Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?

Bottom line, if you say yes, you're signing up for an inferior academy compared to the majority of other MLS academies. That is just the reality. As long as you accept that and make the best of it, that is all you can do. But being ignorant to the realities of DCU is just hurting you own son.

If your son is thriving at a world class professional academy, why do you care as much as you do what's happening to other people's sons at dcua?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?

Bottom line, if you say yes, you're signing up for an inferior academy compared to the majority of other MLS academies. That is just the reality. As long as you accept that and make the best of it, that is all you can do. But being ignorant to the realities of DCU is just hurting you own son.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?

Bottom line, if you say yes, you're signing up for an inferior academy compared to the majority of other MLS academies. That is just the reality. As long as you accept that and make the best of it, that is all you can do. But being ignorant to the realities of DCU is just hurting you own son.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?

Bottom line, if you say yes, you're signing up for an inferior academy compared to the majority of other MLS academies. That is just the reality. As long as you accept that and make the best of it, that is all you can do. But being ignorant to the realities of DCU is just hurting you own son.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?

Bottom line, if you say yes, you're signing up for an inferior academy compared to the majority of other MLS academies. That is just the reality. As long as you accept that and make the best of it, that is all you can do. But being ignorant to the realities of DCU is just hurting you own son.

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also my first day posting here. And I can tell you that one of the players on Arlington U19 that kicked the crap out of DCU this weekend was actually on DCU until this year. He could not longer pretend that DCU was making him a better player. Looks like he made a wise move.

U18 onwards is time to perform

Looking for youth development at U19 you missed the boat

In November Alexandria U19s beat Philly Union. So let's also say Philly Union is crap based on the lack of football knowledge and logic in this gossip forum

OK, I am fine with that. Most of the MLS academies are nothing but talent brokers. They recruit a bunch of already skilled players and hope to sell 1 out of 100 to legitimate teams overseas.

I tend to agree with this. Although there are a few academies that are decent developers of talent. Not great, but decent. DCU is absolutely not one of them.

Yes, they are all about winning.

That's why the stronger players in each age group train with and play with older age groups.
No development happening there.

Playing up does not equal development If you're not impacting the game playing up the same way you would be doing on age then playing up is much less beneficial. Barely hanging on playing up is a move backwards not forwards.

No development is happening at DCU, that is absolutely correct.

Then tell us the exact steps dcua should be doing with them for their development that's not being done.

Be very precise when laying it out.

Since training with older age groups and playing against older competition (which is a development philosophy in every top academy in the world) is a negative thing at dcua.

That's DCUs job not mine. Training in older ages is a great tool when used correctly. DCU just doesn't use that tool correctly. They often play kids up that are physically developed and who are also not absolutely dominating on age. Meaning there is a lot they can still learn playing on age about how to actually play. Instead they have them rely on their size to get by instead of their technical ability and smarts. It's a balance and that balance is usually not well maintained at DCU. The product of that is a mindset that physical dominance is the way to play. When that runs out, the players struggle. You start to see this at u15 and u16. And it carries to older ages. It's a hard balance to strike and it takes some real strategy and thinking around player management and progression. Something that I don't see at DCU. Of course playing up can be helpful the decision just needs to be made strategically along many dimensions not just you're big enough and fast enough to play up, go ahead.

So to be clear, you feel they lack player development because you think they pull kids up based on size and not skill? Your suggestion is that they keep players at their age level where they bulldoze smaller kids over and aren't challenged to improve or highlight their technical side? You are right, once they are pulled up, it is exposed who has technical skills vs. who is just a big kid. For the right kids, the move will force them to either improve their technical side and adapt. For the others, it reveals they aren't technically where they should be to play academy. I'm not sure that is a bad thing. In MLS soccer it is like everything else, those who have the natural abilities and can adapt go to the next level. There are a lot of smaller players who have ridiculous technical skills but struggle with the physical side because of their size. That eventually all works itself out which is why you hear less about them. The physical/muscular structure eventually finds itself on some kind of level playing ground even if there are different heights. The bigger players who dominate physically but aren't technically strong are exposed. That's the nature of the game no matter where you play.

No. My view is that they pull kids up based only on size and speed and then don't actually teach them how to be better. It is the teaching where the deficiency is.

I agree that kids need to be challenged physically too if they are physically more developed. But again, it needs to be managed the right way and strategically in the best interest of each kid. Seen so many kids running hard and trying to bulldoze older kids and not learn a damn thing about football in the process.

I know you're an already self acclaimed expert on youth development in soccer.
So it must just be a slight oversight on your part thinking that playing up is solely based on physical size.

Playing up isn't based solely on size and no one ever said that. DCU plays kids up based primarily on size. That was the point and the problem. And the point was made that there are many factors that go into the decision to play a kid up. It is a strategic decision based on the players best interest and their development path. Not just, you're big enough, go ahead and play up.

Wrong again. It is a strategic decision. It’s to determine if the bigger player is also a better player or just a big kid with average skill. The bigger player will either rise to the level or be exposed. And if they are exposed, without progression, then they may not belong at the academy level. That’s why you see so many big kids at u8-u12 dominating the field but once the other kids physically catch up they struggle. It’s not that they were the better player, and that’s why they stood out. It was just that they were more athletic at the time. Moving them up gives them a level playing field as far as size and then shows their skill level clearly. I’ve never seen DC drop a kid who was progressing. If they aren’t progressing, they shouldn’t be there. That’s just the reality of it.

I think we are saying similar things. My point is DCU moves kids up largely based on size. No one is giving an opinion on when DCU decides to kick a kid out of the program. Totally different conversation. But if a kid moves up and doesn't perform but performs on age, usually they stay.

Anyone with true knowledge of Professional club academies and youth development knows that physicality is and must be a consideration and factor in having a child play up in age.
It is negligence to place a kid in physical high risk danger by having them in a category where they are overly outmatched by size, speed and strength in a contact sport.

Don't think anyone is arguing with this ..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?

Irrelevant. Has nothing to do with whether DCU is a good academy.

Someone said all the kids with top tier talent are choosing options other than dcua.
So it's only irrelevant if none of those parents of exceptional kids are on this gossip column.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also my first day posting here. And I can tell you that one of the players on Arlington U19 that kicked the crap out of DCU this weekend was actually on DCU until this year. He could not longer pretend that DCU was making him a better player. Looks like he made a wise move.

U18 onwards is time to perform

Looking for youth development at U19 you missed the boat

In November Alexandria U19s beat Philly Union. So let's also say Philly Union is crap based on the lack of football knowledge and logic in this gossip forum

OK, I am fine with that. Most of the MLS academies are nothing but talent brokers. They recruit a bunch of already skilled players and hope to sell 1 out of 100 to legitimate teams overseas.

I tend to agree with this. Although there are a few academies that are decent developers of talent. Not great, but decent. DCU is absolutely not one of them.

Yes, they are all about winning.

That's why the stronger players in each age group train with and play with older age groups.
No development happening there.

Playing up does not equal development If you're not impacting the game playing up the same way you would be doing on age then playing up is much less beneficial. Barely hanging on playing up is a move backwards not forwards.

No development is happening at DCU, that is absolutely correct.

Then tell us the exact steps dcua should be doing with them for their development that's not being done.

Be very precise when laying it out.

Since training with older age groups and playing against older competition (which is a development philosophy in every top academy in the world) is a negative thing at dcua.

That's DCUs job not mine. Training in older ages is a great tool when used correctly. DCU just doesn't use that tool correctly. They often play kids up that are physically developed and who are also not absolutely dominating on age. Meaning there is a lot they can still learn playing on age about how to actually play. Instead they have them rely on their size to get by instead of their technical ability and smarts. It's a balance and that balance is usually not well maintained at DCU. The product of that is a mindset that physical dominance is the way to play. When that runs out, the players struggle. You start to see this at u15 and u16. And it carries to older ages. It's a hard balance to strike and it takes some real strategy and thinking around player management and progression. Something that I don't see at DCU. Of course playing up can be helpful the decision just needs to be made strategically along many dimensions not just you're big enough and fast enough to play up, go ahead.

