Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Soccer
Reply to "US soccer rumors of changing back age groups?"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Younger doesn't mean smaller Why is this so hard? This is common sense. Six month age groups [/quote] You haven't read the thread. Size, both large and small has been referred to in bio banding. Significantly larger kids play up and significantly smaller kids play down. Six month age groups work fine for elementary age kids but not really beyond but bio banding can help out bridge the gap for many players.[/quote] Absurd. I'm the who brought up six months age groups. Bio banding is ridiculous. Yet another ill conceived thought by US Soccer. Everyone wants to ot smart each other. Its very very simple. Six Month age groups. [/quote] You can have both but based on general percentiles in growth there is just not the need for the added complexity of two age groups per birth year beyond elementary school. Target the kids who fall outside of the norm and find the best fit for them. There is no silver bullet to the issue and there is little incentive or need to create more complexity when simpler solutions would suffice. The size difference based solely on 6 months dissipates after elementary school and size difference is based more on the genetic lottery than the predictability of a birthdate.[/quote] I gave you a clear example that there is. I will say it again. Look at any U17 or U16 ECNL or GA roster. Pick whatever club, state, team you want and look at the roster. The vast majority of the team will be comprised of the earlier graduation year which means they have the earlier birth months...hence they are older. So where did all the later birth months go? This is common sense. I challenge anyone to put forward a reason this is a bad idea? By the way, most girls stop growing vertically by 16. That does not mean they stop developing. And by the way, once you turn 16 in this country, your fate is typically sealed. Why? Six month age groups would double the amount of teams and thus double the participation. The more kids we have participating the better off we will be at developing talent. There will still by a pyramid to funnel players. The pyramid will just be bigger. Less kids will be funnelled out of the system and it will happen at a much later age. [/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics