, but I think it gets it 80% right.

Let me clarify...we're just now to U8 (headed into U9).  We were in academy and had a pretty good experience.  My son got to play with the older boys and that probably helped him improve.  I'm not an academy "hater" at all...we participated. Our son just didn't enjoy it....and he loves soccer.

I've heard that from more than a few people and we weren't excited about going from our Rec team and fantastic coach to the Academy, but our coach wanted all of our boys to give it a shot.  After the first fall season we almost got the old team back together because many of the kids missed playing with their friends.  And that's one of the biggest complaints I have about the Academy is the mixed intra-Academy teams.  The idea was to put 2 "A" players with a couple of "B" players and the rest are C, D etc., which would elevate the lower players and give them confidence.  Personally, I thought it did the opposite by making the kids that weren't as good or tended to screw around a bit lazy while making the better players selfish.  How many times is the better kid going to pass it back to the kid that doesn't care when the ball gets taken away every time?  Eventually they're going to try to do it all themselves which is what I saw during the Saturday intra-Academy games.  2 kids on my son's team scored probably 80% of the goals.  Frankly, I thought the Saturday mixed group  games were the most worthless part of the Academy program.

However, I didn't see much advantage because some of the academy coaches were frankly disappointing.  We had one or two that just "checked out" during the games...provided no instruction to the kids...weren't really paying attention.  I couldn't agree more and that's still a problem.  See my statement above about worthless intra-Academy gamesWe found a rec team with a dad that played college soccer and happened to be a good coach.  He taught our boys a LOT and kept it fun.  They're skills have certainly improved and we have enjoyed a lot of success.

You're very lucky that you have that and we had that as well, but we didn't really have anyone to play in Rec other than maybe 2 teams that were much of a challenge.  I saw a few kids that had tons of potential on teams, but had dads coaching that meant well, but didn't know how to coach them in soccer. Some games were so lopsided that our coach would pull one of our kids and play a man down plus making them pass 3 times before they could score.



We were not alone in our decision....I know of several kids (some on our team) that left academy for the same reasons.  I'm glad your U9-U10 academy teams have done well.  We played academy teams this year and won easily.

I've heard that the Academy group at that age is pretty small and many have left because they want to play with their friends.  As I said above, we almost did the same and I totally get it.  If your son is happy playing Rec and having fun, then keep him in that program by all means.  If my son wasn't having fun anymore then we would find him a good Rec team with some friends or concentrate on another activity.  He eats and breathes soccer though, so as long as he's happy then so am I.  There's a guy I know who's shuffled his kid between 4 different clubs in central Arkansas all within 24 months because he thinks his kid is going to be the next Dempsey.  I haven't been happy with everything at LRFC, but jeez, my son loves it and his best friends are in his training group.  I'm not going to drag him around the city to train with the same recycled coaches.


Each to his own, but I think LRFC (or whatever they'll be called) is merging academy/rec for a reason.

i hadn't heard they were merging them together.

I'm sure they will find a way to provide opportunities for the better players....I hope they do.  But academy wasn't accomplishing what they'd hoped.
No argument there!  I think it made a small group of boys and girls MUCH better but it didn't do much to attract and keep many new players.  I wish you could watch the U10 A group play and see how they play.  It's a lot of fun to watch them play creative attacking soccer. 
Good luck to your son and I hope he continues to play.  My son has Classic tryouts in a few weeks, so it's on to the next step for us.  I hope that with the new leadership at the club it will continue to get better from Classic to U5.


Sorry if this is hard to read or follow as I was trying to discuss your points as I saw them.

arsoccer

Quote from: michu on May 06, 2013, 04:15:09 pm
The point of my statement was not intended to refer to those particular set of games, but looking at a basis of measurement within the state of Arkansas in general. We need to be looking at what's going on in the larger and more developed soccer cities like Dallas, St. Louis, So Cal, etc... How are those clubs doing things with the younger age groups. We just need to start setting the standards a little bit higher.
I am sure those kids were playing good soccer in Russellville that day, so sorry to offend. Also great to hear they are also watching the game on TV. Another great way to learn. Keep it up. Sounds like you guys are doing a good job.