So to be clear, you feel they lack player development because you think they pull kids up based on size and not skill? Your suggestion is that they keep players at their age level where they bulldoze smaller kids over and aren't challenged to improve or highlight their technical side? You are right, once they are pulled up, it is exposed who has technical skills vs. who is just a big kid. For the right kids, the move will force them to either improve their technical side and adapt. For the others, it reveals they aren't technically where they should be to play academy. I'm not sure that is a bad thing. In MLS soccer it is like everything else, those who have the natural abilities and can adapt go to the next level. There are a lot of smaller players who have ridiculous technical skills but struggle with the physical side because of their size. That eventually all works itself out which is why you hear less about them. The physical/muscular structure eventually finds itself on some kind of level playing ground even if there are different heights. The bigger players who dominate physically but aren't technically strong are exposed. That's the nature of the game no matter where you play.

No. My view is that they pull kids up based only on size and speed and then don't actually teach them how to be better. It is the teaching where the deficiency is.

I agree that kids need to be challenged physically too if they are physically more developed. But again, it needs to be managed the right way and strategically in the best interest of each kid. Seen so many kids running hard and trying to bulldoze older kids and not learn a damn thing about football in the process.

I know you're an already self acclaimed expert on youth development in soccer.
So it must just be a slight oversight on your part thinking that playing up is solely based on physical size.

Playing up isn't based solely on size and no one ever said that. DCU plays kids up based primarily on size. That was the point and the problem. And the point was made that there are many factors that go into the decision to play a kid up. It is a strategic decision based on the players best interest and their development path. Not just, you're big enough, go ahead and play up.

Wrong again. It is a strategic decision. It’s to determine if the bigger player is also a better player or just a big kid with average skill. The bigger player will either rise to the level or be exposed. And if they are exposed, without progression, then they may not belong at the academy level. That’s why you see so many big kids at u8-u12 dominating the field but once the other kids physically catch up they struggle. It’s not that they were the better player, and that’s why they stood out. It was just that they were more athletic at the time. Moving them up gives them a level playing field as far as size and then shows their skill level clearly. I’ve never seen DC drop a kid who was progressing. If they aren’t progressing, they shouldn’t be there. That’s just the reality of it.

I think we are saying similar things. My point is DCU moves kids up largely based on size. No one is giving an opinion on when DCU decides to kick a kid out of the program. Totally different conversation. But if a kid moves up and doesn't perform but performs on age, usually they stay.

Anyone with true knowledge of Professional club academies and youth development knows that physicality is and must be a consideration and factor in having a child play up in age.
It is negligence to place a kid in physical high risk danger by having them in a category where they are overly outmatched by size, speed and strength in a contact sport.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also my first day posting here. And I can tell you that one of the players on Arlington U19 that kicked the crap out of DCU this weekend was actually on DCU until this year. He could not longer pretend that DCU was making him a better player. Looks like he made a wise move.

U18 onwards is time to perform

Looking for youth development at U19 you missed the boat

In November Alexandria U19s beat Philly Union. So let's also say Philly Union is crap based on the lack of football knowledge and logic in this gossip forum

OK, I am fine with that. Most of the MLS academies are nothing but talent brokers. They recruit a bunch of already skilled players and hope to sell 1 out of 100 to legitimate teams overseas.

I tend to agree with this. Although there are a few academies that are decent developers of talent. Not great, but decent. DCU is absolutely not one of them.

Yes, they are all about winning.

That's why the stronger players in each age group train with and play with older age groups.
No development happening there.

Playing up does not equal development If you're not impacting the game playing up the same way you would be doing on age then playing up is much less beneficial. Barely hanging on playing up is a move backwards not forwards.

No development is happening at DCU, that is absolutely correct.

Then tell us the exact steps dcua should be doing with them for their development that's not being done.

Be very precise when laying it out.

Since training with older age groups and playing against older competition (which is a development philosophy in every top academy in the world) is a negative thing at dcua.

