Can you tell me the pros and cons of playing “up”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best players ever:

Messi 5’6.5”
Maradona 5’5”
Pele 5’8”
Ronaldo 6’1”
Iniesta 5’7”
Cruyff 5’10”

Best American:
Pulisic 5’8”

^Yeah. Pretty amazing given American coach’s obsession with size

Agree. American coaching's obsession with size is absolutely killing youth soccer and, in turn, the development of quality advanced players in this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best players ever:

Messi 5’6.5”
Maradona 5’5”
Pele 5’8”
Ronaldo 6’1”
Iniesta 5’7”
Cruyff 5’10”

Best American:
Pulisic 5’8”

^Yeah. Pretty amazing given American coach’s obsession with size

Agree. American coaching's obsession with size is absolutely killing youth soccer and, in turn, the development of quality advanced players in this country.

Pulisic is 5’6”. Regardless, a sample of 7 players isn’t statistically valid to defend that height is not important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best players ever:

Messi 5’6.5”
Maradona 5’5”
Pele 5’8”
Ronaldo 6’1”
Iniesta 5’7”
Cruyff 5’10”

Best American:
Pulisic 5’8”

^Yeah. Pretty amazing given American coach’s obsession with size

Agree. American coaching's obsession with size is absolutely killing youth soccer and, in turn, the development of quality advanced players in this country.

Pulisic is 5’6”. Regardless, a sample of 7 players isn’t statistically valid to defend that height is not important.

You know what does validate height not being all that important? Having eyes. And results. Size really does not matter much in soccer. Go measure your wanker.

[Anonymous]

Hands down the US has the best athletes. The problem is our best athletes dont play soccer. If they did we would dominate the sport. Soccer is a distant favorite here for better athletes. Its not as accessible , doesn't provide enough of an educational or financial reward, and The pay to play format excludes most of our lower income yet better athletes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hands down the US has the best athletes. The problem is our best athletes dont play soccer. If they did we would dominate the sport. Soccer is a distant favorite here for better athletes. Its not as accessible , doesn't provide enough of an educational or financial reward, and The pay to play format excludes most of our lower income yet better athletes.

And here we go with the weapons-grade stupidity...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid played up from 2nd grade till middle school. She had a great time, was a leader on the team. Middle school years were tricky on the social side. Moved her to her age group (stronger team) as high school started. No regrets!

This is my concern. My 8 year old played up last year, so some kids were already 10. We joined soccer for the social aspect of a team sport and she didn’t really get that playing up because all her school friends played at age level.

Our teams haven’t been solidified this year yet and I’m leaning towards a decline if asked to play up again. We aren’t in it for scholarship and college teams, we are in it to build friendships with kids in our town/grades.

Fwiw - she was asked to play up to push her skill development. She is a head or more talker than kids her age and significantly faster than them. The coach didn’t want her simply relying on her size and speed, but wanted her to be more challenged on skill. I agree with this approach if we had a focus on being the best player on the best team, but we aren’t.

Teams don't stay together. Developing a social network can be a very positive outcome of soccer but it should not be the reason to pursue it or other similar activities.

Why not?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best players ever:

Messi 5’6.5”
Maradona 5’5”
Pele 5’8”
Ronaldo 6’1”
Iniesta 5’7”
Cruyff 5’10”

Best American:
Pulisic 5’8”

^Yeah. Pretty amazing given American coach’s obsession with size

Agree. American coaching's obsession with size is absolutely killing youth soccer and, in turn, the development of quality advanced players in this country.

Pulisic is 5’6”. Regardless, a sample of 7 players isn’t statistically valid to defend that height is not important.

You know what does validate height not being all that important? Having eyes. And results. Size really does not matter much in soccer. Go measure your wanker.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best players ever:

Messi 5’6.5”
Maradona 5’5”
Pele 5’8”
Ronaldo 6’1”
Iniesta 5’7”
Cruyff 5’10”

Best American:
Pulisic 5’8”

^Yeah. Pretty amazing given American coach’s obsession with size

+1,000

I often wonder if he would have been noticed without his mom and dad who knew the landscape and how to navigate. Your average kid with parents with no connections and not putting him with coaches they trust and know would likely have gotten buried on a bottom team in the younger years. We lose so much potential in the US player pool because of this. Our big Club has no qualms telling parents and players that the only thing their player needs is 'to grow'.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid played up from 2nd grade till middle school. She had a great time, was a leader on the team. Middle school years were tricky on the social side. Moved her to her age group (stronger team) as high school started. No regrets!

This is my concern. My 8 year old played up last year, so some kids were already 10. We joined soccer for the social aspect of a team sport and she didn’t really get that playing up because all her school friends played at age level.

Our teams haven’t been solidified this year yet and I’m leaning towards a decline if asked to play up again. We aren’t in it for scholarship and college teams, we are in it to build friendships with kids in our town/grades.

Fwiw - she was asked to play up to push her skill development. She is a head or more talker than kids her age and significantly faster than them. The coach didn’t want her simply relying on her size and speed, but wanted her to be more challenged on skill. I agree with this approach if we had a focus on being the best player on the best team, but we aren’t.

Teams don't stay together. Developing a social network can be a very positive outcome of soccer but it should not be the reason to pursue it or other similar activities.

