Travel Soccer teams around NOVA let's discuss

[Anonymous]

We will never have great player development here because we are a 'club-based' system. We want results for little kids and to get parents to pay $ they are lured by tournament wins and State Cup crap and promise of 'elite'.

From that article, I liked this concept of bio-banding players:

"After eight years with Southampton, Bunce spent three years with the English Premier League, first as Head of Sports Science and most recently as Head of Performance. In that capacity he implemented “bio-banding” for players ages 12 to 15 to address the bias by clubs for selecting players born early in an age group cycle because they tended be bigger. Bio-banding groups players in competition based on their level of maturation, based on a child’s height, weight and the height of both parents. Players of different sizes still compete against each other, but bio-banding reduces “violent swings of maturity difference within the chronological system,” says Bunce."

Hell--we could never do that because of our stupid birth year rules and idea of calendar year for little kids.

[Anonymous]

We will never have great player development here because we are a 'club-based' system. We want results for little kids and to get parents to pay $ they are lured by tournament wins and State Cup crap and promise of 'elite'.

From that article, I liked this concept of bio-banding players:

"After eight years with Southampton, Bunce spent three years with the English Premier League, first as Head of Sports Science and most recently as Head of Performance. In that capacity he implemented “bio-banding” for players ages 12 to 15 to address the bias by clubs for selecting players born early in an age group cycle because they tended be bigger. Bio-banding groups players in competition based on their level of maturation, based on a child’s height, weight and the height of both parents. Players of different sizes still compete against each other, but bio-banding reduces “violent swings of maturity difference within the chronological system,” says Bunce."

Hell--we could never do that because of our stupid birth year rules and idea of calendar year for little kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding the chest-bumping of 11/12 year old '04 players:

“Players all develop at different times. All their attributes can develop at different times, and if you’re coaching a player at a very young age you can make massive fundamental errors around their trajectory and their ability.”
-- James Bunce, U.S. Soccer’s new High Performance Director.

“If anyone is judging a player at under-17 or under-18 purely based on their ability to score goals or their ability to dominate in a training session, there is a massive amount of evidence now that shows that you could be misidentifying them,” Bunce says. “The way we coin the phrase here is that you start seeing fool’s gold and missing the diamond in the rough. You can’t start backing the player who isn’t actually your best option only because he’s just doing well in that age group. You want to be identifying the longer-term strategy, seeing what they could offer in their 20s."

“In many cases within England, players are being released for being too small. … We took a massive stance on this, giving the players the right opportunity and the right environment to thrive no matter what their birthdate was, but rather what their individual requirements were.”


http://www.socceramerica.com/article/72316/james-bunce-players-all-develop-at-different-tim.html

I've been really disturbed by the trend of Clubs around here to give all of their time, extra practices, etc. to just 8-10 players beginning at the U-9-U12 level. My kids have been at two different Clubs and in each Club 8-10 players per age group receive extra winter practices, extra training, extra games. Yet- most of these kids are just dominating this age group for purely physical reasons. I watch the ball skill and decision-making of some of the smaller kids on the lower teams and it is light-years ahead of the A team. But--to win in CCL/NCSL div 1--you just need a bigger kid that can run fast. Winning makes gotsoccer ranking go up. We are really getting it wrong.

Then--you see pages of people lamenting the low quality of first touch and skill present at all of the older DA tryouts in the area. Hmmm....coincidence? They only invite those 8-10 A players per club to ID sessions. By that time---some of the over-looked kids are really coming into their own. Yet--people here talk about a kid's soccer chances being over by 14.

I guess the sad thing is that after all the extra privileges and work being given to those chosen kids they don really end up that much better for it.

Ha--good point. But --they still get promoted and placed on the higher teams.

Since skill is ultimately lacking some skill and athleticism are still "pathways to success" in American "Elite" soccer.

But, we still need to pump the breaks and not create a false narrative that every B and C team player is really an overlooked Messi. For every B and C team "Messi" there are 4-6 kids that are simply B or C team players.

