Message
Anonymous wrote:NOVASoccerCoach wrote:Anonymous wrote:Hi coach,
How much physical training should a 14 years old boy be doing each week?
I took my son to two outside coaches for personal evaluation and both coaches said that the boy has the technical skill and soccer IQ to be good at the next level. Both coaches that the boy needs to work on his physical conditioning and get stronger.
The boy is working out with a personal trainer who is a former Olympian in decathlon 2 hours every day five times a week. On weekend, he works on soccer techniques with a private coach from South America. He is not playing soccer on any team this year. He is hoping to get on DA in 2020.
Is that too much training for a 14 years old boy?
TIA
My biggest concern would be that he is not on team this year. You can't replicate the game environment as there's pretty much no way you can work on decision making and speed of play with individual training. If there's a way for him to take out some of that individual training and bring in some actual participation in high-level games I'd say that would be 10x more beneficial.
Thank you coach.
He is currently in boarding school 800 miles away from my wife and I. On weekends, he gets to scrimmage and practice with the local D1 college soccer team because his private coach has a relationship with the school. Will that be enough for him in going for DA in 2020?
Thank you coach.
Depends on the DA he is trying out for....also if that coach he is with is working with him then at this point all you can do is trust that coach and trust your kid that they will work hard and he will have a good tryout for DA.
Anonymous wrote:Hi coach,
How much physical training should a 14 years old boy be doing each week?
I took my son to two outside coaches for personal evaluation and both coaches said that the boy has the technical skill and soccer IQ to be good at the next level. Both coaches that the boy needs to work on his physical conditioning and get stronger.
The boy is working out with a personal trainer who is a former Olympian in decathlon 2 hours every day five times a week. On weekend, he works on soccer techniques with a private coach from South America. He is not playing soccer on any team this year. He is hoping to get on DA in 2020.
Is that too much training for a 14 years old boy?
TIA
My biggest concern would be that he is not on team this year. You can't replicate the game environment as there's pretty much no way you can work on decision making and speed of play with individual training. If there's a way for him to take out some of that individual training and bring in some actual participation in high-level games I'd say that would be 10x more beneficial.
Anonymous wrote:Given the fact the vast overwhelming majority of DA/ECNL players will end their soccer career come university, do you feel it is reasonable, or better yet, in a child’s best interest to have clubs and coaches require a total commitment to the sport of 3/4 practices plus games a week, or would more balance be more developmentally appropriate?
If we are talking health: I'd hope that the DA/ECNL coaches understand load management and understand the recovery periods/intensity training each week. If we are talking just about the kid, if they like playing for an ECNL team, I'd imagine they enjoy having training 3-4 times a week. If they don't then maybe it's time to stop investing a lot $$$ and play for a lower team.
Anonymous wrote:About this hang up on physicality in American soccer....So I watched the Maradona HBO doc last night and it was the classic 'zero physical advantage so I had to find other ways'. His footwork and smarts unbelievable. Until the addictions. A lot of truly amazing players fall into this category, Messi, Cryuff (said he was slow so had to be faster in his brain), Iniesta, Pep, etc.
At the age of 16 Paul Scholes as he did not possess outstanding power, speed or athletic prowess which – unfortunately – is highly coveted by many misguided individuals involved at the grassroots level of the game. Without question, Scholes could have easily dropped out of the sport at a young age if the Manchester United academy staff were transfixed with short-term “success” and results. If they had been focusing on winning games, and therefore utilizing the capabilities of players who demonstrated greater speed and physicality, Paul Scholes would have been simply left on the bench. This is how Les Kershaw (the former Manchester United Academy Director) describes Paul Scholes and his development:
"He was a little one. He had asthma. No strength. No power. No athleticism. No endurance. 'You've got a bleeding dwarf,' I remember somebody said to Brian Kidd (Former youth-team coach). 'You will eat your words,' said Kidd. If Scholes had been at a lesser club, they would have got rid of him and he would probably not be in the game now. We stuck with Scholes, a wonderful technician.
He ended up one of the best midfielders of all time. Sir Alex Ferguson (former Manchester United manager): “He has a clever football brain. He’s two-footed, has a quick football brain and that marks him out as one of the best players in the game. He`s actually the cleverest midfield player we’ve ever had. To work with him has been an absolute pleasure.”
The US will never be like this because the end game is 18 college. There isn't time for kids to show later potential. The sport is done for them when they could just be coming into their own.
Agree with you 100% the issue is here in America there's not a soccer-infused culture. Kids in other countries start touching a ball at 1-2 years old, they play soccer outside on the streets. In America we play basketball. Imagine if all the basketball courts in the whole country were futsal cages. USA would produce the best soccer players in the world easily.
Anonymous wrote:Coach - My kid played last year on a club's 'B' team u15 and was clearly one of the strongest players on the team, led the team in scoring, hardly subbed off, etc. At tryouts, didn't get an offer to move to the 'A' team -- okay with that since the training at that club left a lot to be desired -- so switched to another club with stronger 'A' and 'B' teams. Is on the new club's 'B' team, lots of goals and assists, barely subs off. Any recommendations for how to get looks or consideration for higher level teams? It seems hard to 'break in' to established teams at u15/u16. Is it worth asking the 'B' team coach if he can get some looks with the 'A' team?
It would be a good ask for your kid to ask his coach. Don't ask as a parent ever. Ask your player to ask the coach and make sure your kid phrases it "Coach, I want to make the A team next year. What do I need to work on and can you help me set some goals that would help me give me a good chance next year? I'm willing to work hard at home and in training to achieve this."
A mature question like that will do very well with coach. Don't ever step in as a parent and ask. Now I'm not saying force your kid to ask coach, but have a discussion with your kid, make it very much player-guided and be like "Hey, if you want to make the A team, you have to make this happen, etc. we are not going to talk to coach etc etc but we will help you work at home if needed and you can ask us what you think are good ways to talk to your coach about it."
Anonymous wrote:NOVASoccerCoach wrote:Anonymous wrote:Coach - very interesting thread - thanks! Two questions:
You have made multiple references to getting kids evaluated by a "qualified" outsider. Who does this and how do we find them?
Also, I've heard that private coaches can help kids move to the next level. Where do we find these folks?
Basically when I talk about a "qualified" outsider, I just mean a freelance coach (Same as private coach) who offers individual training/analysis. You can find them simply by googling. The reason I refer to this is because sometimes the higher ups at clubs won't give a fair assessment of your player. Too much politics. If you have a good individual as a coach, your coach may (and should) give you an unbiased evaluation. Basically I see the only benefit of having a private coach is to have someone who will give unbiased opinions about your player.
Hi Coach, how do the higher ups give assessment to players for team placement? do they rely on player's current coach's recommendation? the tryouts at big clubs are just scrimmages where most coaches do not even pay lots of attention (chatting with each other etc). I guess a decision for most players have been made before the tryouts except you are new. Right?
Thanks.
You can evaluate a lot from scrimmages about a player. Having said that, it is unfair to evaluate a player on 2-3 days of tryout if they are not new. So the tryout typically also holds some ties to how that player performed during the course of the season as well. Every club's tryouts are different and really tryouts for each age group should be eval'd by coaches who have no knowledge of that age group. Having said that, players that do move up to the next team typically have some backing by the coach. That's why it's important never to be the parent who's a dick to your club coach. Harsh reality.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You wrote that "To evaluate if a team is truly a top team, you have to evaluate them from a technical and Soccer IQ standpoint."
How do you evaluate a player from a technical and soccer IQ standpoint? What are you looking for? For technical I would think there are measurable criteria like passes competed, goals, assists. What about soccer IQ?
