Message
The program looks fine to me - no red flags.
It looks to serve kids that are anywhere from:
New to soccer
Recreational level
"Academy" level (recreational kids that want to train in order to improve)
Travel "lite" - kids that can compete at the level of play available in and around the DC metro area
It looks to serve kids that are anywhere from:
New to soccer
Recreational level
"Academy" level (recreational kids that want to train in order to improve)
Travel "lite" - kids that can compete at the level of play available in and around the DC metro area
To whoever posted the "Wrong" comment:
Have you ever even played or coached soccer before? It really doesn't sound like it since you have to make a parallel to baseball as your example.
We are talking about summer camps, not a select team. If you have an axe to grind, grind it elsewhere.
Reading your comment lowers the credibility of your advice to zero because it reflects zero knowledge of the sport or how youth soccer even works.
If you have a summer camp (lets say 30-50 kids), typically the groups are broken up by age on the first day of camp.
Any players who are much more physically developed for their age group or advanced in skill and ability will get moved up to the next higher group.
Players who are obviously new to soccer, are purely recreational players that haven't had any training yet, or if for some reason are very emotionally sensitive may be moved down to the next youngest age group if its a better fit for them.
Have you ever even played or coached soccer before? It really doesn't sound like it since you have to make a parallel to baseball as your example.
We are talking about summer camps, not a select team. If you have an axe to grind, grind it elsewhere.
Reading your comment lowers the credibility of your advice to zero because it reflects zero knowledge of the sport or how youth soccer even works.
If you have a summer camp (lets say 30-50 kids), typically the groups are broken up by age on the first day of camp.
Any players who are much more physically developed for their age group or advanced in skill and ability will get moved up to the next higher group.
Players who are obviously new to soccer, are purely recreational players that haven't had any training yet, or if for some reason are very emotionally sensitive may be moved down to the next youngest age group if its a better fit for them.
DC Stoddert U9/U10 - I only know a few things about the club firsthand:
The culture at DC stoddert has a heavy emphasis on continuing education for coaches. Len Oliver used to be the Technical Director for many years, and he taught the "D" License courses for VYSA for a very long time.
Now Karen Kelser as the new "Director of Soccer" does the same, so there is a culture where the coaches are continually developing. Some clubs just give their coaches a reimbursement for attending a course once or twice or year, and that's about it.
DC Stoddert has teams in CCL, so I imagine tryouts are competitive. I'm not sure how many players would be competing for 20-24 spots spread across 2 teams, but I think it would be a lot considering how many people live within the DC Stoddert territory.
Wish I could be more helpful - best thing would be to ask the same question on the "Travel Teams Lets Discuss" forum.
The culture at DC stoddert has a heavy emphasis on continuing education for coaches. Len Oliver used to be the Technical Director for many years, and he taught the "D" License courses for VYSA for a very long time.
Now Karen Kelser as the new "Director of Soccer" does the same, so there is a culture where the coaches are continually developing. Some clubs just give their coaches a reimbursement for attending a course once or twice or year, and that's about it.
DC Stoddert has teams in CCL, so I imagine tryouts are competitive. I'm not sure how many players would be competing for 20-24 spots spread across 2 teams, but I think it would be a lot considering how many people live within the DC Stoddert territory.
Wish I could be more helpful - best thing would be to ask the same question on the "Travel Teams Lets Discuss" forum.
Private training - either small group or 1 on 1. Usually GK trainers work with a group of keepers at the same time. Also ask your club if they provide anything.
Yes, anyone who wants to come to pickup soccer on friday is invited out to Draper Drive Park again 5:30 - 7:00, U12 and younger boys and girls... slightly older kids can play too if they want.
We will do this every week at least through the end of February.
9797 Beech Dr, Fairfax, VA 22031
We will do this every week at least through the end of February.
9797 Beech Dr, Fairfax, VA 22031
I don't know the people actually involved behind the scenes with the girls DA happenings locally, but I'm reading these forums and trying to stay on top of what is going on.
There's the "soccer" part of the DA and the "$$$" part of the DA - I'm not a good resource for knowing the business model, marketing, fees, and who gets paid what and how the pie is divided and all of the politics/turf war shakeouts, but I think I have a good feel for the "on the field" stuff.
So my thoughts on the Girls DA is just my 2 cents without the knowledge of the marketing machine behind the boys and girls DA programs.