There are 25,000 players registered in the state of Arkansas through USYS.  Compare that to 195,000 registered players in North Texas, with the largest number coming from the Dallas metro.  It isn't that these places have some kind of magic formula for developing players.  They have 8x the kids we have.  Take any team in the state, rec or classic, and clone that team 8 times over.  You are going to end up with a pretty good team without doing much of anything.

Further it's important to understand the landscape of big time club soccer in these environemnts.  If you think that there is a lovefest going on where the only thing the clubs care about is is player development, helping the kids stay in the game, and finding a love for soccer you are wrong.  I know a coach who spent a few years coaching in Little Rock before moving to Dallas for a job.  He currently coaches 3 U8 teams for FC Dallas.  I, like you, was interested in what kinds of things they were doing with the players that may be different than what is done here.  He said the training was basically the same, but the main difference was how competitive things are at a very young age.  There are no contracts, there are no recruiting rules, there is nothing that prevents players to up and leave a team at any time.  He says he has players leave his team all the time but it's no big deal because according to him "I can hold a tryout any time I like and find 3 players that are just as good as the one that left."  These are cutthroat environments where only the strong survive and not something that would work with our small numbers.

IMO the best we can do today is to find a way to manufacture competitive environments within our individual clubs.  This means academies, pool training, players playing at levels that make sense for them, etc.  Certainly if we merged clubs together it would be great for the top tier of players, but my fear would be where that would leave the rest of the players.  Perhaps if this were done at the older age groups (U16 and above) it would be something that works, but i'm not sure it will ever happen the way it needs to given the current landscape and relationship between clubs.

Brownclown

I confirmed this morning that the Academy program at Arkansas United (LRFC) isn't going away and training will remain separate from Rec.

Brownclown

Quote from: arsoccer on May 07, 2013, 07:34:24 am
Quote from: michu on May 06, 2013, 04:15:09 pm
The point of my statement was not intended to refer to those particular set of games, but looking at a basis of measurement within the state of Arkansas in general. We need to be looking at what's going on in the larger and more developed soccer cities like Dallas, St. Louis, So Cal, etc... How are those clubs doing things with the younger age groups. We just need to start setting the standards a little bit higher.
I am sure those kids were playing good soccer in Russellville that day, so sorry to offend. Also great to hear they are also watching the game on TV. Another great way to learn. Keep it up. Sounds like you guys are doing a good job.

There are 25,000 players registered in the state of Arkansas through USYS.  Compare that to 195,000 registered players in North Texas, with the largest number coming from the Dallas metro.  It isn't that these places have some kind of magic formula for developing players.  They have 8x the kids we have.  Take any team in the state, rec or classic, and clone that team 8 times over.  You are going to end up with a pretty good team without doing much of anything.

Further it's important to understand the landscape of big time club soccer in these environemnts.  If you think that there is a lovefest going on where the only thing the clubs care about is is player development, helping the kids stay in the game, and finding a love for soccer you are wrong.  I know a coach who spent a few years coaching in Little Rock before moving to Dallas for a job.  He currently coaches 3 U8 teams for FC Dallas.  I, like you, was interested in what kinds of things they were doing with the players that may be different than what is done here.  He said the training was basically the same, but the main difference was how competitive things are at a very young age.  There are no contracts, there are no recruiting rules, there is nothing that prevents players to up and leave a team at any time.  He says he has players leave his team all the time but it's no big deal because according to him "I can hold a tryout any time I like and find 3 players that are just as good as the one that left."  These are cutthroat environments where only the strong survive and not something that would work with our small numbers.

IMO the best we can do today is to find a way to manufacture competitive environments within our individual clubs.  This means academies, pool training, players playing at levels that make sense for them, etc.  Certainly if we merged clubs together it would be great for the top tier of players, but my fear would be where that would leave the rest of the players.  Perhaps if this were done at the older age groups (U16 and above) it would be something that works, but i'm not sure it will ever happen the way it needs to given the current landscape and relationship between clubs.

Excellent points! 

LR_Dad

Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 11:04:07 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 03:36:20 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 02:31:10 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 01:00:03 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 12:00:48 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 09:31:50 am
So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

I've heard the Academy age will be raised to 8 or 9.  I'm not sure what the reason is for that.  I hadn't heard that it will be eliminated though.  I have heard that the Rec teams will also go by the Coerver syllabus also.  Apparently all Rec teams will have to attend one practice per week facilitated by a Coerver coach.  Its manditory that the Rec coach attends as well.  This is a great option for kids that want to play 2 sports, such as baseball in the spring and soccer in the fall.  The idea is to close the skills gap between those that want to have the same coach while playing with their friends until they get to Classics. Why lose good athletes to other sports when they can be encouraged to keep their foot on the ball for a few more years. 
By then they'll realize that soccer is so much more fun than baseball! Haha!

