5 games were lost by 1 goal. Blame it on lack of experience or coaching or both. Not having a fogo hurts too. Offense is lacking and shooting poor. Same couple of kids are only ones that dodge so predictable. Offense doesn’t push and settles the ball so no easy goals. On defense not bad but kids get beat and yet play. Team defense was good but getting more exposed game after game and slides have been late or nonexistent. Overall team very young and will be competitive next yr but there definitely is some favoring of sophs at all positions that not saying shouldn’t be playing but maybe not playing as much. With the close losses maybe they can turn it around for playoffs but who knows.
Sounds like a very disgruntled parent whose kid doesn't see the field - sour grapes.
Every time time there is some constructive criticism, it's because their kid is not playing. Maybe you can't face the fact that what he stated is all true.
Not specific to Massapequa, but the situation of having HS coaches also being coaches/directors/owners of club teams is a big problem. People claim favoritism with TB, S2S, Igloo, LIE and probably others. On the other hand, is it fair to tell coaches who do not make a lot of money coaching that they can't supplement their income through club teams? What if the rule becomes HS coaches can continue to coach, own, etc. club teams but they can't have kids who they will coach in HS in their clubs? This will prevent the favoritism issues (which are real) and allow coaches to supplement their incomes. And we all know there are plenty of club options for the kids.
Reply
Quote