That's DCUs job not mine. Training in older ages is a great tool when used correctly. DCU just doesn't use that tool correctly. They often play kids up that are physically developed and who are also not absolutely dominating on age. Meaning there is a lot they can still learn playing on age about how to actually play. Instead they have them rely on their size to get by instead of their technical ability and smarts. It's a balance and that balance is usually not well maintained at DCU. The product of that is a mindset that physical dominance is the way to play. When that runs out, the players struggle. You start to see this at u15 and u16. And it carries to older ages. It's a hard balance to strike and it takes some real strategy and thinking around player management and progression. Something that I don't see at DCU. Of course playing up can be helpful the decision just needs to be made strategically along many dimensions not just you're big enough and fast enough to play up, go ahead.

So to be clear, you feel they lack player development because you think they pull kids up based on size and not skill? Your suggestion is that they keep players at their age level where they bulldoze smaller kids over and aren't challenged to improve or highlight their technical side? You are right, once they are pulled up, it is exposed who has technical skills vs. who is just a big kid. For the right kids, the move will force them to either improve their technical side and adapt. For the others, it reveals they aren't technically where they should be to play academy. I'm not sure that is a bad thing. In MLS soccer it is like everything else, those who have the natural abilities and can adapt go to the next level. There are a lot of smaller players who have ridiculous technical skills but struggle with the physical side because of their size. That eventually all works itself out which is why you hear less about them. The physical/muscular structure eventually finds itself on some kind of level playing ground even if there are different heights. The bigger players who dominate physically but aren't technically strong are exposed. That's the nature of the game no matter where you play.

No. My view is that they pull kids up based only on size and speed and then don't actually teach them how to be better. It is the teaching where the deficiency is.

I agree that kids need to be challenged physically too if they are physically more developed. But again, it needs to be managed the right way and strategically in the best interest of each kid. Seen so many kids running hard and trying to bulldoze older kids and not learn a damn thing about football in the process.

I know you're an already self acclaimed expert on youth development in soccer.
So it must just be a slight oversight on your part thinking that playing up is solely based on physical size.

Playing up isn't based solely on size and no one ever said that. DCU plays kids up based primarily on size. That was the point and the problem. And the point was made that there are many factors that go into the decision to play a kid up. It is a strategic decision based on the players best interest and their development path. Not just, you're big enough, go ahead and play up.

Wrong again. It is a strategic decision. It’s to determine if the bigger player is also a better player or just a big kid with average skill. The bigger player will either rise to the level or be exposed. And if they are exposed, without progression, then they may not belong at the academy level. That’s why you see so many big kids at u8-u12 dominating the field but once the other kids physically catch up they struggle. It’s not that they were the better player, and that’s why they stood out. It was just that they were more athletic at the time. Moving them up gives them a level playing field as far as size and then shows their skill level clearly. I’ve never seen DC drop a kid who was progressing. If they aren’t progressing, they shouldn’t be there. That’s just the reality of it.

I think we are saying similar things. My point is DCU moves kids up largely based on size. No one is giving an opinion on when DCU decides to kick a kid out of the program. Totally different conversation. But if a kid moves up and doesn't perform but performs on age, usually they stay.

Name me an academy in the world where kids don't get dropped?
Your "point" is not relevant, only facts are.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also my first day posting here. And I can tell you that one of the players on Arlington U19 that kicked the crap out of DCU this weekend was actually on DCU until this year. He could not longer pretend that DCU was making him a better player. Looks like he made a wise move.

U18 onwards is time to perform

Looking for youth development at U19 you missed the boat

In November Alexandria U19s beat Philly Union. So let's also say Philly Union is crap based on the lack of football knowledge and logic in this gossip forum

OK, I am fine with that. Most of the MLS academies are nothing but talent brokers. They recruit a bunch of already skilled players and hope to sell 1 out of 100 to legitimate teams overseas.

I tend to agree with this. Although there are a few academies that are decent developers of talent. Not great, but decent. DCU is absolutely not one of them.

Yes, they are all about winning.

That's why the stronger players in each age group train with and play with older age groups.
No development happening there.

Playing up does not equal development If you're not impacting the game playing up the same way you would be doing on age then playing up is much less beneficial. Barely hanging on playing up is a move backwards not forwards.

