Sub rule changes for u-15 and u16.

Division 2 and 3 will go back to the old sub rule,Division 1 will continue with the current sub rule.

U17 and U19, as well (D2 and 3)

What was the rationale for that decision?

The original rationale was to make it more like college so the boys could get used to it. Most D2 and D3 players won't play college. Additionally, I think the coaches were taking some flak from parents. The coaches committee asked to have it changed back...the board obliged.

Where did they announce this?

south wrote:Where did they announce this?

It was voted on last night. It will be communicated at the managers' meeting and the rules will be updated on the website.

happyfeet wrote:The original rationale was to make it more like college so the boys could get used to it. Most D2 and D3 players won't play college. Additionally, I think the coaches were taking some flak from parents. The coaches committee asked to have it changed back...the board obliged.

Happy Feet... I disagree about only D1 players making it college soccer. I believe that there are diamonds in the rough that play D2 or D3 for coaches that have major connections in the college community and can help develop the players to their fullest potential.

Goal4Momma wrote:

happyfeet wrote:The original rationale was to make it more like college so the boys could get used to it. Most D2 and D3 players won't play college. Additionally, I think the coaches were taking some flak from parents. The coaches committee asked to have it changed back...the board obliged.

Happy Feet... I disagree about only D1 players making it college soccer. I believe that there are diamonds in the rough that play D2 or D3 for coaches that have major connections in the college community and can help develop the players to their fullest potential.

I would have to agree with momma on this. That's a stupid statement. What coach told you that during the recruiting process? Especially when you look a the teams this year in the U16 division that just pulled teams together just for the byes.

'Most D2 and D3 players won't play college??'
Yea, not sure what the reasons were for the sub rule change, but I like to think that the above was not one of the reasons.

Goal4Momma wrote:

happyfeet wrote:The original rationale was to make it more like college so the boys could get used to it. Most D2 and D3 players won't play college. Additionally, I think the coaches were taking some flak from parents. The coaches committee asked to have it changed back...the board obliged.

Happy Feet... I disagree about only D1 players making it college soccer. I believe that there are diamonds in the rough that play D2 or D3 for coaches that have major connections in the college community and can help develop the players to their fullest potential.

I agree with both of you.
Most D2 and D3 players will not play college soccer.
A few D2 and D3 players will play college soccer.
And my own axiom: a large number of D1 players will not play college soccer.

I guess I should have left the coaches' rationale out of it and merely passed on the results; however, someone asked, so I repeated what YOUR coaches told us. I'm sure there were a myriad of reasons and this was just one of them.
Certainly, there are players from D2 and 3 who play college soccer. As for it being a "stupid statement"...sorry, "It's Me", to disappoint you, but the majority (i.e.most) do not.

No worries Happy Feet-just a slow day on the forum

I would like to add that some of the discussion also centered around the importance of developing players and that the sub rule in the D2-D3 Divisions didn't promote development. It forced coaches to play their starters and sub only when absolutely necessary. I think there were several reasons as to the rational and I personally am grateful that the change was made! Especially with the heat of the summer upon us!

And no one said you were stupid Happy Feet... cuz you ain't!

So does that mean if they are D2/D3 this year but reach D1 w/ in a few years they still wont play college? Since it is U-15 and up. Or were we just speaking of college aged players?

Goal4Momma wrote:I would like to add that some of the discussion also centered around the importance of developing players and that the sub rule in the D2-D3 Divisions didn't promote development. It forced coaches to play their starters and sub only when absolutely necessary. I think there were several reasons as to the rational and I personally am grateful that the change was made! Especially with the heat of the summer upon us!

And no one said you were stupid Happy Feet... cuz you ain't!

Ahhh....thanks!
Since I also ref, I love the substitutions...I get to rest!

Since I also ref, I love the substitutions...I get to rest!

LET THE KIDS PLAY! So glad they repealed this rule. Don't care the reason.

Actually the original reason stated for the rule was State Tournament, but who cares... Div 2 & 3 are not playing for State Cup. If the sub rule is for College, then great, implement at U18 - where it would apply. UNTIL then, let the coaches sub and INSTRUCT and LET THE KIDS PLAY!!!.

Enjoy the rest Happy or I.

The reason for the rule change is not because "colleges do it that way". As usual, you guys get your panties in a wad over misinformation even though that misinformation is probably a good enough reason for the rule.

The rule was originally written for D1 teams only. Last year, CL made a huge mistake by implementing in D2/D3. This year, they corrected the error. Now, the parents of D2/D3 players that don't start can relax. Their kid will now get pretty much the same amount of playing time as they did last year. They'll just do it in smaller increments.