DD U12 plays in the wings or in mid and makes most assists on her team (sometimes all in a game). What happens to such a player in U13? What position do they end up playing?
She'll continue to play those positions...11/7/10/8
Coach- if winning isn't that important and IQ, technique, etc should be the focus, why is it that most of your peers field 1st teams with "athletes". My son is was born late in the year and when we switched to calendar year, he became the youngest, shortest, sometimes slowest on the team. But he had the best technique and field vision on the team, what made him frustrated is that team would always be built with the fast kid with ZERO skill. He even said that there were at least 5-6 players on the 2nd team that would be better to pass to.
Back to my question, if the coaches can't figure this out what makes anyone think the parents can? Fast forward, he's a U15 now and is killing it with another club....he's just as tall and fast now.
It depends on the club. Some clubs fill their 1st team with very technical players regardless of size. Some clubs fill their 1st teams with the best athletes who are decently technical. Really, best case scenario you fill your 1st team with technical players who are pretty athletic/big. There are pros/cons to both of the scenarios I stated. Sometimes you don't want all the quick and big players to be scattered across because since they are fastest/biggest, they need to compete/play with others their own size. Your question is excellent and is something I could write 3+ paragraphs about the pros/cons. I'm glad your kid is doing great now, and as you stated, he is tall and fast now but also had the technical foundation when he was young. Kudos to you for being patient with the development of your kid!
Anonymous wrote:You wrote that "To evaluate if a team is truly a top team, you have to evaluate them from a technical and Soccer IQ standpoint."
How do you evaluate a player from a technical and soccer IQ standpoint? What are you looking for? For technical I would think there are measurable criteria like passes competed, goals, assists. What about soccer IQ?
DD U12 plays in the wings or in mid and makes most assists on her team (sometimes all in a game). What happens to such a player in U13? What position do they end up playing?
Depends on the player. For the most part, the same position will translate over. For technical standpoint, its things like good first touch into space, completing/receiving passes and able to dribble out of trouble if they need to. Soccer IQ takes a more wise eye to evaluate. It's how many times they make the right decision whether it be passing, dribbling etc. It could be do they look to play the ball forward when possible and do they know when they need to just play the supporting player back. Do they know when to dribble vs when to pass. Can they create chances for others from dribbling, etc.
Anonymous wrote:What would you say is the hardest adjustment kids have when they go from U12 to U13 on the big field? Who excels the most initially? Is it the bigger, slower athletic kids who have been ramming through everyone on the small field? Or the smaller, faster, technical kids that have been passing around everyone? I have a U12 DD on a team that has half the kids in either camp. I'm just curious what this will look like in 12 months.
I'd say fitness is probably a big factor when the switch happens. Not because it needs to be worked on more but players will struggle just coping with the bigger field. Even the most fit players will have to adjust since they can no longer be chasing up and down the field anymore until they physically adjust. They will struggle as well to use the width of the whole field as well. From an individual standpoint, anyone technical with decent athleticism will transition nicely. The players that will struggle are those that are small, slow and not very technical.
Anonymous wrote:In HS soccer, why are most kids playing defensive soccer? Why the kids staying behind to protect the goal all the time? Why are there two kids running to score a goal and having no one to pass the ball to? In most games I watched, there are players having a chat on the defense side, while two kids are trying to score a goal.
Because HS Soccer is a dumpster fire where they hire unqualified coaches. Not to mention obviously its all zonal so some high school players get all the top club players and some don't. That's why there are some HS teams who are insanely good and some that are horrible.
All-
NOVA Soccer Coach here. This forum is also filled with discussion about whose the best team and the evidence is always because "this team beat another". I see talk as early as U11/U12.
Here's why you should stop using strictly results:
1. Youth players are extremely inconsistent and will have bad games
Even pros have bad games. The difference is pros have less bad games and are more consistent.