The Coerver idea is great...heard that also.  We have participated in both rec and academy....wasn't much of skills gap between the two.  In fact a couple of rec teams were quite skilled.  I hope the combined training sessions come to fruition. I believe it would be good for the kids .
You didn't think there was a skills gap between the kids that have been in the Academy program and those in Rec?  Really?  We must be watching different soccer then because the 9 and 10 year olds are light years ahead of ANY Rec team that I've seen play; at least the boys.  My son's Rec coach played in college and coached Catholic to a few state championships, so he's no slouch.  Needless to say, my son had an excellent base of soccer that has gotten much better in the Academy by playing with and against better competition.

I can say that the "A" Academy boys went to the Russellville jamboree a few Saturdays ago and did quite well.  I haven't seem a boys Rec team do half of the things these boys can do.  I'm not saying that I think the LRFC Academy is perfect by any means, but I think it gets it 80% right.

Let me clarify...we're just now to U8 (headed into U9).  We were in academy and had a pretty good experience.  My son got to play with the older boys and that probably helped him improve.  I'm not an academy "hater" at all...we participated. Our son just didn't enjoy it....and he loves soccer.

I've heard that from more than a few people and we weren't excited about going from our Rec team and fantastic coach to the Academy, but our coach wanted all of our boys to give it a shot.  After the first fall season we almost got the old team back together because many of the kids missed playing with their friends.  And that's one of the biggest complaints I have about the Academy is the mixed intra-Academy teams.  The idea was to put 2 "A" players with a couple of "B" players and the rest are C, D etc., which would elevate the lower players and give them confidence.  Personally, I thought it did the opposite by making the kids that weren't as good or tended to screw around a bit lazy while making the better players selfish.  How many times is the better kid going to pass it back to the kid that doesn't care when the ball gets taken away every time?  Eventually they're going to try to do it all themselves which is what I saw during the Saturday intra-Academy games.  2 kids on my son's team scored probably 80% of the goals.  Frankly, I thought the Saturday mixed group  games were the most worthless part of the Academy program.

However, I didn't see much advantage because some of the academy coaches were frankly disappointing.  We had one or two that just "checked out" during the games...provided no instruction to the kids...weren't really paying attention.  I couldn't agree more and that's still a problem.  See my statement above about worthless intra-Academy gamesWe found a rec team with a dad that played college soccer and happened to be a good coach.  He taught our boys a LOT and kept it fun.  They're skills have certainly improved and we have enjoyed a lot of success.

You're very lucky that you have that and we had that as well, but we didn't really have anyone to play in Rec other than maybe 2 teams that were much of a challenge.  I saw a few kids that had tons of potential on teams, but had dads coaching that meant well, but didn't know how to coach them in soccer. Some games were so lopsided that our coach would pull one of our kids and play a man down plus making them pass 3 times before they could score.



We were not alone in our decision....I know of several kids (some on our team) that left academy for the same reasons.  I'm glad your U9-U10 academy teams have done well.  We played academy teams this year and won easily.

I've heard that the Academy group at that age is pretty small and many have left because they want to play with their friends.  As I said above, we almost did the same and I totally get it.  If your son is happy playing Rec and having fun, then keep him in that program by all means.  If my son wasn't having fun anymore then we would find him a good Rec team with some friends or concentrate on another activity.  He eats and breathes soccer though, so as long as he's happy then so am I.  There's a guy I know who's shuffled his kid between 4 different clubs in central Arkansas all within 24 months because he thinks his kid is going to be the next Dempsey.  I haven't been happy with everything at LRFC, but jeez, my son loves it and his best friends are in his training group.  I'm not going to drag him around the city to train with the same recycled coaches.


Each to his own, but I think LRFC (or whatever they'll be called) is merging academy/rec for a reason.

i hadn't heard they were merging them together.