The purpose of the rule is to force coaches to let players that are struggling on the field to work things out. Today, if a player makes a bad pass or two, the coach subs to get him off the field. With the new rule, the coach has to let the player overcome his problems or pull him off the field for an extended period of time. What happens if a player gets an early yellow card? What happens if player is not fit? All these cause problems. With the new rule, the coaches get to coach, and the players get to play.

Are there few possibilities for the subs? No, not really. The coach still has the flexibility to put your BB on the field. The rule is works fine. If you can't come up with anything better than "let 'em play", then the only problem is your "sour grapes / entitlement" attitude.

FlatBack4 wrote:The reason for the rule change is not because "colleges do it that way". As usual, you guys get your panties in a wad over misinformation even though that misinformation is probably a good enough reason for the rule.

The rule was originally written for D1 teams only. Last year, CL made a huge mistake by implementing in D2/D3. This year, they corrected the error. Now, the parents of D2/D3 players that don't start can relax. Their kid will now get pretty much the same amount of playing time as they did last year. They'll just do it in smaller increments.

The purpose of the rule is to force coaches to let players that are struggling on the field to work things out. Today, if a player makes a bad pass or two, the coach subs to get him off the field. With the new rule, the coach has to let the player overcome his problems or pull him off the field for an extended period of time. What happens if a player gets an early yellow card? What happens if player is not fit? All these cause problems. With the new rule, the coaches get to coach, and the players get to play.

Are there few possibilities for the subs? No, not really. The coach still has the flexibility to put your BB on the field. The rule is works fine. If you can't come up with anything better than "let 'em play", then the only problem is your "sour grapes / entitlement" attitude.

Comments in red: No....the rule was written for all divisions and the board passed it at the request of the coaches (how do I know this...because I was there).
Comments in green: That is a GREAT reason for the rule...and I agree wholeheartedly FB; unfortunately, that was NOT the reason given by the coaches committee for the rule passing last year.
I believe the rule is now where it should be, as does the rest of the board (passed unanimously).

FB4=PWNED!
Happy: I remember the controversy but explain the rationale behind D-1 sticking to this?

"The reason for the rule change is not because "colleges do it that way". As usual, you guys get your panties in a wad over misinformation even though that misinformation is probably a good enough reason for the rule.The rule was originally written for D1 teams only. Last year, CL made a huge mistake by implementing in D2/D3. This year, they corrected the error."
So your saying that CL is implementing a change this year to correct their mistake? I like to give CL more credit and assume they thought this out before implementing the rule in D1, D2 and D3. Talk about misinformation. But I promise not to get my panties in a wad.
I think Happy Feet has a better handle on concrete information.

I'll comment once more on this and then I'll bow out of it:
The board doesn't rubber stamp everything the coaches committee presents, but we do give them deference, as they are the closest to the situation in most cases. I can only imagine how much flak we would take if we DIDN'T listen to the coaches!

FlatBack4 wrote:The reason for the rule change is not because "colleges do it that way". As usual, you guys get your panties in a wad over misinformation even though that misinformation is probably a good enough reason for the rule.

The rule was originally written for D1 teams only. Last year, CL made a huge mistake by implementing in D2/D3. This year, they corrected the error. Now, the parents of D2/D3 players that don't start can relax. Their kid will now get pretty much the same amount of playing time as they did last year. They'll just do it in smaller increments.

The purpose of the rule is to force coaches to let players that are struggling on the field to work things out. Today, if a player makes a bad pass or two, the coach subs to get him off the field. With the new rule, the coach has to let the player overcome his problems or pull him off the field for an extended period of time. What happens if a player gets an early yellow card? What happens if player is not fit? All these cause problems. With the new rule, the coaches get to coach, and the players get to play.

Are there few possibilities for the subs? No, not really. The coach still has the flexibility to put your BB on the field. The rule is works fine. If you can't come up with anything better than "let 'em play", then the only problem is your "sour grapes / entitlement" attitude.

Flat the rule was implemented to more closely align with Academy rules on subs, and college. It is supposed to let these older players get adjusted to not having indefinite subbing. Ultimately it is the way of soccer with limited subs, but I do feel for some of the kids because it has them sitting for no other reason then a rule.

The way I see it is it takes away the chance to let players get their 10-15 minutes per half, which some coaches would like to do in order to provide a better environment. Now coaches are forced to hold out on subs, and of course there are many arse's that will use it as leverage to not sub. For me I did not see the benefit of the new rule at all.