2. Results just don't mean as much without a context of game performance
I've seen plenty of U12 matches where a team just wins because they have the better athletes, not because they are the more technical team. It's why some clubs drop off after certain age groups and some don't. To evaluate if a team is truly a top team, you have to evaluate them from a technical and Soccer IQ standpoint. Of course a 5-0 win with an excellent game performance is good. But if a team loses but they played well, missed a bunch of chances and lost to a team that just had a couple of quick players then you can't really say that team that won is really better than the other.
3. Everything changes at U13 and up
This is extremely important: The field gets bigger and you will see teams that took shortcuts in the 9v9 game just totally drop off in the 11v11 game. It's almost insane to see some of the teams that just got exposed at U13 for 11v11. Not to mention, kids start hitting their growth spurts and if they were technical to begin with at U12, now at U13 they are becoming faster, stronger, etc.
For example: I had a boys team at 9v9 who really struggled. They were very technical but would lose games just because in the 9v9 game if you have fast athletes you can get by with 2-3 pass sequences and send the striker through. When we went 11v11, it flip-flopped. The boys team dominated and the teams that would beat us, we would pummel them. This was a good amount of years ago.
NOVA Soccer Coach here. This forum is also filled with discussion about whose the best team and the evidence is always because "this team beat another". I see talk as early as U11/U12.
Here's why you should stop using strictly results:
1. Youth players are extremely inconsistent and will have bad games
Even pros have bad games. The difference is pros have less bad games and are more consistent.
2. Results just don't mean as much without a context of game performance
I've seen plenty of U12 matches where a team just wins because they have the better athletes, not because they are the more technical team. It's why some clubs drop off after certain age groups and some don't. To evaluate if a team is truly a top team, you have to evaluate them from a technical and Soccer IQ standpoint. Of course a 5-0 win with an excellent game performance is good. But if a team loses but they played well, missed a bunch of chances and lost to a team that just had a couple of quick players then you can't really say that team that won is really better than the other.
3. Everything changes at U13 and up
This is extremely important: The field gets bigger and you will see teams that took shortcuts in the 9v9 game just totally drop off in the 11v11 game. It's almost insane to see some of the teams that just got exposed at U13 for 11v11. Not to mention, kids start hitting their growth spurts and if they were technical to begin with at U12, now at U13 they are becoming faster, stronger, etc.
For example: I had a boys team at 9v9 who really struggled. They were very technical but would lose games just because in the 9v9 game if you have fast athletes you can get by with 2-3 pass sequences and send the striker through. When we went 11v11, it flip-flopped. The boys team dominated and the teams that would beat us, we would pummel them. This was a good amount of years ago.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
I have two kids playing soccer in college right now with scholarships, one in D1, and I can tell you no local coaches thought anything of either of them at U12--they were still playing on their club's B team with the better coach at that age. They didn't even get selected for district ODP at U12. I noticed a difference, and sure, maybe a different coach could have picked them out, but none of the ones who saw them thought they were anything special so I have my reservations about your theory. Maybe you are the one coach who would have seen their potential at that age.
As a parent with a couple kids playing soccer in college whose been through the whole youth soccer cycle--if your kid is playing soccer for a scholarship and not for the love of the game you're wasting their time and yours. If your reasons are financial put the thousands you spend on elite soccer each season into a college fund and you'll be much better off. I know multiple players who chose to play club soccer in college or dropped off the team after the first year because when they got there they realized they just didn't love it that much.
College soccer here is miserable. Terrible coaching with too many games crammed into too short of a season. At the end of the season half the team is nursing overuse injuries if they're lucky enough to escape actual injuries. If they got good coaching as a youth player and really understand the game and how to play it--college soccer will probably make them dumber not smarter. With a handful of exceptions it's pretty much high school soccer at a faster pace. They ones that realized they didn't want it that bad and chose to play club or do something else are the lucky ones. Please don't push your kids into that unless they are so passionate they can survive four years of that without losing their passion. The vast majority of seniors I have talked to don't want to ever touch a ball again after they graduate. Hopefully after some time away from the game they'll come back around to it, but if you're pushing your kid to play college soccer that's the reality of what you're pushing them into.