No development is happening at DCU, that is absolutely correct.

Then tell us the exact steps dcua should be doing with them for their development that's not being done.

Be very precise when laying it out.

Since training with older age groups and playing against older competition (which is a development philosophy in every top academy in the world) is a negative thing at dcua.

That's DCUs job not mine. Training in older ages is a great tool when used correctly. DCU just doesn't use that tool correctly. They often play kids up that are physically developed and who are also not absolutely dominating on age. Meaning there is a lot they can still learn playing on age about how to actually play. Instead they have them rely on their size to get by instead of their technical ability and smarts. It's a balance and that balance is usually not well maintained at DCU. The product of that is a mindset that physical dominance is the way to play. When that runs out, the players struggle. You start to see this at u15 and u16. And it carries to older ages. It's a hard balance to strike and it takes some real strategy and thinking around player management and progression. Something that I don't see at DCU. Of course playing up can be helpful the decision just needs to be made strategically along many dimensions not just you're big enough and fast enough to play up, go ahead.

So to be clear, you feel they lack player development because you think they pull kids up based on size and not skill? Your suggestion is that they keep players at their age level where they bulldoze smaller kids over and aren't challenged to improve or highlight their technical side? You are right, once they are pulled up, it is exposed who has technical skills vs. who is just a big kid. For the right kids, the move will force them to either improve their technical side and adapt. For the others, it reveals they aren't technically where they should be to play academy. I'm not sure that is a bad thing. In MLS soccer it is like everything else, those who have the natural abilities and can adapt go to the next level. There are a lot of smaller players who have ridiculous technical skills but struggle with the physical side because of their size. That eventually all works itself out which is why you hear less about them. The physical/muscular structure eventually finds itself on some kind of level playing ground even if there are different heights. The bigger players who dominate physically but aren't technically strong are exposed. That's the nature of the game no matter where you play.

No. My view is that they pull kids up based only on size and speed and then don't actually teach them how to be better. It is the teaching where the deficiency is.

I agree that kids need to be challenged physically too if they are physically more developed. But again, it needs to be managed the right way and strategically in the best interest of each kid. Seen so many kids running hard and trying to bulldoze older kids and not learn a damn thing about football in the process.

I know you're an already self acclaimed expert on youth development in soccer.
So it must just be a slight oversight on your part thinking that playing up is solely based on physical size.

Playing up isn't based solely on size and no one ever said that. DCU plays kids up based primarily on size. That was the point and the problem. And the point was made that there are many factors that go into the decision to play a kid up. It is a strategic decision based on the players best interest and their development path. Not just, you're big enough, go ahead and play up.

Wrong again. It is a strategic decision. It’s to determine if the bigger player is also a better player or just a big kid with average skill. The bigger player will either rise to the level or be exposed. And if they are exposed, without progression, then they may not belong at the academy level. That’s why you see so many big kids at u8-u12 dominating the field but once the other kids physically catch up they struggle. It’s not that they were the better player, and that’s why they stood out. It was just that they were more athletic at the time. Moving them up gives them a level playing field as far as size and then shows their skill level clearly. I’ve never seen DC drop a kid who was progressing. If they aren’t progressing, they shouldn’t be there. That’s just the reality of it.

I think we are saying similar things. My point is DCU moves kids up largely based on size. No one is giving an opinion on when DCU decides to kick a kid out of the program. Totally different conversation. But if a kid moves up and doesn't perform but performs on age, usually they stay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also my first day posting here. And I can tell you that one of the players on Arlington U19 that kicked the crap out of DCU this weekend was actually on DCU until this year. He could not longer pretend that DCU was making him a better player. Looks like he made a wise move.

U18 onwards is time to perform

Looking for youth development at U19 you missed the boat

In November Alexandria U19s beat Philly Union. So let's also say Philly Union is crap based on the lack of football knowledge and logic in this gossip forum

OK, I am fine with that. Most of the MLS academies are nothing but talent brokers. They recruit a bunch of already skilled players and hope to sell 1 out of 100 to legitimate teams overseas.