I'm sure they will find a way to provide opportunities for the better players....I hope they do.  But academy wasn't accomplishing what they'd hoped.
No argument there!  I think it made a small group of boys and girls MUCH better but it didn't do much to attract and keep many new players.  I wish you could watch the U10 A group play and see how they play.  It's a lot of fun to watch them play creative attacking soccer. 
Good luck to your son and I hope he continues to play.  My son has Classic tryouts in a few weeks, so it's on to the next step for us.  I hope that with the new leadership at the club it will continue to get better from Classic to U5.


Agree with everything....good luck to your son too!

I'm confused on the academy/rec changes.  Justin clearly stated they were combining rec and academy.  Maybe they are keeping academy for U9_U10...or maybe they're still deciding.  Either way, it will be interesting to see the new changes.

Brownclown

Quote from: LR_Dad on May 07, 2013, 08:38:15 am
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 11:04:07 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 03:36:20 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 02:31:10 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 01:00:03 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 12:00:48 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 09:31:50 am
So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

I've heard the Academy age will be raised to 8 or 9.  I'm not sure what the reason is for that.  I hadn't heard that it will be eliminated though.  I have heard that the Rec teams will also go by the Coerver syllabus also.  Apparently all Rec teams will have to attend one practice per week facilitated by a Coerver coach.  Its manditory that the Rec coach attends as well.  This is a great option for kids that want to play 2 sports, such as baseball in the spring and soccer in the fall.  The idea is to close the skills gap between those that want to have the same coach while playing with their friends until they get to Classics. Why lose good athletes to other sports when they can be encouraged to keep their foot on the ball for a few more years. 
By then they'll realize that soccer is so much more fun than baseball! Haha!

The Coerver idea is great...heard that also.  We have participated in both rec and academy....wasn't much of skills gap between the two.  In fact a couple of rec teams were quite skilled.  I hope the combined training sessions come to fruition. I believe it would be good for the kids .
You didn't think there was a skills gap between the kids that have been in the Academy program and those in Rec?  Really?  We must be watching different soccer then because the 9 and 10 year olds are light years ahead of ANY Rec team that I've seen play; at least the boys.  My son's Rec coach played in college and coached Catholic to a few state championships, so he's no slouch.  Needless to say, my son had an excellent base of soccer that has gotten much better in the Academy by playing with and against better competition.

I can say that the "A" Academy boys went to the Russellville jamboree a few Saturdays ago and did quite well.  I haven't seem a boys Rec team do half of the things these boys can do.  I'm not saying that I think the LRFC Academy is perfect by any means, but I think it gets it 80% right.

Let me clarify...we're just now to U8 (headed into U9).  We were in academy and had a pretty good experience.  My son got to play with the older boys and that probably helped him improve.  I'm not an academy "hater" at all...we participated. Our son just didn't enjoy it....and he loves soccer.

I've heard that from more than a few people and we weren't excited about going from our Rec team and fantastic coach to the Academy, but our coach wanted all of our boys to give it a shot.  After the first fall season we almost got the old team back together because many of the kids missed playing with their friends.  And that's one of the biggest complaints I have about the Academy is the mixed intra-Academy teams.  The idea was to put 2 "A" players with a couple of "B" players and the rest are C, D etc., which would elevate the lower players and give them confidence.  Personally, I thought it did the opposite by making the kids that weren't as good or tended to screw around a bit lazy while making the better players selfish.  How many times is the better kid going to pass it back to the kid that doesn't care when the ball gets taken away every time?  Eventually they're going to try to do it all themselves which is what I saw during the Saturday intra-Academy games.  2 kids on my son's team scored probably 80% of the goals.  Frankly, I thought the Saturday mixed group  games were the most worthless part of the Academy program.

However, I didn't see much advantage because some of the academy coaches were frankly disappointing.  We had one or two that just "checked out" during the games...provided no instruction to the kids...weren't really paying attention.  I couldn't agree more and that's still a problem.  See my statement above about worthless intra-Academy gamesWe found a rec team with a dad that played college soccer and happened to be a good coach.  He taught our boys a LOT and kept it fun.  They're skills have certainly improved and we have enjoyed a lot of success.

You're very lucky that you have that and we had that as well, but we didn't really have anyone to play in Rec other than maybe 2 teams that were much of a challenge.  I saw a few kids that had tons of potential on teams, but had dads coaching that meant well, but didn't know how to coach them in soccer. Some games were so lopsided that our coach would pull one of our kids and play a man down plus making them pass 3 times before they could score.



We were not alone in our decision....I know of several kids (some on our team) that left academy for the same reasons.  I'm glad your U9-U10 academy teams have done well.  We played academy teams this year and won easily.

I've heard that the Academy group at that age is pretty small and many have left because they want to play with their friends.  As I said above, we almost did the same and I totally get it.  If your son is happy playing Rec and having fun, then keep him in that program by all means.  If my son wasn't having fun anymore then we would find him a good Rec team with some friends or concentrate on another activity.  He eats and breathes soccer though, so as long as he's happy then so am I.  There's a guy I know who's shuffled his kid between 4 different clubs in central Arkansas all within 24 months because he thinks his kid is going to be the next Dempsey.  I haven't been happy with everything at LRFC, but jeez, my son loves it and his best friends are in his training group.  I'm not going to drag him around the city to train with the same recycled coaches.


Each to his own, but I think LRFC (or whatever they'll be called) is merging academy/rec for a reason.

i hadn't heard they were merging them together.

I'm sure they will find a way to provide opportunities for the better players....I hope they do.  But academy wasn't accomplishing what they'd hoped.
No argument there!  I think it made a small group of boys and girls MUCH better but it didn't do much to attract and keep many new players.  I wish you could watch the U10 A group play and see how they play.  It's a lot of fun to watch them play creative attacking soccer. 
Good luck to your son and I hope he continues to play.  My son has Classic tryouts in a few weeks, so it's on to the next step for us.  I hope that with the new leadership at the club it will continue to get better from Classic to U5.


Agree with everything....good luck to your son too!

I'm confused on the academy/rec changes.  Justin clearly stated they were combining rec and academy.  Maybe they are keeping academy for U9_U10...or maybe they're still deciding.  Either way, it will be interesting to see the new changes.

I'm confused also.  I wish they'd go ahead and release all the new info instead of us speculating.  Either way, I think it's going to be good for the future of the club and kids that want to play, have fun and get better.

michu

Sounds like our local academy programs and heading in the right direction, but simply lack the competitive level of the larger soccer communities like Dallas. Obviously, we are never going to have those participation numbers, but we can structure the programs more efficiently. Competition is going to be lower when you mix all of your A, B, C, and D players together. The top players are going to dominate those situations and it's probably not any fun for the lower level kids. The A and B players need to be playing each other and the C and D players need to be playing one another. Kids with similar ability are going to create a more competitive atmosphere. But most importantly, at these lower age groups, kids are going to have more fun playing against kids of similar ability. 

Brownclown made the biggest point of all and it's simply numbers. This is a numbers game where our talent pool is simply not very large. You take that small talent pool and spread it out between 3-4 clubs and we are not going to enjoy much team success. Just to be clear, I am now talking about the classic age groups. There simply needs to be one classic program in central Arkansas. Best case scenario would be each age group having multiple teams and those teams playing in the appropriate league. A team playing in a regional league, B team playing in state league (A bracket), C team playing state league (B bracket). These kids need to be training together on a weekly basis with a quality coach and following the proper training curriculum. This is how we would truly see improvements in both player development and team results.

Finally, you can't wait until these kids reach the high school age groups. It's too late. These kids need to start funneling into one program at U11.

michu

Does anyone know why LRFC has changed their club name and color scheme? Did they feel they had a bad brand and needed to re brand? Since they are now called United, did they unite with another club? Just curious as to why all the changes.

Rey Pygsterio

Regarding the post about a cutthroat and competitive environment at U8 in Dallas, that's not healthy. If you are an adult who is a part of this, you should be ashamed of yourself. Go play fantasy league soccer instead and quit ruining a childhood experience for the kids at an age where they should be learning to love the game not being put under pressure by the yelling adults on the sideline. That's a disgrace.

LRFC: I hope black is not one of the new colors.


Brownclown

Quote from: michu on May 07, 2013, 09:52:17 am
Does anyone know why LRFC has changed their club name and color scheme? Did they feel they had a bad brand and needed to re brand? Since they are now called United, did they unite with another club? Just curious as to why all the changes.