I think the issue is the lack of accountability upon the A team kids to develop their skills versus systems and styles of play that simply rely upon their athleticism. We need to find more creative ways to challenge these kids and expose their potential weaknesses. When a simple "one cut and go" move works for 5 or 5 years a player is not forced to work on anything else.

These B and C team "Messi's" are usually missing a particular athletic attribute, size, speed etc., which forces them to work on their skills in order to solve problems that they are regularly challenged with whereas the "athletes" are not forced to develop these skills in the same manner. However, if these "B and C team Messi's" do not later develop the required athletic attributes then they simply remain small, slow but extremely skilled players.

And that is as it should be, because highly skilled AND elite speed and/or size is actually rare and is why there are few Messi types, but when they are nurtured and given a chance the whole dynamic changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Regarding the chest-bumping of 11/12 year old '04 players:

“Players all develop at different times. All their attributes can develop at different times, and if you’re coaching a player at a very young age you can make massive fundamental errors around their trajectory and their ability.”
-- James Bunce, U.S. Soccer’s new High Performance Director.

“If anyone is judging a player at under-17 or under-18 purely based on their ability to score goals or their ability to dominate in a training session, there is a massive amount of evidence now that shows that you could be misidentifying them,” Bunce says. “The way we coin the phrase here is that you start seeing fool’s gold and missing the diamond in the rough. You can’t start backing the player who isn’t actually your best option only because he’s just doing well in that age group. You want to be identifying the longer-term strategy, seeing what they could offer in their 20s."

“In many cases within England, players are being released for being too small. … We took a massive stance on this, giving the players the right opportunity and the right environment to thrive no matter what their birthdate was, but rather what their individual requirements were.”


http://www.socceramerica.com/article/72316/james-bunce-players-all-develop-at-different-tim.html

I've been really disturbed by the trend of Clubs around here to give all of their time, extra practices, etc. to just 8-10 players beginning at the U-9-U12 level. My kids have been at two different Clubs and in each Club 8-10 players per age group receive extra winter practices, extra training, extra games. Yet- most of these kids are just dominating this age group for purely physical reasons. I watch the ball skill and decision-making of some of the smaller kids on the lower teams and it is light-years ahead of the A team. But--to win in CCL/NCSL div 1--you just need a bigger kid that can run fast. Winning makes gotsoccer ranking go up. We are really getting it wrong.

Then--you see pages of people lamenting the low quality of first touch and skill present at all of the older DA tryouts in the area. Hmmm....coincidence? They only invite those 8-10 A players per club to ID sessions. By that time---some of the over-looked kids are really coming into their own. Yet--people here talk about a kid's soccer chances being over by 14.

I apologize for my OCD kicking in here, but please recognize that the problem is not that big players are excessively selected because of the relative age effect (that wouldn't make any sense, would it?). It's that players of OLDER BIOLOGICAL AGE are. The biggest player on the field may be the youngest in biological terms, and often is. Again, I don't mean to be shrill, but it's a sore subject in our house. DS and DD are very tall, and we frequently have parents from opposing teams suggesting that they're "ringers" when both are young for their calendar birth year and in terms of biological age as well. I am an unusually tall person (and no athlete, by the way); we exist. Our kids look all weird and big out there, even though they're not old. In bio-banding, players in a particular group should be as tall, short, average, and otherwise variable in height as the adult general population they'll one day grow to become. Rant over . . .

[Anonymous]

I think many parents miss the point here -- a good coach can teach technical skills to a kid, but technical skill development has to take place outside of practice. In a given 90 to 120 minute practice a coach may work on 1 or 2 technical skills and then some tactical stuff. Working to improve the technical skill, like working to improve physical fitness, is done by the kid on their own outside of practice. The kids who get better at technical stuff are the kids who work on their own. The kids who get better at tactical stuff, are the kids who watch a lot of soccer on their own and thinks about the game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding the chest-bumping of 11/12 year old '04 players:

“Players all develop at different times. All their attributes can develop at different times, and if you’re coaching a player at a very young age you can make massive fundamental errors around their trajectory and their ability.”
-- James Bunce, U.S. Soccer’s new High Performance Director.

“If anyone is judging a player at under-17 or under-18 purely based on their ability to score goals or their ability to dominate in a training session, there is a massive amount of evidence now that shows that you could be misidentifying them,” Bunce says. “The way we coin the phrase here is that you start seeing fool’s gold and missing the diamond in the rough. You can’t start backing the player who isn’t actually your best option only because he’s just doing well in that age group. You want to be identifying the longer-term strategy, seeing what they could offer in their 20s."

“In many cases within England, players are being released for being too small. … We took a massive stance on this, giving the players the right opportunity and the right environment to thrive no matter what their birthdate was, but rather what their individual requirements were.”


http://www.socceramerica.com/article/72316/james-bunce-players-all-develop-at-different-tim.html

I've been really disturbed by the trend of Clubs around here to give all of their time, extra practices, etc. to just 8-10 players beginning at the U-9-U12 level. My kids have been at two different Clubs and in each Club 8-10 players per age group receive extra winter practices, extra training, extra games. Yet- most of these kids are just dominating this age group for purely physical reasons. I watch the ball skill and decision-making of some of the smaller kids on the lower teams and it is light-years ahead of the A team. But--to win in CCL/NCSL div 1--you just need a bigger kid that can run fast. Winning makes gotsoccer ranking go up. We are really getting it wrong.

Then--you see pages of people lamenting the low quality of first touch and skill present at all of the older DA tryouts in the area. Hmmm....coincidence? They only invite those 8-10 A players per club to ID sessions. By that time---some of the over-looked kids are really coming into their own. Yet--people here talk about a kid's soccer chances being over by 14.

I guess the sad thing is that after all the extra privileges and work being given to those chosen kids they don really end up that much better for it.

Ha--good point. But --they still get promoted and placed on the higher teams.

Since skill is ultimately lacking some skill and athleticism are still "pathways to success" in American "Elite" soccer.

But, we still need to pump the breaks and not create a false narrative that every B and C team player is really an overlooked Messi. For every B and C team "Messi" there are 4-6 kids that are simply B or C team players.

I think the issue is the lack of accountability upon the A team kids to develop their skills versus systems and styles of play that simply rely upon their athleticism. We need to find more creative ways to challenge these kids and expose their potential weaknesses. When a simple "one cut and go" move works for 5 or 5 years a player is not forced to work on anything else.

These B and C team "Messi's" are usually missing a particular athletic attribute, size, speed etc., which forces them to work on their skills in order to solve problems that they are regularly challenged with whereas the "athletes" are not forced to develop these skills in the same manner. However, if these "B and C team Messi's" do not later develop the required athletic attributes then they simply remain small, slow but extremely skilled players.

And that is as it should be, because highly skilled AND elite speed and/or size is actually rare and is why there are few Messi types, but when they are nurtured and given a chance the whole dynamic changes.

Nobody is arguing hidden Messi's. Messi is a class all his own.

Fact: most A team players at U-9 are not A team players at U-14/15.

Fact: many tall kids at 9-12, do not maintain the height advantage once puberty hits.

Fact: most clubs ignore kids on lower teams beginning at 9/10. They place them on pre-seeded fields at tryouts and do not re-assess. Coaches/TDs aren't continually evaluating the other teams.

Fact: yes--any player that does not put in time on their own (skills and conditioning) will not develop.

Fact: nobody can watch a U9-11 practice and not notice the lack of skill on many of the A players. It is pain-stakingly obvious when Futsal is involved in winter. Kick and run outside they can eat up the ground with a physical advantage that may or may not be there at 16.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Regarding the chest-bumping of 11/12 year old '04 players:

“Players all develop at different times. All their attributes can develop at different times, and if you’re coaching a player at a very young age you can make massive fundamental errors around their trajectory and their ability.”
-- James Bunce, U.S. Soccer’s new High Performance Director.

