Anonymous wrote:

Any system that invests a lot of time early in concepts that are not age appropriate is poorly designed and likely to fail. With regard to the Alexandria approach, is this something they just made up or has some reputable third party validated the approach?

The possession-based approach is used by teams in professional soccer - for example, by Barcelona. Certainly not all teams. But, it is not something that Alexandria made up.

In terms of whether it is developmentally appropriate to teach this system, the system itself is not that complicated in theory. Any kids U9 and up should be able to grasp the general idea. However, it can be difficult to implement, because it involves making judgment calls (can I move up the pitch or do I need to pass backwards? Is this particular pass in the area near my goal too risky?). But, some of the way of learning this is making mistakes. When the kids are younger, they will often lose, especially against teams that kick it long.

And again, no matter how well you learn and implement it, if you are outmatched by much faster and more athletic opponents, it'll be difficult.

Any system that invests a lot of time early in concepts that are not age appropriate is poorly designed and likely to fail. With regard to the Alexandria approach, is this something they just made up or has some reputable third party validated the approach?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

I get your point here. I agree that Alexandria does seem to teach a little to much to a system - and that, as a consequence they become predictable which inhibits their results at older age groups, but that does not invalidate the fact that the kids develop good technical skills. And I doubt that they permanently drive creativity out of the kids.

I think the failure comes at trying to run before one can walk. I can teach a 10 year old how to go through the motions of algebra and get most of the questions correct; however, he won’t know any of the underlying concepts or be able to answer the question why. On top of that it will take a lot more effort and time just to have him look like he’s doing algebra. Now if I wait until the kid has developed in the basics of math, he’ll know both how and why he should use algebra. As an added bonus he will have spent a lot more time at the basics and will both be more proficient at those and will learn algebra more quickly. Any system that invests a lot of time early in concepts that are not age appropriate is poorly designed and likely to fail. With regard to the Alexandria approach, is this something they just made up or has some reputable third party validated the approach? Are the meh results at older ages a consequence spending too much time on non-age appropriate activities in the younger years instead of fully developing basic skills and concepts? I’ve always found the lack of understanding child development and eduction one of the more frustrating things about these ‘professional’ youth coaches. I think parents should not assume that because someone has given themselves a title that the person actually knows what they are doing. If your paying several thousand dollars a year to these clubs, ask questions and get fact driven answers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

I get your point here. I agree that Alexandria does seem to teach a little to much to a system - and that, as a consequence they become predictable which inhibits their results at older age groups, but that does not invalidate the fact that the kids develop good technical skills. And I doubt that they permanently drive creativity out of the kids.

Anonymous wrote:The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

The real question is at what age do the Alexandria players transition to full automatons. Does it take one or two years to strip them of creativity and joy for the game? I guess if you keep telling kids they are wrong if they don’t play the style we tell them, you can probably get it done in one season. If I remember my Star Trek, the borg was pretty efficient at this kind of thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

U9

Hilarious. On the boys side it's no contest under U13. Arlington's holdover staff from DA for top teams U12 on up has a really good reputation. I don't know if they're better than Alexandria coaches, but people who know soccer and who know both staffs think highly of both. Arlington would improve by giving this set of coaches control of the entire program on the boys side, including player selection and development at earlier ages.

You think? People that 'know' soccer. I guess our definitions of 'know soccer' are quite different.

. and with the huge futsal program they have I would have thought that Alexandria would be attracting players, not losing them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

U9

Hilarious. On the boys side it's no contest under U13. Arlington's holdover staff from DA for top teams U12 on up has a really good reputation. I don't know if they're better than Alexandria coaches, but people who know soccer and who know both staffs think highly of both. Arlington would improve by giving this set of coaches control of the entire program on the boys side, including player selection and development at earlier ages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?

U9

Anonymous wrote:I mean... where are all these alexandria players leaving to?

There's really only 2 viable options, SYC and Arlington nearby, where else is there to go... but neither seems like much of a draw...

Anonymous wrote:Ageism nice! Youngsters flexing like they know anything. Please let me entrust my kids to you.

Anonymous wrote:At what age does the Alexandria coaching drop off in Arlington's get so much better?