I tend to agree with this. Although there are a few academies that are decent developers of talent. Not great, but decent. DCU is absolutely not one of them.

Yes, they are all about winning.

That's why the stronger players in each age group train with and play with older age groups.
No development happening there.

Playing up does not equal development If you're not impacting the game playing up the same way you would be doing on age then playing up is much less beneficial. Barely hanging on playing up is a move backwards not forwards.

No development is happening at DCU, that is absolutely correct.

Then tell us the exact steps dcua should be doing with them for their development that's not being done.

Be very precise when laying it out.

Since training with older age groups and playing against older competition (which is a development philosophy in every top academy in the world) is a negative thing at dcua.

That's DCUs job not mine. Training in older ages is a great tool when used correctly. DCU just doesn't use that tool correctly. They often play kids up that are physically developed and who are also not absolutely dominating on age. Meaning there is a lot they can still learn playing on age about how to actually play. Instead they have them rely on their size to get by instead of their technical ability and smarts. It's a balance and that balance is usually not well maintained at DCU. The product of that is a mindset that physical dominance is the way to play. When that runs out, the players struggle. You start to see this at u15 and u16. And it carries to older ages. It's a hard balance to strike and it takes some real strategy and thinking around player management and progression. Something that I don't see at DCU. Of course playing up can be helpful the decision just needs to be made strategically along many dimensions not just you're big enough and fast enough to play up, go ahead.

So to be clear, you feel they lack player development because you think they pull kids up based on size and not skill? Your suggestion is that they keep players at their age level where they bulldoze smaller kids over and aren't challenged to improve or highlight their technical side? You are right, once they are pulled up, it is exposed who has technical skills vs. who is just a big kid. For the right kids, the move will force them to either improve their technical side and adapt. For the others, it reveals they aren't technically where they should be to play academy. I'm not sure that is a bad thing. In MLS soccer it is like everything else, those who have the natural abilities and can adapt go to the next level. There are a lot of smaller players who have ridiculous technical skills but struggle with the physical side because of their size. That eventually all works itself out which is why you hear less about them. The physical/muscular structure eventually finds itself on some kind of level playing ground even if there are different heights. The bigger players who dominate physically but aren't technically strong are exposed. That's the nature of the game no matter where you play.

No. My view is that they pull kids up based only on size and speed and then don't actually teach them how to be better. It is the teaching where the deficiency is.

I agree that kids need to be challenged physically too if they are physically more developed. But again, it needs to be managed the right way and strategically in the best interest of each kid. Seen so many kids running hard and trying to bulldoze older kids and not learn a damn thing about football in the process.

I know you're an already self acclaimed expert on youth development in soccer.
So it must just be a slight oversight on your part thinking that playing up is solely based on physical size.

Playing up isn't based solely on size and no one ever said that. DCU plays kids up based primarily on size. That was the point and the problem. And the point was made that there are many factors that go into the decision to play a kid up. It is a strategic decision based on the players best interest and their development path. Not just, you're big enough, go ahead and play up.

Wrong again. It is a strategic decision. It’s to determine if the bigger player is also a better player or just a big kid with average skill. The bigger player will either rise to the level or be exposed. And if they are exposed, without progression, then they may not belong at the academy level. That’s why you see so many big kids at u8-u12 dominating the field but once the other kids physically catch up they struggle. It’s not that they were the better player, and that’s why they stood out. It was just that they were more athletic at the time. Moving them up gives them a level playing field as far as size and then shows their skill level clearly. I’ve never seen DC drop a kid who was progressing. If they aren’t progressing, they shouldn’t be there. That’s just the reality of it.

I think we are saying similar things. My point is DCU moves kids up largely based on size. No one is giving an opinion on when DCU decides to kick a kid out of the program. Totally different conversation. But if a kid moves up and doesn't perform but performs on age, usually they stay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?

Irrelevant. Has nothing to do with whether DCU is a good academy.

Anonymous wrote:SURVEY:

If you live in the DMV and your DS is a strong player 12 to 15 years old and being recruited to the DC United Academy, will you let him go?

If you say No, why not and what better option would you take?