“If anyone is judging a player at under-17 or under-18 purely based on their ability to score goals or their ability to dominate in a training session, there is a massive amount of evidence now that shows that you could be misidentifying them,” Bunce says. “The way we coin the phrase here is that you start seeing fool’s gold and missing the diamond in the rough. You can’t start backing the player who isn’t actually your best option only because he’s just doing well in that age group. You want to be identifying the longer-term strategy, seeing what they could offer in their 20s."

“In many cases within England, players are being released for being too small. … We took a massive stance on this, giving the players the right opportunity and the right environment to thrive no matter what their birthdate was, but rather what their individual requirements were.”


http://www.socceramerica.com/article/72316/james-bunce-players-all-develop-at-different-tim.html

I've been really disturbed by the trend of Clubs around here to give all of their time, extra practices, etc. to just 8-10 players beginning at the U-9-U12 level. My kids have been at two different Clubs and in each Club 8-10 players per age group receive extra winter practices, extra training, extra games. Yet- most of these kids are just dominating this age group for purely physical reasons. I watch the ball skill and decision-making of some of the smaller kids on the lower teams and it is light-years ahead of the A team. But--to win in CCL/NCSL div 1--you just need a bigger kid that can run fast. Winning makes gotsoccer ranking go up. We are really getting it wrong.

Then--you see pages of people lamenting the low quality of first touch and skill present at all of the older DA tryouts in the area. Hmmm....coincidence? They only invite those 8-10 A players per club to ID sessions. By that time---some of the over-looked kids are really coming into their own. Yet--people here talk about a kid's soccer chances being over by 14.

I guess the sad thing is that after all the extra privileges and work being given to those chosen kids they don really end up that much better for it.

Ha--good point. But --they still get promoted and placed on the higher teams.

Since skill is ultimately lacking some skill and athleticism are still "pathways to success" in American "Elite" soccer.

But, we still need to pump the breaks and not create a false narrative that every B and C team player is really an overlooked Messi. For every B and C team "Messi" there are 4-6 kids that are simply B or C team players.

I think the issue is the lack of accountability upon the A team kids to develop their skills versus systems and styles of play that simply rely upon their athleticism. We need to find more creative ways to challenge these kids and expose their potential weaknesses. When a simple "one cut and go" move works for 5 or 5 years a player is not forced to work on anything else.

These B and C team "Messi's" are usually missing a particular athletic attribute, size, speed etc., which forces them to work on their skills in order to solve problems that they are regularly challenged with whereas the "athletes" are not forced to develop these skills in the same manner. However, if these "B and C team Messi's" do not later develop the required athletic attributes then they simply remain small, slow but extremely skilled players.

And that is as it should be, because highly skilled AND elite speed and/or size is actually rare and is why there are few Messi types, but when they are nurtured and given a chance the whole dynamic changes.

Nobody is arguing hidden Messi's. Messi is a class all his own.

Fact: most A team players at U-9 are not A team players at U-14/15.

Fact: many tall kids at 9-12, do not maintain the height advantage once puberty hits.

Fact: most clubs ignore kids on lower teams beginning at 9/10. They place them on pre-seeded fields at tryouts and do not re-assess. Coaches/TDs aren't continually evaluating the other teams.

Fact: yes--any player that does not put in time on their own (skills and conditioning) will not develop.

Fact: nobody can watch a U9-11 practice and not notice the lack of skill on many of the A players. It is pain-stakingly obvious when Futsal is involved in winter. Kick and run outside they can eat up the ground with a physical advantage that may or may not be there at 16.

Not only are the young "athletes" not being forced to use skill and thinking in the younger years (Cruyff talks about how he became so skilled because he was lacking physical attributes)---many of these poor kids no longer have the athletic advantage at puberty. They are no longer the 'fast' kid, etc. So now--they don't have speed or skill. I can't tell you how many elementary superstars I knew as a child that were not relevant by HS.

[Anonymous]

^yboint in why it's idiotic to put all resources, extra practices, time, etc for 8-10 kids at the U-9 level. There is an entire pool being overlooked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Not only are the young "athletes" not being forced to use skill and thinking in the younger years (Cruyff talks about how he became so skilled because he was lacking physical attributes)---many of these poor kids no longer have the athletic advantage at puberty. They are no longer the 'fast' kid, etc. So now--they don't have speed or skill. I can't tell you how many elementary superstars I knew as a child that were not relevant by HS.

This is so true, and something I've seen as well. Somewhere along the line I described my family's great experience with a coach who is really focused on this issue. He was the opposing coach in a U8 game, and approached us afterward to say that our son had a lot of potential (he wasn't large, but very fast and strong), but that he would not reach it if he didn't start working on skills right away. He gave us a training plan right there and invited our son to join his team's practice (at a different club) any time. He's still a mentor 10 years later.

I don't think the way the club system is structured or the birth year movement (mentioned by a poster above) are the main issue here. We just need more talented coaches who understand the problem and are good teachers, and parents who are educated enough to look for the right things from coaches and clubs. Hard to do as a parent if you are new to the sport, but I think there are a lot more resources available to anyone who cares to look than there were a few years ago.

[Anonymous]

My children have played for 5 different clubs from U6 through U11 for various reasons. Of those 5 clubs, I have no idea how many coaches they have worked with. Lots. Not one of the coaches ever forced them to play ball in X place and run there like they are puppets. Granted some encouraged going forward. Some encouraged playing back. Etc. Only one introduced patterns. Three of the five highly encouraged street soccer as part of every kids development and provided field space for pick up/street soccer on a weekly year round basis. Anyway, just saying. I'm sure there is a club out there that will make you happy.

As for the comment on the club only training 8-10 kids extra...have you ever tried to break into that group? I've seen what you described before as well, but I always found these groups to be open to adding committed/passionate kids willing to work hard and do extra. I don't like the idea of recruiting big, fast kids but I also don't like so many people using that as an excuse of why their kid doesn't get selected for things. Just because some kids have some decent footskills at age 9 doesn't mean that the world needs to stop and wait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^yboint in why it's idiotic to put all resources, extra practices, time, etc for 8-10 kids at the U-9 level. There is an entire pool being overlooked.

I'm sure those kids pay extra for it. So what's the problem? If the club is offering it up for free only to these 8-10 kids, yeah, that's a problem especially if they are taking field away from other kids. But in general, don't complain. Find someone to give your kid and similar kids extra training. If you can't find anyone, look in the mirror.

[Anonymous]

At 8-10, there are not that many parents willing to make the commitment level required for their kids to participate in a travel program, and drive to practice in NOVA twice a week.

The ones that are get their kids signed up or prepped at early ages. There are a lot of rec players at younger ages who are really, really good but their parents can't commit to the schedule see the value of paying for professional training when their kid seems to already be having a good time on a rec team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At 8-10, there are not that many parents willing to make the commitment level required for their kids to participate in a travel program, and drive to practice in NOVA twice a week.

The ones that are get their kids signed up or prepped at early ages. There are a lot of rec players at younger ages who are really, really good but their parents can't commit to the schedule see the value of paying for professional training when their kid seems to already be having a good time on a rec team.

Yes, so is it the club's fault for offering these opportunities to these kids? I think not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not only are the young "athletes" not being forced to use skill and thinking in the younger years (Cruyff talks about how he became so skilled because he was lacking physical attributes)---many of these poor kids no longer have the athletic advantage at puberty. They are no longer the 'fast' kid, etc. So now--they don't have speed or skill. I can't tell you how many elementary superstars I knew as a child that were not relevant by HS.

