7v7, 8v8, 9v9??

Dread Pirate wrote:Boilerjoe-wouldn't the competition be there for your daughter's team if teams like yours stayed in age group- and demanded 7v7?   Surely the leagues can handle the field size issue.  

If all the 07s in North Texas signed up for CFBAL, we would still have one grouping of girls play up if that is the question.  Same girls but different teams would be in Plat as they are now.  Please Talk to Katt webb, her top group isn't playing in age and doing 9v9.  Where are Sting East, Kicks, LFS, Texan Dynamo?  All are capable gold/plat level teams with plenty of players and have played 8v8 and 7v7. If gold/plat teams want 7v7 I am fine with that(again not my call), but I don't think 1 player is magically going to bring gold/plat type teams to the table(except Dynamo, leave that one to BigTex).Where are the 20 or more silver level teams? Most believe silver will play 7v7 no mad rush to sign up yet and half the silver teams have signed up 8v8.    I could be wrong on all this, wouldn't be first time.  Mainly frustrated that 5 teams outside of our own have signed up.  That in and of itself might lead a team to go find 06s to play before its too late(silver B u9 still open but is 9v9   ).  Why would an LP team play its sister team(which can happen any day of the week) and only two others in league play if Gold/Plat combined.  Doesn't make sense.

Exactly why NTX should limit the size to 7v7 at this age group. If everybody has to choose between 7v7 or playing up- most would play 7v7.

boilerjoe_96 wrote:

Dread Pirate wrote:Boilerjoe-wouldn't the competition be there for your daughter's team if teams like yours stayed in age group- and demanded 7v7?   Surely the leagues can handle the field size issue.  

If all the 07s in North Texas signed up for CFBAL, we would still have one grouping of girls play up if that is the question.  Same girls but different teams would be in Plat as they are now.  Please Talk to Katt webb, her top group isn't playing in age and doing 9v9.  Where are Sting East, Kicks, LFS, Texan Dynamo?  All are capable gold/plat level teams with plenty of players and have played 8v8 and 7v7. If gold/plat teams want 7v7 I am fine with that(again not my call), but I don't think 1 player is magically going to bring gold/plat type teams to the table(except Dynamo, leave that one to BigTex).Where are the 20 or more silver level teams? Most believe silver will play 7v7 no mad rush to sign up yet and half the silver teams have signed up 8v8.    I could be wrong on all this, wouldn't be first time.  Mainly frustrated that 5 teams outside of our own have signed up.  That in and of itself might lead a team to go find 06s to play before its too late(silver B u9 still open but is 9v9   ).  Why would an LP team play its sister team(which can happen any day of the week) and only two others in league play if Gold/Plat combined.  Doesn't make sense.

Not sure your question or reference to me boiler...I think I have been clear with our position. We want to play 7v7 platinum/gold- nothing has changed. Coach Stark wants to have a smaller field with fewer players on it. That is why when the u90 ‘07 division did not make we choose to play 07 boys (i.e. less players and smaller field). Your team I believe choose to go play with the 06 girls 9v9 on a bigger field. I am sure your coach is doing what he thinks is in the best interest of his team and our coach is doing the same.

Our priority for league play (just as it was for this tournament) is to keep it small sided on a smaller field as much as possible- assuming we can find the right level of competition (in u90 case much stronger competition ;>) We would of course rather play girls either in our own age group or 06s, but not if that means 9v9 on a big field. Just as we made the best out of the options out there for this tournament, so we will try to make the best out of the options out there for league play (i.e. which is why we have not yet registered).

Right... 1 player makes a difference to you, where I was opining that 1 player wouldn't make a difference. Why I stated "except Dynamo".

1:0,  Bigtex/Stark won the first round!

boilerjoe/Kat Webb, why you choose 9x9 while still claiming 7x7 is good for development for this young age?

bigtex wrote:

boilerjoe_96 wrote:

Dread Pirate wrote:Boilerjoe-wouldn't the competition be there for your daughter's team if teams like yours stayed in age group- and demanded 7v7?   Surely the leagues can handle the field size issue.  

If all the 07s in North Texas signed up for CFBAL, we would still have one grouping of girls play up if that is the question.  Same girls but different teams would be in Plat as they are now.  Please Talk to Katt webb, her top group isn't playing in age and doing 9v9.  Where are Sting East, Kicks, LFS, Texan Dynamo?  All are capable gold/plat level teams with plenty of players and have played 8v8 and 7v7. If gold/plat teams want 7v7 I am fine with that(again not my call), but I don't think 1 player is magically going to bring gold/plat type teams to the table(except Dynamo, leave that one to BigTex).Where are the 20 or more silver level teams? Most believe silver will play 7v7 no mad rush to sign up yet and half the silver teams have signed up 8v8.    I could be wrong on all this, wouldn't be first time.  Mainly frustrated that 5 teams outside of our own have signed up.  That in and of itself might lead a team to go find 06s to play before its too late(silver B u9 still open but is 9v9   ).  Why would an LP team play its sister team(which can happen any day of the week) and only two others in league play if Gold/Plat combined.  Doesn't make sense.

Not sure your question or reference to me boiler...I think I have been clear with our position.  We want to play 7v7 platinum/gold- nothing has changed.  Coach Stark wants to have a smaller field with fewer players on it.  That is why when the u90 ‘07 division did not make we choose to play 07 boys (i.e. less players and smaller field).  Your team I believe choose to go play with the 06 girls 9v9 on a bigger field.   I am sure your coach is doing what he thinks is in the best interest of his team and our coach is doing the same.

Our priority for league play (just as it was for this tournament) is to keep it small sided on a smaller field as much as possible- assuming we can find the right level of competition (in u90 case much stronger competition ;>)  We would of course rather play girls either in our own age group or 06s, but not if that means 9v9 on a big field.  Just as we made the best out of the options out there for this tournament, so we will try to make the best out of the options out there for league play (i.e. which is why we have not yet registered).  

boilerjoe_96 wrote:Right... 1 player makes a difference to you, where I was opining that 1 player wouldn't make a difference.  Why I stated "except Dynamo".

Am I missing something isn’t that the point of this whole thread about 1 or 2 players and field size? I am not sure how you could surmise that we (Dynamo) are the only ones who care about this….we did not start the thread nor did we write the volumes of articles on this subject. Anyway I must be lost and I think I have clearly stated our desire…got to get back to work.

planogirl wrote:1:0,  Bigtex/Stark won the first round!

boilerjoe/Kat Webb, why you choose 9x9 while still claiming 7x7 is good for development for this young age?

bigtex wrote:

boilerjoe_96 wrote:

Dread Pirate wrote:Boilerjoe-wouldn't the competition be there for your daughter's team if teams like yours stayed in age group- and demanded 7v7?   Surely the leagues can handle the field size issue.  

If all the 07s in North Texas signed up for CFBAL, we would still have one grouping of girls play up if that is the question.  Same girls but different teams would be in Plat as they are now.  Please Talk to Katt webb, her top group isn't playing in age and doing 9v9.  Where are Sting East, Kicks, LFS, Texan Dynamo?  All are capable gold/plat level teams with plenty of players and have played 8v8 and 7v7. If gold/plat teams want 7v7 I am fine with that(again not my call), but I don't think 1 player is magically going to bring gold/plat type teams to the table(except Dynamo, leave that one to BigTex).Where are the 20 or more silver level teams? Most believe silver will play 7v7 no mad rush to sign up yet and half the silver teams have signed up 8v8.    I could be wrong on all this, wouldn't be first time.  Mainly frustrated that 5 teams outside of our own have signed up.  That in and of itself might lead a team to go find 06s to play before its too late(silver B u9 still open but is 9v9   ).  Why would an LP team play its sister team(which can happen any day of the week) and only two others in league play if Gold/Plat combined.  Doesn't make sense.

