Get ready folks

[sigmabody]

This is exactly why this country struggles to develop top players; we push out the younger, later-developing kids who could grow into stars, all because we assume the early-developing, bigger, faster kids will stay dominant forever.

There's a converse element to this also, though, which parents sometimes overlook: as kids mature, there will be obvious and somewhat durable genetic differences in height, size, strength, etc. While it's accurate that early-developing kids are often placed on higher-level teams and given a durable advantage because of that (as they get better training, competition, etc.), some of those kids might also just end up being bigger, faster, etc. (which can make up for some other deficiencies, in terms of overall effectiveness in play).

I presume the clubs know this also (explicitly or implicitly), and at least some of that "unfair" advancement of early developing kids is aimed to pre select kids who might be just bigger and faster generally, for better effective training. While this might disadvantage some late developing kids, it might also be selecting for the best overall potential, statistically (for a much more limited amount of access and resources available for soccer training). I'm not sure if that's accurate or not, but it seems like something to at least consider also.

 

[Scrub It Kook]

There's a converse element to this also, though, which parents sometimes overlook: as kids mature, there will be obvious and somewhat durable genetic differences in height, size, strength, etc. While it's accurate that early-developing kids are often placed on higher-level teams and given a durable advantage because of that (as they get better training, competition, etc.), some of those kids might also just end up being bigger, faster, etc. (which can make up for some other deficiencies, in terms of overall effectiveness in play).

I presume the clubs know this also (explicitly or implicitly), and at least some of that "unfair" advancement of early developing kids is aimed to pre select kids who might be just bigger and faster generally, for better effective training. While this might disadvantage some late developing kids, it might also be selecting for the best overall potential, statistically (for a much more limited amount of access and resources available for soccer training). I'm not sure if that's accurate or not, but it seems like something to at least consider also.

I agree, genetics matter.

 

[Carlsbad7]

I agree, genetics matter.

Parents buy into RAE and the promises clubs make with Development until they witness a true freak of nature thats better than their kid physically in every way and age doesnt even matter. If a player like this is smart and has a high level of dedication / focus its scary.

Unfortunately you dont run into these type of players unless your kid is playing at the highest levels. When it happens the reality check helps to comprehend what playing professionally actually entails. If youngers and players on B and C teams got a chance to play against players like this they wouldn't keep trying to eat the cheese that clubs throw out to sell the dream.

Im not saying its impossible for "regular" players to go all the way. Its just nice to understand what you'll be up against if this is what youre shooting for.

 

[Grace T.]

There's a converse element to this also, though, which parents sometimes overlook: as kids mature, there will be obvious and somewhat durable genetic differences in height, size, strength, etc. While it's accurate that early-developing kids are often placed on higher-level teams and given a durable advantage because of that (as they get better training, competition, etc.), some of those kids might also just end up being bigger, faster, etc. (which can make up for some other deficiencies, in terms of overall effectiveness in play).

I presume the clubs know this also (explicitly or implicitly), and at least some of that "unfair" advancement of early developing kids is aimed to pre select kids who might be just bigger and faster generally, for better effective training. While this might disadvantage some late developing kids, it might also be selecting for the best overall potential, statistically (for a much more limited amount of access and resources available for soccer training). I'm not sure if that's accurate or not, but it seems like something to at least consider also.

1. You'll have the same effect regardless of where you set the line. They'll be winners and they'll be losers.
2. Soccereconomics showed the effect varies based on sport. In one study, for example, hockey showed that the teen youth elite hockey players 60% of the elite players in Canada were within a quarter of the age line. By the NHL it had weakened to 40%. So in short, there's a huge (almost compared to the final quarter 10x advantage) in being close to the age line in ice hockey in the short term, which weakens to 3x v. the final quarter over time. Part of it is the Matthew Effect, but mostly it's just people in the back quarter get frustrated and drop out....those that survive in the back half are especially forged because they are the ones who persevered against huge disadvantages, and now the sample pool (elite hockey players v. NHL players) has shrunk.