I don't think they thought they had a bad brand per se, but felt that they wanted to be more inclusive to kids from any community, not just LR.    As for the color change, I was told it was time for a kit change anyway, so they elected to change colors to go along with the new logo and name.  A fresh start.

arsoccer

Quote from: michu on May 07, 2013, 09:31:12 am
Sounds like our local academy programs and heading in the right direction, but simply lack the competitive level of the larger soccer communities like Dallas. Obviously, we are never going to have those participation numbers, but we can structure the programs more efficiently. Competition is going to be lower when you mix all of your A, B, C, and D players together. The top players are going to dominate those situations and it's probably not any fun for the lower level kids. The A and B players need to be playing each other and the C and D players need to be playing one another. Kids with similar ability are going to create a more competitive atmosphere. But most importantly, at these lower age groups, kids are going to have more fun playing against kids of similar ability. 

Brownclown made the biggest point of all and it's simply numbers. This is a numbers game where our talent pool is simply not very large. You take that small talent pool and spread it out between 3-4 clubs and we are not going to enjoy much team success. Just to be clear, I am now talking about the classic age groups. There simply needs to be one classic program in central Arkansas. Best case scenario would be each age group having multiple teams and those teams playing in the appropriate league. A team playing in a regional league, B team playing in state league (A bracket), C team playing state league (B bracket). These kids need to be training together on a weekly basis with a quality coach and following the proper training curriculum. This is how we would truly see improvements in both player development and team results.

Finally, you can't wait until these kids reach the high school age groups. It's too late. These kids need to start funneling into one program at U11.

For me, this is absolutely the wrong answer.  Taking U11 players, placing them in one club, and putting them on teams based on ability is a great thing for the best kids, but in the interest of the whole and the long term development and success of the age group I think it doesn't have much lasting value.

By doing something like this what you are asking from families is to sacrifice.  They must sacrifice their current team, they must sacrifice playing with their buddies, and they must sacrifice training at the most convenient location.  Now, for the top tier kids I don't think this will be a problem.  Those parents probably recognize that they have a child with ability and are more than willing to make those sacrifices for the sake of his/her development. 

The problem is going to come from the second tier kids.  Because these kids are 11 you have no idea how they will develop over the next 3 years.  The best can become the worst, the worst can become the best.  Unlike the top tier families, these families may be less than willing to make the same sacrifices given the fact that their environment, while perhaps being overall more appropriate for them, will very likely be a lower level than where they were previously training on a daily basis.  Couple that with not being able to play with their friends and having to travel further for training and I think you end up pushing more kids out of the game.

I get the idea that a high level training environment is what helps drive development, but I don't think we can afford doing it at the cost of driving down numbers.  The numbers are going to disappear anyway due to a variety of reasons.  I don't think we should give families/players any other reasons to stop playing.

michu

Not sure I understand why placing kids of like ability on the same team and playing like ability teams in games/tournaments doesn't have lasting value? Again, this only concerns the classic/competitive age groups, Rey Pygsterio. Training sessions are much more productive and create a much more competitive atmosphere when the entire group has similar ability. If it works for the top end, why not middle, and lowere end groups?

Not sure I understand the parental sacrifice either. West Little Rock parents have no problem driving their kids down to Junior Deputy for baseball. Training location is important, which I get, but I don't think this would require cross county commutes. Burns Park is a pretty nice facility with plenty of field space.

You make a great point in the fact that kids develop at different age groups. It's about putting kids in the best environment to develop and having the ability to move kids between teams given their progress or regress. 

I understand the concern about losing kids, but wouldn't kids enjoy training and games more if teammates and competition were of like ability?

The trick is to create an environment for all levels of players, but I have yet to see a local program create an environment for the top level. In my opinion, local programs create a program trying to cater to the masses and it simply doesn't work. Create the love for the game at the rec age groups and create players/teams at the classic age groups. Can't operate both rec and classic the same way. That is the local problem.

michu

Quote from: Rey Pygsterio on May 07, 2013, 11:28:29 am
Regarding the post about a cutthroat and competitive environment at U8 in Dallas, that's not healthy. If you are an adult who is a part of this, you should be ashamed of yourself. Go play fantasy league soccer instead and quit ruining a childhood experience for the kids at an age where they should be learning to love the game not being put under pressure by the yelling adults on the sideline. That's a disgrace.