Why not?

If you are in travel soccer it is a competitive environment and not a social club. Players come and go and they do so mostly based on soccer reasons as they get older.

Yes when kids are young, like yours, having friends on the team certainly makes a world of difference. They like playing with their friends but overtime some kids get better, some stay the same and some never improve. Some kids move up to a better team or different club. Some chose another sport some kids don't make the same team and some do.

I'm not trying to tell you what to do. By all means any sport is a great way to get kids out of the house and meet new people. That is all good but it obviously works best if the kid really wants to do the activity in question. At 8 they really don't know what they like so providing them with as many options as possible is the best course of action. Just try to prioritize the enjoyment of the actual activity over the social network.

Kids absolutely make friends but soccer should be the primary motivation for playing soccer not looking for friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My kid played up from 2nd grade till middle school. She had a great time, was a leader on the team. Middle school years were tricky on the social side. Moved her to her age group (stronger team) as high school started. No regrets!

This is my concern. My 8 year old played up last year, so some kids were already 10. We joined soccer for the social aspect of a team sport and she didn’t really get that playing up because all her school friends played at age level.

Our teams haven’t been solidified this year yet and I’m leaning towards a decline if asked to play up again. We aren’t in it for scholarship and college teams, we are in it to build friendships with kids in our town/grades.

Fwiw - she was asked to play up to push her skill development. She is a head or more talker than kids her age and significantly faster than them. The coach didn’t want her simply relying on her size and speed, but wanted her to be more challenged on skill. I agree with this approach if we had a focus on being the best player on the best team, but we aren’t.

Teams don't stay together. Developing a social network can be a very positive outcome of soccer but it should not be the reason to pursue it or other similar activities.

Why not?

If you are in travel soccer it is a competitive environment and not a social club. Players come and go and they do so mostly based on soccer reasons as they get older.

Yes when kids are young, like yours, having friends on the team certainly makes a world of difference. They like playing with their friends but overtime some kids get better, some stay the same and some never improve. Some kids move up to a better team or different club. Some chose another sport some kids don't make the same team and some do.

I'm not trying to tell you what to do. By all means any sport is a great way to get kids out of the house and meet new people. That is all good but it obviously works best if the kid really wants to do the activity in question. At 8 they really don't know what they like so providing them with as many options as possible is the best course of action. Just try to prioritize the enjoyment of the actual activity over the social network.

Kids absolutely make friends but soccer should be the primary motivation for playing soccer not looking for friends.

I disagree. The motivation should be up to the kid. They should play for whatever reason they wish to play. My kids are not young by the way - I'm just about finished with this game . All my kids played various sports to different degrees of competitiveness and for different reasons. The ones that played primarily for social reasons got just as much out of the activity as the ones that played for the sake of the sport - it's just that what they got was different - not better, not worse - just different.

[Anonymous]

All other things equal, length (height and long limbs, not “size”) does matter. But, often all other things aren’t equal. Soccer, unlike b-ball and football and volleyball affords opportunities to smaller in stature athletes that have uncanny quickness, balance and coordination. Baseball and golf are other sports where one can be short and still succeed but longer limbs do provide greater leverage when hitting the ball. Hockey, size can matter, but more for defenders. Speed is key in that sport. One thing you can’t be in any team athletic sport is slow. Speed kills. Fast of foot, fast pitch, or fast hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best players ever:

Messi 5’6.5”
Maradona 5’5”
Pele 5’8”
Ronaldo 6’1”
Iniesta 5’7”
Cruyff 5’10”

Best American:
Pulisic 5’8”

^Yeah. Pretty amazing given American coach’s obsession with size

Agree. American coaching's obsession with size is absolutely killing youth soccer and, in turn, the development of quality advanced players in this country.

Pulisic is 5’6”. Regardless, a sample of 7 players isn’t statistically valid to defend that height is not important.

You know what does validate height not being all that important? Having eyes. And results. Size really does not matter much in soccer. Go measure your wanker.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

I think the guy would understand more if he opened his eyes. Size always matters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Best players ever:


I think the guy would understand more if he opened his eyes. Size always matters

Tell that to Lionel Messi, who is 5'7" on a very good day and is adding another $100 million or so to his bank soon. Most stars are under 6 feet. And the tall guys in soccer would be considered tiny in the NBA. You're watching the wrong sport if you think you need to be six feet to excel at it.

[Anonymous]

Some players benefit from the challenge, some do not. In any case...get on age by u16 to be in proper recruiting cycle.

[Anonymous]

All other things equal, length (height and long limbs, not “size”) does matter. But, often all other things aren’t equal. Soccer, unlike b-ball and football and volleyball affords opportunities to smaller in stature athletes that have uncanny quickness, balance and coordination. Baseball and golf are other sports where one can be short and still succeed but longer limbs do provide greater leverage when hitting the ball. Hockey, size can matter, but more for defenders. Speed is key in that sport. One thing you can’t be in any team athletic sport is slow. Speed kills. Fast of foot, fast pitch, or fast hands.

Agree somewhat, with the caveat that being both short and slight can be tough, unless you have a ton of moxy. It is hard to handle shouldering if you don't have much body mass. My son is both short and slight, and is a much better futsal player (where shouldering is not allowed) than soccer player.