Alexandria older boys teams

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

U9

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ageism nice! Youngsters flexing like they know anything. Please let me entrust my kids to you.

I am as old as you are, maybe older, but know better than to simply assume that past is prologue or that things don't change. We'd all still be playing for FPYC and Annandale or BRYC or LMVSC if things did not change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean... where are all these alexandria players leaving to?

There's really only 2 viable options, SYC and Arlington nearby, where else is there to go... but neither seems like much of a draw...

DCU and Bethesda - I don't think top players are put off by the commute, and I know that some of the players who have been in the Alexandria system have gone over to DCU and Bethesda. I am also aware of a few who had gone to Arlington when it had a DA program. And of course a lot of kids who don't live in wealthier suburbs and who aren't going to college or cannot go pro stop playing travel soccer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

U9

Hilarious. On the boys side it's no contest under U13. Arlington's holdover staff from DA for top teams U12 on up has a really good reputation. I don't know if they're better than Alexandria coaches, but people who know soccer and who know both staffs think highly of both. Arlington would improve by giving this set of coaches control of the entire program on the boys side, including player selection and development at earlier ages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

U9

Hilarious. On the boys side it's no contest under U13. Arlington's holdover staff from DA for top teams U12 on up has a really good reputation. I don't know if they're better than Alexandria coaches, but people who know soccer and who know both staffs think highly of both. Arlington would improve by giving this set of coaches control of the entire program on the boys side, including player selection and development at earlier ages.

You think? People that 'know' soccer. I guess our definitions of 'know soccer' are quite different.

[Anonymous]

. and with the huge futsal program they have I would have thought that Alexandria would be attracting players, not losing them.

My child plays soccer for Alexandria, and I have been happy with their travel soccer program, but disappointed in futsal ID. Granted, my child never made fustal ID red, but the white and blue teams for the two years that he played didn't play true futsal formations, and were often matched against what were essentially "rec" teams made up of Alexandria soccer players. We are going to try something different for futsal next year. Again, we have been mostly satisfied with the travel soccer component.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

U9

Hilarious. On the boys side it's no contest under U13. Arlington's holdover staff from DA for top teams U12 on up has a really good reputation. I don't know if they're better than Alexandria coaches, but people who know soccer and who know both staffs think highly of both. Arlington would improve by giving this set of coaches control of the entire program on the boys side, including player selection and development at earlier ages.

You think? People that 'know' soccer. I guess our definitions of 'know soccer' are quite different.

I am assuming that is one of many differences between us, which doesn’t trouble me and shouldn’t trouble you.

[Anonymous]

The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

[Anonymous]

The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

Yeah, perhaps that is true for the top most talented players, but for most kids, the kids seem to have some amount of difficulty even implementing what Alexandria asks them to do, never mind think up new things on their own. I think it is fine for most kids to learn to play in a system. It may not be for the very top talent, but that is a very, very small subset of even the more athletic kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

I don't know about Alexandria's coaching, but Arlington's academy, which is an entirely separate (and very strong) coaching team from the rest of the club, starts at U13. I'm not sure whether they also assist with some of the coaching at U12 as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

I get your point here. I agree that Alexandria does seem to teach a little to much to a system - and that, as a consequence they become predictable which inhibits their results at older age groups, but that does not invalidate the fact that the kids develop good technical skills. And I doubt that they permanently drive creativity out of the kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

I get your point here. I agree that Alexandria does seem to teach a little to much to a system - and that, as a consequence they become predictable which inhibits their results at older age groups, but that does not invalidate the fact that the kids develop good technical skills. And I doubt that they permanently drive creativity out of the kids.