I think the choice between ECNL and DA would be heavily dependent on the coaching staff and what people say about their ability to develop players, not just win games or prep for showcases. The coach ALWAYS make or breaks the program. The coach is always has more direct influence over your player's development than the club or the league the team plays in, despite what anyone tells you.
If you take a summer class at Harvard and get a bad/inexperienced teacher who doesn't know what they are doing, you are paying a lot of money not to learn anything. But, it still looks good on paper to everyone else that you took a class at Harvard, and they start to assume that you must be bright, even if you're not.
Same with soccer! See the product on the field - it doesn't lie. Getting a hodgepodge of good players on the field together does not make a team. It takes a great coach to mold a great team together after working with them consistently for a longer time period.
There's the "soccer" part of the DA and the "$$$" part of the DA - I'm not a good resource for knowing the business model, marketing, fees, and who gets paid what and how the pie is divided and all of the politics/turf war shakeouts, but I think I have a good feel for the "on the field" stuff.
So my thoughts on the Girls DA is just my 2 cents without the knowledge of the marketing machine behind the boys and girls DA programs.
I think the choice between ECNL and DA would be heavily dependent on the coaching staff and what people say about their ability to develop players, not just win games or prep for showcases. The coach ALWAYS make or breaks the program. The coach is always has more direct influence over your player's development than the club or the league the team plays in, despite what anyone tells you.
If you take a summer class at Harvard and get a bad/inexperienced teacher who doesn't know what they are doing, you are paying a lot of money not to learn anything. But, it still looks good on paper to everyone else that you took a class at Harvard, and they start to assume that you must be bright, even if you're not.
Same with soccer! See the product on the field - it doesn't lie. Getting a hodgepodge of good players on the field together does not make a team. It takes a great coach to mold a great team together after working with them consistently for a longer time period.
We live in Maryland and had our kids start with MSI and then the MSC Academy program. MSI was the classs team and then she made the MSC (travel team) Academy. We have been really unhappy with the MSI Soccer program. The quality of the coaches and the lack of support from the main office to deal with any issues that arise. Doug Schuesler is the MSI Soccer executive director and you would think he would come out if his glass ceiling office to observe his coaches and the programs. When we seek help for our team (review the curriculum, look at this coach, etc) we are ignored. MSI wonders why Schuesler has a bad nasty image and the program does not produce quality developed soccer players.
What other opportunities are out there for my daughter?
Funny story - I actually played MSI myself in the late 90's in the high school recreational boys division (which was pretty competitive considering its a rec league... some teams we'd play against had 19 (almost 20) year old african & hispanic freshman going to Montgomery College that probably could have played college soccer somewhere.
As a 9th grader, by pure luck, I was placed on a team full Damantha and Gonzaga players that played MSI on the side just get in more games during the season, which helped me improve a lot. I didn't play club in the area because at the time, I didn't even know how anything worked as a high school kid... so I just played HS soccer & MSI, trained at Montgomery College-Rockville in the summer, and also tagged along everywhere with a buddy who played for a very good team in northern VA.
It's hard to expect that the director of the entire program will take much time to deal with something like this.
With these types of issues there's usually more going on beneath the surface, just send me a PM and we can talk further.
Soccer is a great sport and can do so many good things for kids (it did for me when I was that age) and I hate to see the experience for a young person ruined because of adult stupidity - a huge pet peeve of mine.
What other opportunities are out there for my daughter?
Funny story - I actually played MSI myself in the late 90's in the high school recreational boys division (which was pretty competitive considering its a rec league... some teams we'd play against had 19 (almost 20) year old african & hispanic freshman going to Montgomery College that probably could have played college soccer somewhere.
As a 9th grader, by pure luck, I was placed on a team full Damantha and Gonzaga players that played MSI on the side just get in more games during the season, which helped me improve a lot. I didn't play club in the area because at the time, I didn't even know how anything worked as a high school kid... so I just played HS soccer & MSI, trained at Montgomery College-Rockville in the summer, and also tagged along everywhere with a buddy who played for a very good team in northern VA.
It's hard to expect that the director of the entire program will take much time to deal with something like this.
With these types of issues there's usually more going on beneath the surface, just send me a PM and we can talk further.
Soccer is a great sport and can do so many good things for kids (it did for me when I was that age) and I hate to see the experience for a young person ruined because of adult stupidity - a huge pet peeve of mine.