I believe you are referencing my theory, which I think you and the Andi Sullivan poster misunderstand. In no way am I claiming that the average coach can predict which U12 or U13 player will make it to college or the pros--even generously compensated pro scouts at the world's top clubs have a poor track record with this, which is in no way surprising given how many things have to line up for a kid to make it to and at those levels. What most coaches can do is assess which kids do not have the baseline athletic ability to play at a high level. Puberty does of course make a big difference in kids' athletic abilities, but it almost never will make a massive difference for a kid who has terrible balance and no coordination. Some kids are just not athletes no matter how much they may enjoy the game. This is very different from a coach saying your kid, or mine, or young Andi Sullivan is "nothing special". By that they could mean that they don't like the way the kid plays for any number of reasons, including that they prefer big fast players to small technical ones (or vice versa), that the kid doesn't fit the coach's system, or that other, flashier players catch their eye more for whatever reason. Every kid who has played in college or beyond has had a coach tell him or her that they think the kid is overrated (at least all the ones I know have had this happen to them).
I too have a kid playing D1, and while I wouldn't say all of college soccer is uniformly miserable, there are huge structural problems with the way it is set up. I absolutely support the idea of a 10 month season, and hope that the NCAA someday changes the rules to permit it.
If all you're saying is that some kids aren't great athletes and never will be... well duh. I have two kids who play soccer. One is on a travel team and a good general athlete. (Although he's tiny, and not a standout, and he has no desire to do all the extra work to be elite.) The other one... God bless her... she tries so hard. She's so focused and hard working at practice. But she simply has no inherent coordination or athletic ability. I could have told you at age 5 that she wouldn't be a college athlete (except for maybe a coxswain or something...) Literally anyone who watcher her play for any length of time could have said that. So I'm not sure I really get your point....
Thanks, I'm glad you understand! It really is quite simple when you think about it.
Anonymous wrote:
She is technical enough but she is not know for it. Heath for example is on another level. Here are the FIFA skills ratings between Morgan and Heath:
[url]https://www.fifaindex.com/player/226301/alex-morgan/fifa19/[/url]
https://www.fifaindex.com/player/226330/tobin-heath/
Lets stop the fantasy that a kid can pick up soccer at 12 and become Alex Morgan. She is an outlier and even with her athleticism she has several short comings.
Are you seriously relying on video game information for your argument...
They are all super technical at this level, you just don’t think so because you can’t judge the speed of play - it is very fast BTW. Relative speed is tough for people to grasp...
Whoever this is.....you did not just reference a video game come on......even so, just because someone doesn't do as many dribble moves in a game doesn't mean they aren't "technical"
Anonymous wrote:NOVASoccerCoach wrote:Ok, OP here. This has quickly gotten out of hand.
1. USWNT players are EXTREMELY TECHNICAL and freakishly athletic.
2. This thread was made because I hate seeing parents push their kids for their own vicarious aspirations. If your kid wants to play D1, ask them or even better, let them tell you. Let your kid enjoy soccer and see how far they want to go with it. Too many parents have these ECNL and D1 aspirations for their kid and their kid just wants to play!
That's pretty much it. It doesn't need to be anymore complicated than that. If you have any questions about development and your player, ask in the AMA thread I have.
I am a former female competitive soccer player with many top players in my family.
#2 is so on point. These parents worrying about college soccer in the young kid years are ridiculous. I was a player on a team #1 in the Nation. I was recognized by scouts, etc. I had played since K. By the time I was 16, I knew I did not want to play in college. I loved the sport, but was ready to move on to other things. I was a biochemistry major with a minor in partying and enjoying my social life. About 75% of players on my team went on to play in college. A few even in a different sport---the goalie basketball, etc.
