Last edited:
How’s the 2023-24 season going?
- Thread starter CharlieMurfee
- Start date
here is my rant.
Probably some good coaches scattered throughout. For example, in San Diego area Surf recruits, but does little to develop on the girls side. (probably the same throughout the other clubs). But, then again do any clubs really focus on development? I think a few coaches do...most don't and clubs do not.
The problem is that the parents place their daughters on Surf or SoCal Blues, because they believe that is the best team, and she must be on the best team in order to be good. That is a product of parents having never played the sport and not being able to identify bad/good coaching....and because Surf/Blues will pull in all the talent, good players at other clubs are left wihout any competition on their team. Now, those other players have to join that surf/blues team, have a huge gap in playing level on their team, or play a year up. If a club could keep some good players together and win, I have no doubt that parents would believe that team is now better than surf/blues and their daughter must play there.
Other clubs have their own issues. In general, I view the problem with soccer in the usa (not as a problem with pay to play like everyone complains, but play to win). too much emphasis on winning, because that is how you recruit kids. For example, playing kids in set positions when they are age 7...benching players at young age groups...etc..makes no sense to me. There are 13 year olds that have only played one position their whole life. Would be great to see a club create a development program and have all the coaches train the same concepts...and work on those concepts throughout the age groups...and focus on development instead of winning (can still play competitively..just a different focus). But that will never happen...because that is not how you recruit kids, clubs encourage coaches to play to win bc that brings in more kids, and parents/coaches believe they are good coaches if they win games.
No clubs here have any identity or system...its just scattered coaching styles and play to win.
SurfSupDude
SILVER
There are also 13 year olds who have only played one position in baseball, football, or basketball all their lives. Is that a problem? Or is soccer different in some way?
Not sure, I don't coach those sports.
But yes, baseball and soccer are very different.
SurfSupDude
SILVER
Basketball? Does someone need to play both center and point guard?
(American) Football? Does someone need to play both QB and kicker? Or…WR and RB? Or OL and DL?
To be sure, I understand what you are saying and broadly agree that’s it’s best/ideal for kids to play and learn multiple positions in soccer. But is it really awful if a kid absolutely loves GK and just wants to do that? Or winger? Or CB?
Does Messi really need to use both feet to make it?
I played baseball and almost made it Pro, no joke. Soccer is like baseball, meaning there are multiple spots for certain types of talent and size does not matter, like soccer, unless you're a GK. I played 2nd base, shortstop, catcher and pitcher. In soccer, certain players can play winger, striker, defense and mid, all 10 spots on the pitch. If you lock in one spot, then it's harder chance to find a spot. I also played basketball in college. It's not even close for the short guys. PG or SG. If your Magic, you can play all the positions.
Not saying a kid has to play multiple positions if they love GK, but it is generally going to help them to play other positions so they understand the game better…and work on their weaknesses. Generally the reason stuck in one position isn’t due to the child wanting to play center defense..but because that is what wins games today.
You are fixating on a minor issue.The question was in regards to development. My problem is playing to win at young ages…and the lack of a development program in the clubs.
I will say this. In basketball, every position shoots the ball and is part of the attack. In baseball, everyone hits. In soccer, especially in girls who get comfortable, you will see coaches put players in set positions to win where many rarely shoot. Many times it's the defenders with the best shooting potential too with their size and strength. They have just been polished and are now comfortable staying back. Skilled, athletic girls can play anywhere, but it takes hundreds of games to really get polished at a position even in youth.
I'm guilty myself of gearing my daughter for this and maybe it helps in the long run, but girls will get comfortable and avoid discomfort, so the atmosphere will keep some girls from wanting to expand their skills in other positions. This sucks and leaves it to the parents to get the kid whatever skills they need outside of team training, but game time iq is very important.
Matter of fact, I've seen several occasions where the girl getting offensive time gave up goals on defense. The defenders that kicked butt and kept their team in every game always stay back. In fairness though, great defenders are very hard to make and find, so there is some future relevance to learning how to defend. It's just frustrating to see weak finishing when your best shooters are staying back keeping the team in every game.
It takes a very good coach to build a team with quality skills where players can be moved around though. I have a coach like this now and I love it, but sometimes you don't win and it's frustrating. I will just say it's very good to move girls around and develop their iq and kudos to the teams that are willing to not always win to do so. I learned first hand that being on a great team does not guarantee you future spots anywhere. Being on a winning team, may get you exposure, but it won't guarantee a spot or play time anywhere. I have to check myself often to shutup and let her develop. Team success really doesn't mean much at this age.
Agree 100% Bells. Considering how many games these girls play, it's utterly insane to think that some girls have only played 1 or 2 as center forward or at center back or center mid, etc. I don't know the solution, because us parents are probably worse than the coaches though when it comes to winning.
I'm totally open to even playing in a different level for more options to play different positions with my kid, but she is very picky about where she plays. I know where she would develop best, but have to massage the option to gain her acceptance. She is starting to take the wheel now, but she will pick out of comfort rather than what's best for her future. With girls, the #1 trait I want to keep is ganas, so it is what it is I guess.
Just agree that maybe this could be different if youth soccer was different and better developed them for general skills/iq everywhere on the field. Then they would have comfort/ability different positions as they age.
Well Mak sure is leading the charge for the 2010's!!!
https://www.goal.com/en-us/lists/vi...-final-historic-nike-deal/bltddc1dd151ea74ed0
https://www.goal.com/en-us/lists/vi...-final-historic-nike-deal/bltddc1dd151ea74ed0
Fieldsofgold
SILVER
props to mak
Amazing. She's definitely the front runner. Can we say best soccer player in the 2010's ? or Best Striker in the age group?
Fieldsofgold
SILVER
Best striker
That’s a fair assessment. Best striker I’ve seen and then after her it’s the striker from SD Surf. Those are 2 of the best strikers I’ve seen so far in the age group.
Anything learned from the 2010 group after the Battle of the Southwest? The weather didn't really help things.
Not from Surf. They were without their 4 players who were at National camp. The still beat the Blues, which was impressive (although the game wasn’t anything special). Speaks to the depth of the team.
4 YNT players is fascinating and amazing. Surf is a club that knows how to develop players to become YNT players. Nice win Surfer Dad.
Thanks. Surf, for all of its shortcomings, is a great soccer club. A national team head coach once told me that you can’t control winning, so focus on competing for the trophy. In a sense, that is also true about players. If you have a program that is always competing for the trophy, it will attract the players, but without quality coaching, etc. you won’t keep them. I have been around a long time and it has irritated me, sometimes even infuriating me, but it has kept me, and there aren’t may soccer clubs that I think could do that. Ultimately it’s about bringing value to kids and their parents while being sustainable. Surf needs to make money to be sustainable which is probably the rub for most people, but I haven’t yet found a way around that. PS, this 2010 team is pretty amazing and not the norm. Several other players didn’t make the cut that were under consideration!
I have a curious question brother. How many of these 2010s are local to San Diego?
All of them, in fact the entire team is from SD county. They aren't yet old enough to drive, which is when they kind of come out of the woodwork to join the club. Although, there are a few crazy parents out there that will move to the area just for their kids to play at Surf. Crossing over from Southern Orange County is no big deal, but a few years ago, we had 4-5 girls on the U-17 National team and all but 1 were not from out of town, but out of state. That is crazy unless you are that good and need the competition and exposure trying to play at the highest level. Exposure is a big deal at that level, and also the politics unfortunately are also crazy.