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?

NOVASoccerCoach wrote: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.


I think you meant "Results Don't Mean Anything at U12" unless you play for Arlington, Mclean, BRYC, FCV, SYA, SYC, VDA, The Ladybugs, Coach Tim, Any team in Maryland , DC , or Virginia, or a really good sand soccer team. What're you trying to do? Bring the forum down?
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: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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

Anonymous wrote:I think the Title should be "Why Results Don't Mean Anything at U12...if your kid wants to play DA at U16 or play HS soccer or play college or pro and your kid is mature enough to understand this at 11-12 years old..." Because I don't give a crap what anyone says...results matter to a 11-12 year old. Kids need to win to stay involved. They are not going to stay with something that they feel they suck at. There are all different teams out there. If your team is losing, find a crappier team to scrimmage or play against to get that all important W! Don't get me wrong, I believe that we all learn more from losing than winning, but don't blanketly state that results don't matter.

NOVASoccerCoach wrote: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.

Anonymous wrote:

NOVASoccerCoach wrote: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.

who ever said U12 means anything anyway. what a joke