I have two kids who are good, successful rec players. U11 girl and U13 boy playing in CYA rec league. Any recommendations for good summer soccer camps for them? Preferably out in our area... Chantilly/Centreville/Fairfax.
I'll only recommend camps that I have direct experience with that I can say are quality -
#1 - Soccer Academy
#2 - Golden Boot Soccer
There are many others in the area but I can't say how good they are one way or another since I don't have experience with them.
I'll only recommend camps that I have direct experience with that I can say are quality -
#1 - Soccer Academy
#2 - Golden Boot Soccer
There are many others in the area but I can't say how good they are one way or another since I don't have experience with them.
So what do you suggest for a u9 player who plays u10, but skill wise(touch, control, vision, etc) is at a higher level vs the u10. She is not a poke and chase player.
The problem is if she plays at her age or around it, she holds back(no scissor move, no chipping, no quick give and goes in tight space, etc). The other kids don't do this, so she does not do it. If she goes up in level she is still one or two in terms of skill, but the physicality gets too much. She is caught between to world.
[Report Post]
This doesn't make sense - a U9 player who has better skill than anyone else in her age group should be playing with U10. The speed of the game is faster, the play is "slightly" more physical, but look at it this way:
Her development will basically stop or even regress if she plays with other U9s, as you have said.
Her development will either continue or accelerate playing with the U10s. It may take her a month or two to adjust, but once she's at enough training sessions and picks up some of the decision-making or skills that the coach is teaching, she will be learning the same things they are, and should start to show progress. If she isn't making progress in 2 months with the U10s beyond the level of "just good enough to be practicing with them", then the coach is doing something wrong. Players naturally adapt their play to the other kids they train and play with, so that will happen on its own given enough time.
No need to worry, keep her at U10.
The problem is if she plays at her age or around it, she holds back(no scissor move, no chipping, no quick give and goes in tight space, etc). The other kids don't do this, so she does not do it. If she goes up in level she is still one or two in terms of skill, but the physicality gets too much. She is caught between to world.
[Report Post]
This doesn't make sense - a U9 player who has better skill than anyone else in her age group should be playing with U10. The speed of the game is faster, the play is "slightly" more physical, but look at it this way:
Her development will basically stop or even regress if she plays with other U9s, as you have said.
Her development will either continue or accelerate playing with the U10s. It may take her a month or two to adjust, but once she's at enough training sessions and picks up some of the decision-making or skills that the coach is teaching, she will be learning the same things they are, and should start to show progress. If she isn't making progress in 2 months with the U10s beyond the level of "just good enough to be practicing with them", then the coach is doing something wrong. Players naturally adapt their play to the other kids they train and play with, so that will happen on its own given enough time.
No need to worry, keep her at U10.
I help organize pickup soccer on fridays 5:30-7:00 at Draper Drive Park in fairfax, for boys and girls. Anyone who reads this is invited to come out tonight.
Most of the kids are U12 and younger but kids slightly older than that are certainly welcome to play also. All ability levels welcome.
Most of the kids are U12 and younger but kids slightly older than that are certainly welcome to play also. All ability levels welcome.
I cant tell you how happy I am to hear that... "mom played" instead of "dad played". This is a huge turning of the corner for the womens/girls game and something you rarely, rarely would have heard 10-15 years ago.
Thank you for the "mom played" post.. I am mostly focused on coaching girls teams right now and this comment just made my day
Thank you for the "mom played" post.. I am mostly focused on coaching girls teams right now and this comment just made my day
So, if the 3rd world country player development model doesn't fit here, and the European academy model (and with pro teams in little tiny towns that can always fight for promotion up to the 7th division all the way to the top one) doesn't fit here, what is the answer?
The only answer other than "we need more time" is what US Soccer, of all people, has been advocating for a while, which is ECONOMICAL TRAINING SESSIONS.
Weekly schedule in-season:
Rec - 1 or 2 practices a week (usually 1 hour each) 1 - 2 hours training + game
Travel - 2 or 3 practices a week (usually 90 minutes each) - 1.5 - 3 hours training + game
"Elite" if there is such a thing - 3 or 4 practices a week - 3 - 4.5 hours training + game
Regardless of how you slice it, even 4.5 hours of soccer per week is not enough to really develop a player to their fullest potential. Go to any real soccer country and say that an elite 14 year old kid gets 4.5 hours of soccer per week (excluding games) and prepare to be laughed at. I'm sure that Michael Jordan limited himself to 4.5 hours of organized basketball training per week as a high school kid... How many hours do highly competitive 10 year old gymnasts that are 5 years out from the Olympics train per week?