I think the failure comes at trying to run before one can walk. I can teach a 10 year old how to go through the motions of algebra and get most of the questions correct; however, he won’t know any of the underlying concepts or be able to answer the question why. On top of that it will take a lot more effort and time just to have him look like he’s doing algebra. Now if I wait until the kid has developed in the basics of math, he’ll know both how and why he should use algebra. As an added bonus he will have spent a lot more time at the basics and will both be more proficient at those and will learn algebra more quickly. Any system that invests a lot of time early in concepts that are not age appropriate is poorly designed and likely to fail. With regard to the Alexandria approach, is this something they just made up or has some reputable third party validated the approach? Are the meh results at older ages a consequence spending too much time on non-age appropriate activities in the younger years instead of fully developing basic skills and concepts? I’ve always found the lack of understanding child development and eduction one of the more frustrating things about these ‘professional’ youth coaches. I think parents should not assume that because someone has given themselves a title that the person actually knows what they are doing. If your paying several thousand dollars a year to these clubs, ask questions and get fact driven answers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

I get your point here. I agree that Alexandria does seem to teach a little to much to a system - and that, as a consequence they become predictable which inhibits their results at older age groups, but that does not invalidate the fact that the kids develop good technical skills. And I doubt that they permanently drive creativity out of the kids.

I think the failure comes at trying to run before one can walk. I can teach a 10 year old how to go through the motions of algebra and get most of the questions correct; however, he won’t know any of the underlying concepts or be able to answer the question why. On top of that it will take a lot more effort and time just to have him look like he’s doing algebra. Now if I wait until the kid has developed in the basics of math, he’ll know both how and why he should use algebra. As an added bonus he will have spent a lot more time at the basics and will both be more proficient at those and will learn algebra more quickly. Any system that invests a lot of time early in concepts that are not age appropriate is poorly designed and likely to fail. With regard to the Alexandria approach, is this something they just made up or has some reputable third party validated the approach? Are the meh results at older ages a consequence spending too much time on non-age appropriate activities in the younger years instead of fully developing basic skills and concepts? I’ve always found the lack of understanding child development and eduction one of the more frustrating things about these ‘professional’ youth coaches. I think parents should not assume that because someone has given themselves a title that the person actually knows what they are doing. If your paying several thousand dollars a year to these clubs, ask questions and get fact driven answers.

This is where we disagree. I have seen a lot of the Alexandria kids (U14-U16) play - and they are well above average technically. Whatever the failings of Alexandria's system might be (and nobody is perfect) it does not fail to instill the basics.

[Anonymous]

Any system that invests a lot of time early in concepts that are not age appropriate is poorly designed and likely to fail. With regard to the Alexandria approach, is this something they just made up or has some reputable third party validated the approach?

The possession-based approach is used by teams in professional soccer - for example, by Barcelona. Certainly not all teams. But, it is not something that Alexandria made up.

In terms of whether it is developmentally appropriate to teach this system, the system itself is not that complicated in theory. Any kids U9 and up should be able to grasp the general idea. However, it can be difficult to implement, because it involves making judgment calls (can I move up the pitch or do I need to pass backwards? Is this particular pass in the area near my goal too risky?). But, some of the way of learning this is making mistakes. When the kids are younger, they will often lose, especially against teams that kick it long.

And again, no matter how well you learn and implement it, if you are outmatched by much faster and more athletic opponents, it'll be difficult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Any system that invests a lot of time early in concepts that are not age appropriate is poorly designed and likely to fail. With regard to the Alexandria approach, is this something they just made up or has some reputable third party validated the approach?

The possession-based approach is used by teams in professional soccer - for example, by Barcelona. Certainly not all teams. But, it is not something that Alexandria made up.

In terms of whether it is developmentally appropriate to teach this system, the system itself is not that complicated in theory. Any kids U9 and up should be able to grasp the general idea. However, it can be difficult to implement, because it involves making judgment calls (can I move up the pitch or do I need to pass backwards? Is this particular pass in the area near my goal too risky?). But, some of the way of learning this is making mistakes. When the kids are younger, they will often lose, especially against teams that kick it long.

And again, no matter how well you learn and implement it, if you are outmatched by much faster and more athletic opponents, it'll be difficult.

the question is whether it is developmentally appropriate to coach any system at those ages. The consensus seems to be it isn't but that isn't what parents want to hear