Anonymous wrote:Best kids are usually Indians at early age

You are probably proud of your sense of humor. You probably cannot read social cues, but in reality, people around you smile politely and try to get away from you.

Anonymous wrote:Best kids are usually Indians at early age

Your comment is dumb either way. But curious if you mean wigwam Indians or Hindustan Indians.

Best kids are usually Indians at early age

Anonymous wrote:Messi was sent to train at FC Barcelona when he was like 5 or 6. Ajax soccer club in Holland identifiies talent starting around then as well.

Of course professionals are plucking these superstars out of the crowds at even at these young ages these kids are running circles around kids that might be twice their age.

If your kid is Bette than 10 or 11 year olds then you know.

I'm aware of cases like this, and see that even around here there are travel soccer teams for 7 year olds. I am glad to see this thread, as I had been wondering if I had already missed the boat for whatever potential my first grader may have had for soccer stardom (no real indication of any, to be fair). I have often wished for a list of when a kid really has to start a sport if they want to one day play seriously.

Anonymous wrote:The best kids are usually the bossiest at that age

Was just going to chime in with this. The "best" kids in K and 1st grade soccer were the ones who were bossy and either didn't read social cues or didn't care about social cues. Watching soccer games at that age was strange because the girls who dominated the games weren't big, weren't athletic, and weren't fast- they were just the ones who were willing to steal the ball from their teammates and run straight to the goal.

Over time, those girls have moved from one sport to another trying to find a good fit. I think one of them became a swimmer and is pretty decent and another is really into choir. The kids who have become really good are the ones who were fast but unwilling to get into the 1st grade death circles (those horrible little scrums that roam back and forth) or they focused a little too much about how they were passing and dribbling at the expense of keeping the ball.

The girls who have the patience to condition and drill and learn the game and already had natural speed and athleticism weren't obvious at that age.

Messi was sent to train at FC Barcelona when he was like 5 or 6. Ajax soccer club in Holland identifiies talent starting around then as well.

Of course professionals are plucking these superstars out of the crowds at even at these young ages these kids are running circles around kids that might be twice their age.

If your kid is Bette than 10 or 11 year olds then you know.

**players

The best plays in many sports early on are the shortest it’s kind of counter intuitive

Anonymous wrote:When kids are especially young (under 10 or so) it's very easy for the smaller children to excel, as they have less body to control. The larger children can struggle.

As to who really excels in the long term, it's almost always the large children that stay large, but come in to their own through and after puberty.

For better or worse, size matters.

I think it is kind of weird though, in basketball I was surprised my large daughter, was really good at learning some of the skills early. She was able to get shooting, passing and catching much faster. We're going through an awkward phase where all the little girls on her team that want to be guards don't have the skills to pass or catch a basketball and just want to dribble and shoot layups then run around hacking everyone to get the ball.

Swimming yeah some of the short girls get the technique diving and what not but are still slow.

Anonymous wrote:When kids are especially young (under 10 or so) it's very easy for the smaller children to excel, as they have less body to control. The larger children can struggle.

As to who really excels in the long term, it's almost always the large children that stay large, but come in to their own through and after puberty.

For better or worse, size matters.

This

When kids are especially young (under 10 or so) it's very easy for the smaller children to excel, as they have less body to control. The larger children can struggle.

As to who really excels in the long term, it's almost always the large children that stay large, but come in to their own through and after puberty.

For better or worse, size matters.

My daughter stood out when we placed her on her first rec team in 2nd grade. The coach noticed, as did other parents. She still stands out today as a 15 year old. Same sport.

The best kids are usually the bossiest at that age

Anonymous wrote:My 1st grade daughter really dominates her soccer games. There are usually about 16 kids playing and she just appears to be a bit faster, more coordinated, and more hungry to score than the other kids every time she plays. My husband and I are not and were not good at sports so I am surprised to see this. I guess what I am asking is - is being very good at this age just a product of the other kids not having figured the idea out yet?

Sign her up for EPL ASAP!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My 1st grade daughter really dominates her soccer games. There are usually about 16 kids playing and she just appears to be a bit faster, more coordinated, and more hungry to score than the other kids every time she plays. My husband and I are not and were not good at sports so I am surprised to see this. I guess what I am asking is - is being very good at this age just a product of the other kids not having figured the idea out yet?

It’s obvious you know nada about sports. Wait until after puberty

Correct, which is why I asked in the first place. I was not good at sports.

Ignore these a**holes who know everything and cannot contribute anything positive to a discussion. Sometimes I wonder how they are in real life because the image they project is not very flattering.

There’s at least one bitter troll here who responds to practically every thread with “it’s obvious you know nothing,” “it’s obvious your kid is only rec level”, “X sport is for losers”. It’s tedious and immature. Your question is perfectly legitimate.