Anyway, enough about that. Economical sessions are the absolute best way to learn a skill quickly. Street soccer / unstructured play is good for experimenting, learning new moves/skills here and there, and a lot of other "soccer intangibles", but I will tell you, nothing accelerates a player's skill level more than a well-run, economical training session. A player that cannot strike the ball with correct technique will not learn how to do it correctly just by playing street soccer. Maybe another player who can do it right takes the time to show the kid how its done correctly, but its just "do it this way", not a structured motor learning correction process that every coach should know how to do at a basic level.
An economical training session should be (for a technical / skill topic):
warm-up that is related to the topic being taught
-30 minutes of learning a skill without pressure
-30 minutes of using the skill with some pressure with smaller numbers
-30 minutes of using the skill in real game situations
Or, in a rec practice, it would be 20/20/20.
To run a good training session, the burden is on the coach to know how to structure it and teach the topic. USSF has excellent coaching education programs despite all the other things people dislike about the organization, and I learned this concept when I took my D License a while ago. Most of the original USSF (and NSCAA) coaching courses were based on coaching courses in Germany, England, and the Netherlands... but the people putting the USSF coaching courses together realized that we don't have as much time to work with players per week, so while there was good material in the courses, it didn't translate to the American player who didn't even have a feel for the ball yet as a teenager compared to their counterparts in other countries.
I think the idea of economical training sessions originally came from Germany, where at some point, most run-of-the-mill soccer clubs in the country realized it wasn't possible to get the kids 4-5 days per week (except maybe the top top clubs that they had to compete against). So the solution was to implement economical training sessions where the entire practice places demands on the player in all areas of the game: physical, mental, technical, and tactical. You get 90 minutes to train all 4 areas, so its up to the coach to design the session appropriately. There are a lot of variables that can be manipulated in a session (field space / dimensions, time, numbers, amount of pressure, number of touches, restrictions, time limits, incentives... the main things though that slide the difficulty scale up or down are the amount of space and the amount of time that players have to execute a skill or make a decision)
"South American" and "Latin" (Spanish/Italian) training sessions are not economical at all actually... but they don't need to be because its assumed that the players are around the ball so much that they have already developed the technical (skill) part of the game on their own. That's why they are on the team to begin with.
Interestingly enough, training sessions in S.A./Latin countries are designed with the assumption that the players ALREADY have a very high skill level (you won't be on the team if you don't anyway). Therefore, the typical coach will more or less roll the ball out and give the players an objective, but not give them specifics on how they should achieve that objective exactly (or just make running commentary as they play). They let the players play creatively, with their own flair, and be their individual selves as long as they achieve the objective. A German or Dutch session will be extremely specific about how an objective is to be achieved, and even if the objective is still achieved (but in the wrong manner), it's "wrong". Some clubs in these countries break the mold of their own country's soccer culture, and those teams are the interesting ones to watch - Barcelona playing with Dutch influence, Arsenal playing with French influence, DC United in the days of Harkes/Pope/Agoos/Lassiter/Olsen playing with Marco Etcheverry & Jaime Moreno, both players who emerged as among the best from Bolivia's 3rd world country development model (from Tahuichi, which put structure around the 3rd world dev model with huge success) as the engines of the team, etc.
So for right now, I think the solution is educating more coaches and making sure they "get it" when it comes to session planning. Enough faulting the kids for not being from a crazy-about-soccer family where the dad played and enough faulting them for not playing Joga Bonito 24/7 on concrete with soda cans.
Want better test scores in math? Make sure the teachers are good at teaching it and getting the kids to solidly understand it given limited classroom time.
Giving a kid that doesn't speak english a dictionary to memorize does not help. That's the equivalent of what I feel happens when a coach watches Barcelona play, then looks up a random "Rondo" drill from Spain, and runs it with his team. Just stop it.
Raise the bar. Hold coaches accountable for the quality of their training sessions. As a parent, take the time to learn and understand the difference between an excellent session, a good one, an average one, a poor one, and a terrible one.
Try this out:
If your kid is in a larger club, observe a session from a U10 rec coach, a U10 "development academy" session (for more competitive house players looking for more training), a U10 travel coach working with the top team in the age group, and the U10 travel coach working with the bottom team in the age group. Look for the differences in quality in each session. You'll find it interesting.