LRFC: I hope black is not one of the new colors.
Please do us all a favor and read the prior posts if you are going to reply. Nobody is talking about a cutthroat environment for rec players. I understand your agenda, but this is not the correct forum.

arsoccer

Quote from: michu on May 07, 2013, 02:56:19 pm
Not sure I understand why placing kids of like ability on the same team and playing like ability teams in games/tournaments doesn't have lasting value? Again, this only concerns the classic/competitive age groups, Rey Pygsterio. Training sessions are much more productive and create a much more competitive atmosphere when the entire group has similar ability. If it works for the top end, why not middle, and lowere end groups?

Not sure I understand the parental sacrifice either. West Little Rock parents have no problem driving their kids down to Junior Deputy for baseball. Training location is important, which I get, but I don't think this would require cross county commutes. Burns Park is a pretty nice facility with plenty of field space.

You make a great point in the fact that kids develop at different age groups. It's about putting kids in the best environment to develop and having the ability to move kids between teams given their progress or regress. 

I understand the concern about losing kids, but wouldn't kids enjoy training and games more if teammates and competition were of like ability?

The trick is to create an environment for all levels of players, but I have yet to see a local program create an environment for the top level. In my opinion, local programs create a program trying to cater to the masses and it simply doesn't work. Create the love for the game at the rec age groups and create players/teams at the classic age groups. Can't operate both rec and classic the same way. That is the local problem.

I guess I should have explained myself a little better.  I'm really not speaking on whether or not I think this is a good idea in terms of if it works or not.  I'm strictly speaking on whether or not I think it's feasible given my experiences with clubs and parents. 

You seem to be a driven father/player/coach/whatever and player development is something you think about, strive towards, and want.  In my experiences you represent about 10% of the soccer population.  I'm not saying that most parents don't care if their child improves, I'm saying that when push comes to shove they would much rather keep things neat and simple for themselves rather than have to jump through hoops. 

I completely agree that an extra 10 minute car drive is no big deal, but again, you and I are in the minority.  I have heard uproars from parents because they act like if they have to drive across the river, they might as well drive all the way to Missouri.

Ideally speaking, I like the idea of doing this, but I don't think there is lasting value.   Not because I don't think the model in and of itself works, but in my experiences I don't see the parents of the lesser players being sold on the idea.

Rey Pygsterio

Michu seems to be obsessed with forming one regional classic program in order to have somewhat of a classic all-star team.

I put this idea in the category of chasing an irrelevant goal in youth soccer.

LR_Dad

Quote from: Brownclown on May 07, 2013, 09:02:00 am
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 07, 2013, 08:38:15 am
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 11:04:07 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 03:36:20 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 02:31:10 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 01:00:03 pm
Quote from: Brownclown on May 06, 2013, 12:00:48 pm
Quote from: LR_Dad on May 06, 2013, 09:31:50 am
So I've also heard about the changes at LRFC, and that they will no longer have the academy program.  Something about LRFC (or AR United) coaches working with the parent coaches?  If so, that will be interesting.

I wonder how/if things will change for the classic teams.

I've heard the Academy age will be raised to 8 or 9.  I'm not sure what the reason is for that.  I hadn't heard that it will be eliminated though.  I have heard that the Rec teams will also go by the Coerver syllabus also.  Apparently all Rec teams will have to attend one practice per week facilitated by a Coerver coach.  Its manditory that the Rec coach attends as well.  This is a great option for kids that want to play 2 sports, such as baseball in the spring and soccer in the fall.  The idea is to close the skills gap between those that want to have the same coach while playing with their friends until they get to Classics. Why lose good athletes to other sports when they can be encouraged to keep their foot on the ball for a few more years. 
By then they'll realize that soccer is so much more fun than baseball! Haha!

The Coerver idea is great...heard that also.  We have participated in both rec and academy....wasn't much of skills gap between the two.  In fact a couple of rec teams were quite skilled.  I hope the combined training sessions come to fruition. I believe it would be good for the kids .
You didn't think there was a skills gap between the kids that have been in the Academy program and those in Rec?  Really?  We must be watching different soccer then because the 9 and 10 year olds are light years ahead of ANY Rec team that I've seen play; at least the boys.  My son's Rec coach played in college and coached Catholic to a few state championships, so he's no slouch.  Needless to say, my son had an excellent base of soccer that has gotten much better in the Academy by playing with and against better competition.

I can say that the "A" Academy boys went to the Russellville jamboree a few Saturdays ago and did quite well.  I haven't seem a boys Rec team do half of the things these boys can do.  I'm not saying that I think the LRFC Academy is perfect by any means, but I think it gets it 80% right.

