They still didn't need to be in travel and it could be argued benefited by getting in a bit sooner than otherwise expected. The late 07's who would have been the older 08's got pushed up into an age group that already had a year of travel experience. So yes, get over it. Every age group 08 and older were impacted in some way. Some kids benefited and others did not but compared to other age groups the 08's were not as adversely affected as most. |
The point of creating 'one dimensional players' is valid. Many of these places rely on 'young superstars' and their physicality/dominance. They capitalize on it and the player is never developed properly and fails later on at age 17/18. Their backs also rarely touch the ball, but serve only to distribute it with a long kick. Play this way in the younger years seriously limits the number of touches per player. You want every kid on the field touching the ball in the prime development years. And, whether your a fan of possession style or not---it should be learned early in development because it is the method that affords kids the most touches on the ball in practice and in games. Non-possession soccer allocates touches to only a few players. "you watch a teammate launch a 30 yard blind pass or try to dribble three players in the midfield, you are learning less when you don’t have the ball because you are not thinking that you are about to get it. Thinking you will and hoping you might are very different. Finally 4) you want players to know and understand the system that is played at elite levels so they can aspire to go as far as they can go. Possession soccer is the default. That’s why the US Soccer Federation advocates it." Now, as said, the majority of Clubs in the US do not follow USSF's advice or implement it correctly---even many of the 'DA clubs'. |
+1 DA is only an iron-on, culture matters |
| That is incorrect. Try to keep your envy in your pocket |
Completely false. Loudoun has produced top D1 keepers. Top 10 in the nation type keepers. |
Are you from Arlington or FCV? |
|
Ha! |
good Again, the bolded comment is false. But thanks for playing. Loudoun has produced several very good players other than keepers as well. |
|
Here is one of the recent keepers from Loudoun. I guess he punted his way onto the UVA team.
https://virginiasports.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=6009 |
| That guy was also a National Champion on the Loudoun DA team. The haters are just parents of kids who could never make the team or always lost to them. Haters gonna hate. |
I guess Loudoun 03 pre-DA team does not have one of those "top 10 in the nation" type keepers that Loudoun produces, since Louodoun lost 0-8 to a team from Pennsylvania in EDP. |
Right, because the keeper is solely responsible for all goals scored in a match. Good lord. |
I am not saying that Loudoun goalkeeper is solely responsible for their blow out loss. I am just tired of shameless self-promotion by certain clubs. The reality is that many of these "elite" teams are rather mediocre, including goalkeepers. |
| If you are a pointing to a club arguing they are good at developing players because of their track record developing GKs, you don't get it. |