The only answer other than "we need more time" is what US Soccer, of all people, has been advocating for a while, which is ECONOMICAL TRAINING SESSIONS.
Weekly schedule in-season:
Rec - 1 or 2 practices a week (usually 1 hour each) 1 - 2 hours training + game
Travel - 2 or 3 practices a week (usually 90 minutes each) - 1.5 - 3 hours training + game
"Elite" if there is such a thing - 3 or 4 practices a week - 3 - 4.5 hours training + game
Regardless of how you slice it, even 4.5 hours of soccer per week is not enough to really develop a player to their fullest potential. Go to any real soccer country and say that an elite 14 year old kid gets 4.5 hours of soccer per week (excluding games) and prepare to be laughed at. I'm sure that Michael Jordan limited himself to 4.5 hours of organized basketball training per week as a high school kid... How many hours do highly competitive 10 year old gymnasts that are 5 years out from the Olympics train per week?
Anyway, enough about that. Economical sessions are the absolute best way to learn a skill quickly. Street soccer / unstructured play is good for experimenting, learning new moves/skills here and there, and a lot of other "soccer intangibles", but I will tell you, nothing accelerates a player's skill level more than a well-run, economical training session. A player that cannot strike the ball with correct technique will not learn how to do it correctly just by playing street soccer. Maybe another player who can do it right takes the time to show the kid how its done correctly, but its just "do it this way", not a structured motor learning correction process that every coach should know how to do at a basic level.
An economical training session should be (for a technical / skill topic):
warm-up that is related to the topic being taught
-30 minutes of learning a skill without pressure
-30 minutes of using the skill with some pressure with smaller numbers
-30 minutes of using the skill in real game situations
Or, in a rec practice, it would be 20/20/20.
To run a good training session, the burden is on the coach to know how to structure it and teach the topic. USSF has excellent coaching education programs despite all the other things people dislike about the organization, and I learned this concept when I took my D License a while ago. Most of the original USSF (and NSCAA) coaching courses were based on coaching courses in Germany, England, and the Netherlands... but the people putting the USSF coaching courses together realized that we don't have as much time to work with players per week, so while there was good material in the courses, it didn't translate to the American player who didn't even have a feel for the ball yet as a teenager compared to their counterparts in other countries.
I think the idea of economical training sessions originally came from Germany, where at some point, most run-of-the-mill soccer clubs in the country realized it wasn't possible to get the kids 4-5 days per week (except maybe the top top clubs that they had to compete against). So the solution was to implement economical training sessions where the entire practice places demands on the player in all areas of the game: physical, mental, technical, and tactical. You get 90 minutes to train all 4 areas, so its up to the coach to design the session appropriately. There are a lot of variables that can be manipulated in a session (field space / dimensions, time, numbers, amount of pressure, number of touches, restrictions, time limits, incentives... the main things though that slide the difficulty scale up or down are the amount of space and the amount of time that players have to execute a skill or make a decision)
"South American" and "Latin" (Spanish/Italian) training sessions are not economical at all actually... but they don't need to be because its assumed that the players are around the ball so much that they have already developed the technical (skill) part of the game on their own. That's why they are on the team to begin with.
Interestingly enough, training sessions in S.A./Latin countries are designed with the assumption that the players ALREADY have a very high skill level (you won't be on the team if you don't anyway). Therefore, the typical coach will more or less roll the ball out and give the players an objective, but not give them specifics on how they should achieve that objective exactly (or just make running commentary as they play). They let the players play creatively, with their own flair, and be their individual selves as long as they achieve the objective. A German or Dutch session will be extremely specific about how an objective is to be achieved, and even if the objective is still achieved (but in the wrong manner), it's "wrong". Some clubs in these countries break the mold of their own country's soccer culture, and those teams are the interesting ones to watch - Barcelona playing with Dutch influence, Arsenal playing with French influence, DC United in the days of Harkes/Pope/Agoos/Lassiter/Olsen playing with Marco Etcheverry & Jaime Moreno, both players who emerged as among the best from Bolivia's 3rd world country development model (from Tahuichi, which put structure around the 3rd world dev model with huge success) as the engines of the team, etc.
So for right now, I think the solution is educating more coaches and making sure they "get it" when it comes to session planning. Enough faulting the kids for not being from a crazy-about-soccer family where the dad played and enough faulting them for not playing Joga Bonito 24/7 on concrete with soda cans.