Let me clarify...we're just now to U8 (headed into U9).  We were in academy and had a pretty good experience.  My son got to play with the older boys and that probably helped him improve.  I'm not an academy "hater" at all...we participated. Our son just didn't enjoy it....and he loves soccer.

I've heard that from more than a few people and we weren't excited about going from our Rec team and fantastic coach to the Academy, but our coach wanted all of our boys to give it a shot.  After the first fall season we almost got the old team back together because many of the kids missed playing with their friends.  And that's one of the biggest complaints I have about the Academy is the mixed intra-Academy teams.  The idea was to put 2 "A" players with a couple of "B" players and the rest are C, D etc., which would elevate the lower players and give them confidence.  Personally, I thought it did the opposite by making the kids that weren't as good or tended to screw around a bit lazy while making the better players selfish.  How many times is the better kid going to pass it back to the kid that doesn't care when the ball gets taken away every time?  Eventually they're going to try to do it all themselves which is what I saw during the Saturday intra-Academy games.  2 kids on my son's team scored probably 80% of the goals.  Frankly, I thought the Saturday mixed group  games were the most worthless part of the Academy program.

However, I didn't see much advantage because some of the academy coaches were frankly disappointing.  We had one or two that just "checked out" during the games...provided no instruction to the kids...weren't really paying attention.  I couldn't agree more and that's still a problem.  See my statement above about worthless intra-Academy gamesWe found a rec team with a dad that played college soccer and happened to be a good coach.  He taught our boys a LOT and kept it fun.  They're skills have certainly improved and we have enjoyed a lot of success.

You're very lucky that you have that and we had that as well, but we didn't really have anyone to play in Rec other than maybe 2 teams that were much of a challenge.  I saw a few kids that had tons of potential on teams, but had dads coaching that meant well, but didn't know how to coach them in soccer. Some games were so lopsided that our coach would pull one of our kids and play a man down plus making them pass 3 times before they could score.



We were not alone in our decision....I know of several kids (some on our team) that left academy for the same reasons.  I'm glad your U9-U10 academy teams have done well.  We played academy teams this year and won easily.

I've heard that the Academy group at that age is pretty small and many have left because they want to play with their friends.  As I said above, we almost did the same and I totally get it.  If your son is happy playing Rec and having fun, then keep him in that program by all means.  If my son wasn't having fun anymore then we would find him a good Rec team with some friends or concentrate on another activity.  He eats and breathes soccer though, so as long as he's happy then so am I.  There's a guy I know who's shuffled his kid between 4 different clubs in central Arkansas all within 24 months because he thinks his kid is going to be the next Dempsey.  I haven't been happy with everything at LRFC, but jeez, my son loves it and his best friends are in his training group.  I'm not going to drag him around the city to train with the same recycled coaches.


Each to his own, but I think LRFC (or whatever they'll be called) is merging academy/rec for a reason.

i hadn't heard they were merging them together.

I'm sure they will find a way to provide opportunities for the better players....I hope they do.  But academy wasn't accomplishing what they'd hoped.
No argument there!  I think it made a small group of boys and girls MUCH better but it didn't do much to attract and keep many new players.  I wish you could watch the U10 A group play and see how they play.  It's a lot of fun to watch them play creative attacking soccer. 
Good luck to your son and I hope he continues to play.  My son has Classic tryouts in a few weeks, so it's on to the next step for us.  I hope that with the new leadership at the club it will continue to get better from Classic to U5.


Agree with everything....good luck to your son too!

I'm confused on the academy/rec changes.  Justin clearly stated they were combining rec and academy.  Maybe they are keeping academy for U9_U10...or maybe they're still deciding.  Either way, it will be interesting to see the new changes.

I'm confused also.  I wish they'd go ahead and release all the new info instead of us speculating.  Either way, I think it's going to be good for the future of the club and kids that want to play, have fun and get better.

sounds like you are correct...there will be an Academy option. 

There will be 1 mandatory Coerver practice a week for rec/academy combined.  Then you will have 2nd practice with either academy or your rec team.

I don't have a problem with that at all.  Still have choices, but they'll be able to help everyone improve their technical skills.

Fox 16 Arkansas Fox 24 Arkansas