This is so true, and something I've seen as well. Somewhere along the line I described my family's great experience with a coach who is really focused on this issue. He was the opposing coach in a U8 game, and approached us afterward to say that our son had a lot of potential (he wasn't large, but very fast and strong), but that he would not reach it if he didn't start working on skills right away. He gave us a training plan right there and invited our son to join his team's practice (at a different club) any time. He's still a mentor 10 years later.

I don't think the way the club system is structured or the birth year movement (mentioned by a poster above) are the main issue here. We just need more talented coaches who understand the problem and are good teachers, and parents who are educated enough to look for the right things from coaches and clubs. Hard to do as a parent if you are new to the sport, but I think there are a lot more resources available to anyone who cares to look than there were a few years ago.

I will agree with this. I think many coaches don't know it when they see it because they have never really seen it at any stage in development and I'll double down and accuse parents of making the same mistakes. I think as a society we tend to over value athleticism based on our love of sports like football. We tend to think that size, speed, strength are universal attributes that translate across all sports. And without a doubt the are important but soccer requires some different specialized skill development before the physical attributes become differentiators. I stated earlier about the skilled B and C team "Messi" before and my thought was seconded by the later description of how Cruyff developed his skills because he was slow and small and had to learn to cope in some way.

But as a nation we are wired differently. We do not have the patience to either lose at a young age or the patience to be content to watch our kids struggle, to be the slowest, the smallest. We collect the biggest 9 year olds on a A team instead of making them play with kids bigger than they are. We are afraid to let our kids play with less skilled players as well. Even receiving a bad pass can develop skill and for the advanced while conversely knowing that even sending a bad pass to the "good player" will not result in a instant turnover helps to build confidence in the "lesser player".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Not only are the young "athletes" not being forced to use skill and thinking in the younger years (Cruyff talks about how he became so skilled because he was lacking physical attributes)---many of these poor kids no longer have the athletic advantage at puberty. They are no longer the 'fast' kid, etc. So now--they don't have speed or skill. I can't tell you how many elementary superstars I knew as a child that were not relevant by HS.

This is so true, and something I've seen as well. Somewhere along the line I described my family's great experience with a coach who is really focused on this issue. He was the opposing coach in a U8 game, and approached us afterward to say that our son had a lot of potential (he wasn't large, but very fast and strong), but that he would not reach it if he didn't start working on skills right away. He gave us a training plan right there and invited our son to join his team's practice (at a different club) any time. He's still a mentor 10 years later.

I don't think the way the club system is structured or the birth year movement (mentioned by a poster above) are the main issue here. We just need more talented coaches who understand the problem and are good teachers, and parents who are educated enough to look for the right things from coaches and clubs. Hard to do as a parent if you are new to the sport, but I think there are a lot more resources available to anyone who cares to look than there were a few years ago.

I will agree with this. I think many coaches don't know it when they see it because they have never really seen it at any stage in development and I'll double down and accuse parents of making the same mistakes. I think as a society we tend to over value athleticism based on our love of sports like football. We tend to think that size, speed, strength are universal attributes that translate across all sports. And without a doubt the are important but soccer requires some different specialized skill development before the physical attributes become differentiators. I stated earlier about the skilled B and C team "Messi" before and my thought was seconded by the later description of how Cruyff developed his skills because he was slow and small and had to learn to cope in some way.

But as a nation we are wired differently. We do not have the patience to either lose at a young age or the patience to be content to watch our kids struggle, to be the slowest, the smallest. We collect the biggest 9 year olds on a A team instead of making them play with kids bigger than they are. We are afraid to let our kids play with less skilled players as well. Even receiving a bad pass can develop skill and for the advanced while conversely knowing that even sending a bad pass to the "good player" will not result in a instant turnover helps to build confidence in the "lesser player".

Cruyff poster here. What you said is beautiful and articulated much more eloquently than I could do.

As a parent that understands this, yes, I am still guilty as charged at various times. Nobody likes to "lose", but it's an important part of the process.