Want better test scores in math? Make sure the teachers are good at teaching it and getting the kids to solidly understand it given limited classroom time.
Giving a kid that doesn't speak english a dictionary to memorize does not help. That's the equivalent of what I feel happens when a coach watches Barcelona play, then looks up a random "Rondo" drill from Spain, and runs it with his team. Just stop it.
Raise the bar. Hold coaches accountable for the quality of their training sessions. As a parent, take the time to learn and understand the difference between an excellent session, a good one, an average one, a poor one, and a terrible one.
Try this out:
If your kid is in a larger club, observe a session from a U10 rec coach, a U10 "development academy" session (for more competitive house players looking for more training), a U10 travel coach working with the top team in the age group, and the U10 travel coach working with the bottom team in the age group. Look for the differences in quality in each session. You'll find it interesting.
Ok, so for the elite player on the men's side, we are completely screwed until we can start building youth academies that compare to top European or South American ones.
This also includes regular fast-tracking to reserve or senior teams at 17-19 every year for a small handful of players. If you wait until 22 to play with professionals, you are already screwed at the higher levels of play. You've just lost several years worth of development.
So any players coming out of college are basically ruled out of becoming the next big thing for the national team - the top draft picks may be very, very good, but they will not be internationally elite at the highest level... (but they will be what we'd consider "MLS" level).
Think of it this way - take the top 5 draft picks in MLS this year.. we know that most of these players will be starters and getting significant minutes in a year or less.
Now, put those players at any major European club. Do they even make the "C" team? the Reserves for the "C" team? Not sure. They would probably be a fit for a top team in a lower division, or a lesser team in the top division.
Right now we're relying on handouts from other countries occasionally having a rare U.S. youth player with dual citizenship get slots in their academies, and then we are happy to then fast track them to the national team if we can. That's the best we can do. Or, hoping that a player like Andy Najar, who had been training with his uncle (a pro in Honduras) since he could walk will want to play for the US instead of their own country. (man, what an uproar it would have been if Freddy had opted to play for Ghana). DO NOT START A FREDDY ADU THREAD.
So yes, at the elite elite level, we are screwed for the time being.
But enough of beating a dead horse - I think we know that already.
For the 99.9999% of other players that will be signing up to play soccer at a local club, the club should provide some form of unstructured play for the kids on a regular basis.
Importing the 3rd world country player development model will not work in the US because of our culture. The answer is not having kids play street soccer 24/7 either.
I think the answer is to have better coaches that know how to manage their players' development environments, and also make sure the kids are getting healthy dose of foot skills, technical work (first touch, dribbling, passing, shooting/finishing), and provide coaching when it comes to decision-making (basic tactics). There are so many elements of the game that cannot be coached... they have to be "drawn out" of players by setting up the environment the right way.
At U9, this could mean taking time to train different elements within the 3v3, allowing heaps of goals to be scored in numbers up, numbers even, and numbers down situations. This builds the players' confidence, and if you teach foot skills at every practice, the players will start to become more daring, more confident, and take risks. You cannot coach risk-taking or creativity - you can show the players a move or a skill, but they have to decide how to use it in a game. The problem is that coaches either program the kids like robots, water down the skill training, don't know how to structure a training session, or leave it too unstructured. If a club or a coach can't get it right at the young ages, then yes, you are screwed what some would call the "elite" youth level because now you have to go back and spend the U10 season fixing all the bad habits developed at U9, and so forth.
Again, for everyone else not in the "elite" category, you can learn so much about a club and individual coaches by watching a team play a game or a scrimmage at the end of practice. You cannot hide an ineffective player development philosophy when the players take the field.
Here is the worst offender I've seen on Youtube: (if anyone has a few minutes to kill)
Joga Bonito Girls - they look very skilled at younger ages and certainly would impress any parent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4iaeT5xIdw&t=31s
But when they get to 11v11, all they can do is the same set of 1v1 moves and otherwise are completely mediocre.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE8a9Wvmtes
Contrast that to the way these girls play: they still use a variety of skills and take risks, but it is spontaeneous and not the same robotic moves over and over.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJh5Wf-cAQg
THIS is what great soccer looks like at U10 for girls (in my opinion). Good luck to any team that had to match up against them. As a coach, you can't teach a U10 team to properly defend against this brand of soccer even if you tried (it would be teaching zonal defense to 9 year olds). As you can probably tell, most of these girls did not learn these skills in mini-kickers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W9GpsnlaC8
(this team is also called joga bonito but it is not the same club as above).