IF you had asked me at U12, I would have said I was going to be the next female Pele or Cryuff. My family was all about soccer. But, interests change with age---even for kids that are 100% passionate.
As my brother who was a pro player says, they just need to 'love the ball'. As a parent, you can't force it. You can't get caught up in vicariously living through your kids or if you see your kid is a good player at 11-years old seeing flashes of National team and pro career in your eyes. It has to come 100% from the kid.
My biggest job as a sports parent is to shelter my kids from all of the hoopla and serious craziness in the sport (much more than when I was a kid) and keep them having fun. Keep them having fun did mean moving from a Club filled with a bunch of lunatics fighting over color team placements and jockeying for favors which trickled down to the atmosphere and player attitude and behavior. It also meant looking to them. My younger kid who is probably better than his older sibling and touted as a 'star' by coaches---we downplay this to him--wanted to give it up and play basketball at 11. He was just an ok basketball player and won't have the height. I said 'go for it' even though I was cringing inside because soccer was our family sport and he was much more talented in soccer than basketball. After a year or so, HE decided he wanted to re-commit to soccer and he was a whirlwind ever since with a renewed passion. I almost think it was a test for him to see what we would do if he gave up the sport and didn't follow his older sibling. Once he saw he was in charge and didn't feel pressured to please us it was like a weight was lifted off of his shoulders.
I always tell my kids I don't care if they play. They need to choose what they love and when it stops being fun they don't have to do it anymore. I see far too many kids hanging onto the sport and looking to the sidelines because they are trying to please their parents. The parents will tell you 'oh but the kid loves playing for 2 teams and going to practice every day of the week[', but many of them look dead in the eyes by age 13.
Thanks for your anecdote. That is exactly the type of sports parent everyone not only in this thread but in this country needs to be like. Especially when it comes to soccer. Keep up the fantastic work with your kids!
Anonymous wrote:My U12 daughter (10 - turns 11 at the end of December) has standout technical skills - great passing, trapping, equal ability (passing, shooting, etc.) with right and left feet. Can juggle +100 (alternating right/left). Every coach (her coach/other teams' coaches in the club) that have seen her play/practice exclaim - WOW - incredible soccer IQ - keep doing it, you will go far. BUT. (always a but, right?) she lacks aggression/ball hungry/ball hog-ness. And it seems to be getting worse each season. E.g., last game - she made this incredible trap of a goal kick at mid-field - stopped the booming high kick ball DEAD on her foot - and then left it there (practically ducked and bowed away) . . .I asked her - what happened? "Oh, I thought my (wing) buddy was going to get it." Of course that kid/wing buddy was running to (inappropriately) get the ball/take the ball away from her teammate - and my kid bows out and lets her friend take it. Anyway - bottom line, my kid big time lacks aggression. Will this come? Just keep fostering the technical skills in the meantime in the hope that it happens? She used to be a star, but as she ages she gets more and more dominated by the physical players (doesn't help that she is still quite small/petite/no growth spurt yet).
All this (internally) kills my husband who played D1 soccer. He wants her to play in college since he enjoyed (playing in college) so much. Bottom line - I think she fits in the "coaches know if someone has the xx to play in college" (from above) factor - because we have been told by so many different observers how good her skills/IQ are . . . but the aggression/desire is clearly not going to cut it now and in the future. Have folks seen their girls change in this respect?
First off, I believe you in that how talented she is. I think she is at the stage now where she just needs to be encouraged. So if you do have D1 aspirations for her, try your best to hide it and let her make her own path in the sport.
Second regarding aggression: "being aggressive" is a big favorite word among soccer parents. I'd say in your situation, you have to realize she is probably going up against much bigger opposition and remember that she's just an 11 year old kid. To her it's I'm small everyone else is so much bigger than me. It can be very intimidating. I'd wait until she hits her growth spurt. You will see from U12 - U13 -U14 those summers your kid will really start changing and hitting their growth spurts.