Not sure your question or reference to me boiler...I think I have been clear with our position.  We want to play 7v7 platinum/gold- nothing has changed.  Coach Stark wants to have a smaller field with fewer players on it.  That is why when the u90 ‘07 division did not make we choose to play 07 boys (i.e. less players and smaller field).  Your team I believe choose to go play with the 06 girls 9v9 on a bigger field.   I am sure your coach is doing what he thinks is in the best interest of his team and our coach is doing the same.

Our priority for league play (just as it was for this tournament) is to keep it small sided on a smaller field as much as possible- assuming we can find the right level of competition (in u90 case much stronger competition ;>)  We would of course rather play girls either in our own age group or 06s, but not if that means 9v9 on a big field.  Just as we made the best out of the options out there for this tournament, so we will try to make the best out of the options out there for league play (i.e. which is why we have not yet registered).  

Sounds like BigTex/Stark are committed to doing things the right way. Boilerjoe do you see via this example how your team's decision to play up adversely affects the age group as a whole? And you already admitted that playing 9v9 is not optimal for your daughter's development. I don't understand. Lot's of doublespeak going on here-

See but that's just it from 5v5 to 7v7 it's just two more players...well now to 8v8 it's just one more player...it's always just 1 more player or just two more players so what's the big deal?

Dread Pirate wrote:
Sounds like BigTex/Stark are committed to doing things the right way.  Boilerjoe do you see via this example how your team's decision to play up adversely affects the age group as a whole?  And you already admitted that playing 9v9 is not optimal for your daughter's development. I don't understand.  Lot's of doublespeak going on here-

And our team is playing in age group whatever Platinum is.  Be it 7v7 or 8v8.  Not hurting the age group at all.  For development, I have stated this before, no double speak.

Instead of playing 1 game each weekend, our girls are playing 2 games.  So one group is going to play 07s as second game(adding another team to the mix, playing 07,  7v7) and one group will go up to U9 and play 06s.  The thing your missing in the development argument is bigger faster stronger 06 players.  So while they might not touch the ball quite as much with 9 players on field, they will still be exercising(lots of running on 50x80), and when they do touch ball, will most likely have a bigger faster stronger player to contend with. IF there was Bo's 6v6 league vs 06s, I agree that would be preferable. Right now, in CFBAL, the only way to play 06s and try to develop against older girls, is 9v9.  

Since when is playing up taboo?  Happens in every age group by many teams. Is playing up not good for development?

In no way did I plan to insult JS/Dynamo for wanting 7v7, good for them, I knew they wouldn't sign up at moment for anything but 7v7(which is why I stated "except for", reread the question that was posed if needed.).

Boiler as far as I am concerned if the parents on your team believe that your coach has development as his primary goal for your players/team then you should play in any league/division you coach believes is best. Unlike Dread Pirate (who I mostly agree) I do not believe you have a higher obligation to the age group…your coach highest obligation should be to your teams development. There are pros and cons to almost all of these arguments. That is why there has been so much debate over the years. Obviously we believe that there are far more pros to 7v7, but reasonable people can disagree.

But that is why I wanted to make it clear it is not just the Dynamo team or coach Stark that care about 1 player- this has been debated by reasonable people for many a moon.

We of course would hope that more teams would determine on their own that the benefits of 7v7 (in this case) outweigh the benefits of more kids and bigger fields. It would obviously make league and tournament registration easier for us, but at the end of the day I am not willing to lead an NTX revolution on this….I think I might pick some other bigger NTX issues first.

And for the record we will officially be signing up for CFBAL ’07 7v7 Platinum/Gold in the next couple of days, with our preferred day being Sunday.

There are too many variables and dynamics to say this is a black & white issue.  So yes, as bigtex has said many times, the development of the team is based on the needs of that team and the players and no one else.

If Team X is beating every team in the age group, and playing a man down, and making them pass 50 times before scoring, it's best to kick it up a notch because there's not much else to be gained.  If Team Y has 12 advanced players - mentally and physically ahead of their peers (for argument's sake), then 9v9 (longer game times) would be better than 7v7 where 5 kids sit the bench and total playing time is 25 minutes with hardly any touches.  If team Z can't pass and can't use the size of the pitch, or are slow relative to their competitors, then it doesn't make sense to play on a bigger field.  