This also includes regular fast-tracking to reserve or senior teams at 17-19 every year for a small handful of players. If you wait until 22 to play with professionals, you are already screwed at the higher levels of play. You've just lost several years worth of development.
So any players coming out of college are basically ruled out of becoming the next big thing for the national team - the top draft picks may be very, very good, but they will not be internationally elite at the highest level... (but they will be what we'd consider "MLS" level).
Think of it this way - take the top 5 draft picks in MLS this year.. we know that most of these players will be starters and getting significant minutes in a year or less.
Now, put those players at any major European club. Do they even make the "C" team? the Reserves for the "C" team? Not sure. They would probably be a fit for a top team in a lower division, or a lesser team in the top division.
Right now we're relying on handouts from other countries occasionally having a rare U.S. youth player with dual citizenship get slots in their academies, and then we are happy to then fast track them to the national team if we can. That's the best we can do. Or, hoping that a player like Andy Najar, who had been training with his uncle (a pro in Honduras) since he could walk will want to play for the US instead of their own country. (man, what an uproar it would have been if Freddy had opted to play for Ghana). DO NOT START A FREDDY ADU THREAD.
So yes, at the elite elite level, we are screwed for the time being.
But enough of beating a dead horse - I think we know that already.
For the 99.9999% of other players that will be signing up to play soccer at a local club, the club should provide some form of unstructured play for the kids on a regular basis.
Importing the 3rd world country player development model will not work in the US because of our culture. The answer is not having kids play street soccer 24/7 either.
I think the answer is to have better coaches that know how to manage their players' development environments, and also make sure the kids are getting healthy dose of foot skills, technical work (first touch, dribbling, passing, shooting/finishing), and provide coaching when it comes to decision-making (basic tactics). There are so many elements of the game that cannot be coached... they have to be "drawn out" of players by setting up the environment the right way.
At U9, this could mean taking time to train different elements within the 3v3, allowing heaps of goals to be scored in numbers up, numbers even, and numbers down situations. This builds the players' confidence, and if you teach foot skills at every practice, the players will start to become more daring, more confident, and take risks. You cannot coach risk-taking or creativity - you can show the players a move or a skill, but they have to decide how to use it in a game. The problem is that coaches either program the kids like robots, water down the skill training, don't know how to structure a training session, or leave it too unstructured. If a club or a coach can't get it right at the young ages, then yes, you are screwed what some would call the "elite" youth level because now you have to go back and spend the U10 season fixing all the bad habits developed at U9, and so forth.
Again, for everyone else not in the "elite" category, you can learn so much about a club and individual coaches by watching a team play a game or a scrimmage at the end of practice. You cannot hide an ineffective player development philosophy when the players take the field.
Here is the worst offender I've seen on Youtube: (if anyone has a few minutes to kill)
Joga Bonito Girls - they look very skilled at younger ages and certainly would impress any parent:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4iaeT5xIdw&t=31s
But when they get to 11v11, all they can do is the same set of 1v1 moves and otherwise are completely mediocre.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE8a9Wvmtes
Contrast that to the way these girls play: they still use a variety of skills and take risks, but it is spontaeneous and not the same robotic moves over and over.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJh5Wf-cAQg
THIS is what great soccer looks like at U10 for girls (in my opinion). Good luck to any team that had to match up against them. As a coach, you can't teach a U10 team to properly defend against this brand of soccer even if you tried (it would be teaching zonal defense to 9 year olds). As you can probably tell, most of these girls did not learn these skills in mini-kickers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W9GpsnlaC8
(this team is also called joga bonito but it is not the same club as above).
How many full-time professional youth academies that support U9-U19 does our country have (where school is secondary to soccer, not the other way around)?
How many soccer-only boarding schools where the club pays? The number of players doesn't matter without the infrastructure.
Compare that to the amount of youth and professional baseball infrastructure we have in the US... and how many fathers can teach their kids how to play baseball vs. how many can really teach their kids soccer...
There are a lot of kids playing youth basketball in china, but are they ever going to catch up to us? No. Why? Because its in the DNA of several generations already, passed down from grandfather to father to son on the driveway, the park, or the streets, not learned at a weekly skills clinic. Kids playing basketball non-stop form dawn till dusk nearly every day they can.
The most naturally talented players actually come from Africa - heck, most kids aren't even in school and they play soccer all day long with and against teenagers or grown men (with EXTREME substandard equipment). Like the soccer they play would be an instant lawsuit here in the US (no shoes, no shin guards, using a clump of rags stitched together to make something round that resembles a soccer ball, dangerous field conditions, boys playing against men, no risk management forms, no player cards, way too many players on one field if you could even call it that, NOTHING).
The harsher the playing environment/conditions, the more raw talent is produced. Pele, anyone? Didn't own soccer shoes, played barefoot, never had an actual coach until he was discovered (at 13? could be wrong), and had a soccer ball-like object that he would dribble everywhere he went..
The problem is that there are few people (relative to the tens of millions of kids playing soccer in Africa) who can coach them in decision-making and team / group play. For them, its soccer or nothing, so those that actually have a shot at making it to a higher level are playing as if their lives are on the line - because it is for many of them... a life of being an unskilled worker in Africa or getting the glory. Starting at age 11-12 when they are old enough to become aware of it. The very best among these millions of kids are plucked out every year and put into European youth academies... some of them make it, some don't.
Good luck to the typical American kid competing against others that literally have no alternative in life except to become a professional soccer player or have a life of manual labor...
Why are Cuban baseball players so good? same reason. No other way out. Many (not all of course) basketball and football players are as good as they are for the same reason - no alternative. Suburban soccer kids simply do not have the same survival-driven instinct even if they are "good / talented" players.
Yes, there are european kids that will have education alternatives if they don't make it, but again, these kids are getting spoon-fed soccer 7 days a week from the time they can barely walk at 2... by the time they are 7, they have been kicking a ball around for 5 years already in some form or another.... and we are starting with mini kickers classes once a week for 8 week sessions in the spring and fall. God forbid that we let an 8 year old play soccer more than 6 hours of organized soccer per week (2-3 practices + 1 game on the weekend)!!
How many soccer-only boarding schools where the club pays? The number of players doesn't matter without the infrastructure.
Compare that to the amount of youth and professional baseball infrastructure we have in the US... and how many fathers can teach their kids how to play baseball vs. how many can really teach their kids soccer...
There are a lot of kids playing youth basketball in china, but are they ever going to catch up to us? No. Why? Because its in the DNA of several generations already, passed down from grandfather to father to son on the driveway, the park, or the streets, not learned at a weekly skills clinic. Kids playing basketball non-stop form dawn till dusk nearly every day they can.
The most naturally talented players actually come from Africa - heck, most kids aren't even in school and they play soccer all day long with and against teenagers or grown men (with EXTREME substandard equipment). Like the soccer they play would be an instant lawsuit here in the US (no shoes, no shin guards, using a clump of rags stitched together to make something round that resembles a soccer ball, dangerous field conditions, boys playing against men, no risk management forms, no player cards, way too many players on one field if you could even call it that, NOTHING).
The harsher the playing environment/conditions, the more raw talent is produced. Pele, anyone? Didn't own soccer shoes, played barefoot, never had an actual coach until he was discovered (at 13? could be wrong), and had a soccer ball-like object that he would dribble everywhere he went..
The problem is that there are few people (relative to the tens of millions of kids playing soccer in Africa) who can coach them in decision-making and team / group play. For them, its soccer or nothing, so those that actually have a shot at making it to a higher level are playing as if their lives are on the line - because it is for many of them... a life of being an unskilled worker in Africa or getting the glory. Starting at age 11-12 when they are old enough to become aware of it. The very best among these millions of kids are plucked out every year and put into European youth academies... some of them make it, some don't.
Good luck to the typical American kid competing against others that literally have no alternative in life except to become a professional soccer player or have a life of manual labor...
Why are Cuban baseball players so good? same reason. No other way out. Many (not all of course) basketball and football players are as good as they are for the same reason - no alternative. Suburban soccer kids simply do not have the same survival-driven instinct even if they are "good / talented" players.
Yes, there are european kids that will have education alternatives if they don't make it, but again, these kids are getting spoon-fed soccer 7 days a week from the time they can barely walk at 2... by the time they are 7, they have been kicking a ball around for 5 years already in some form or another.... and we are starting with mini kickers classes once a week for 8 week sessions in the spring and fall. God forbid that we let an 8 year old play soccer more than 6 hours of organized soccer per week (2-3 practices + 1 game on the weekend)!!
.