These are just examples, don't read in to these or give an easy solution to the above because there's always more to the story. It's all relative with development in mind. Sometimes you have to pick the lesser of two evils in NTX - proper field size and numbers in a league that doesn't challenge the players in the way the coach wants, or less than desirable field size and numbers but the right challenge for the players.  I have yet to encounter an absolute perfect situation, other than playing up in PSA, but even then, the competition wasn't strong enough and the team went undefeated in back to back seasons playing '06 academy.  Perfect field numbers, field size and goal size otherwise. Now, the fields are too big going into this year and the cost is far too high, so on we go.

Triangles.

Girls can't see triangles. Fact.

The formation that offers more triangles will blow your dd's mind.

7v7, 8v8, 9v9 is all irreverent in relation to the number of triangles on offer with the formation your coach is playing.

Triangles.

Ever seen a girl point out a triangle.

Case closed.

Don't misunderstand BigTex - I am not saying that Boilerjoe's team has any "obligation" to the age group. For all I know, his team should probably be playing 11 a side, and if eligible would have qualified for Lake Highland's D1. I am just saying that for the vast majority of teams, if everyone agreed to a format (or NTX required it) - the choices would be fewer, and the competition would increase because most would be playing in the smaller-sided format. Except in the rare case of a team that is just too advanced for the age group (as Jules said), the entire age group would be better served in the smaller-sided game. But the reality is the age group has multiple formats, and I assume most that think they are the top of the age group are playing up to 06 in a 9v9 format, when in reality, if all those teams formed a 7v7 platinum group, they would get plenty of competition, more touches, more development, and a better avenue for coaches to teach the game. Where is the downside? Just my $.02.

19v19, more triangles.

Crappier development.

Just saying.

the7wolf wrote:19v19, more triangles.

Crappier development.

Just saying.

  

Don’t disagree with any of the above- except maybe field size a bit. For example, I believe our team would actually produce better game results on a bigger field because of our team speed. Many might equate game results (i.e. w/l/d) with development and that is a dangerous assumption. I prefer my daughter not have the size of field that would tend to encourage a greater reliance on speed and less of a reliance on skill. Yes speed kills, but who knows what our team speed will be like in a few years…. so I prefer a field that limits the benefit of speed- not because we are slow, but because we have speed.

At the EOD in my opinion you have to believe in the coach’s teaching abilities, developmental philosophy and his/her character. If you are confident in all of those then everything else is mostly noise.

I disagree with a lot of this but that's ok because no one has the magic key. Except Sir Alex. He does.
Sure, we've all seen those teams that bulldoze 6 kids into the box and toe poke in a goal when the other team passed and danced around them but missed 11 shots, or '06 players being brought in to play '07s in a '07 v '07 matchup in a '06 league, or boot ball to the fast kid, so I agree with you there about w/d/l being deceiving, but there are also teams that do it the right way and get results so it's important to recognize that and know the difference.
Soccer is a game of speed. There's a player in this age group whose former coach told them once that her speed is her greatest downfall and focused on shutting her down and limiting what makes her... her. That player just ran up an age group in track and qualified for the jr olympics in that age group, finishing 3rd of 86 in qualifiers. She's also technically gifted and competitive to boot, so to limit what makes her a special player is just the opposite of what a coach should be doing. Not everyone is equal and everyone shouldn't be limited to vanilla.
Also, dribbling teams, regardless of how fast they may or may not be, would only suffer more on a larger field against a good passing team.

Ok sir Alex   


I am glad it is not black & white ...  

Sting East '07 Harr just registered a team for U8 Gold 7v7 and another for U8 Silver 7v7 at CFBAL. Lots of 7v7 teams adding over the last few days. Hopefully two separate divisions can make!

Great! Now Texan-Dynamo and maybe Kicks... Let's see if they get in today. That would make 9 Gold/Platinum teams, nice league.