New Cal South Minimum Competetive age requirement !
- Thread starter Primetime
- Start date
fantasyfutbol
SILVER
The word on the street: If you played competitive in 2016 and were issued a player card you are grandfathered in, and can be issued a player card for 2017.
Socal United
SILVER ELITE
The word today is that they are still having the U8 this year and will implement it next year. That said, everyone will just work around it. It has been around far too long to have it stop, it will just be done in a different fashion.
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
Cal South sent a correction...effective 2017-2018 season.
younothat
PREMIER
Those already exist some clubs run them as spring leagues.. Ie http://southbaypdl.com/
When my players where U8 many moons ago (7ys+) they played U9 because that was the competitive side of club, but there was already U8 program offered by the clubs that played local teams only and some in-house tournaments, CAL South was'nt involved for those , like Socal United says there will be workarounds. Some clubs already had 2010 tryouts, assigned coaches, took deposits so they don't want to lose that revenue stream.
In 97 and 98, Presidio had unofficial U8 circuits because not enough clubs put up U8 teams. All the U8 teams were grouped together, but they added a few U9s to get eight teams for a full schedule. My sons competed on a Poway Vaqueros U8 team in 98 in what Presidio called the "U9-Eights" circuit - and there were two under-7s on that team. There were at least two under-sevens that I knew of in the 97 Vaqueros team as well.
Two of those 4 under-sevens got D1 college scholarships, and one of those 2 played lower-division pro in Germany for a few years.
Two of those 4 under-sevens got D1 college scholarships, and one of those 2 played lower-division pro in Germany for a few years.
A good option for U8 team managers...
When my kid was U8 (seems like forever ago) we set up an unsanctioned mini league in the Fall with several other clubs, scheduled 12 games per team (2 games each team every other Sunday), rented fields and hired refs. All involved shared in the minimal expense and those clubs that could, took their turn hosting a weekend. It was a great way to go. Kids were playing and competing without the added pressure of competitive league play and we got to coordinate on locations, times, and weekends that worked for everyone involved. None of this 8am nonsense in the middle of nowhere to play a team who's parents and coaches think they're playing in a WC final. Took a little bit of legwork, but the experience was great for the kids and parents.
Also, definitely recommend participation in a short-sided Spring league like...http://southbaypdl.com/.
When my kid was U8 (seems like forever ago) we set up an unsanctioned mini league in the Fall with several other clubs, scheduled 12 games per team (2 games each team every other Sunday), rented fields and hired refs. All involved shared in the minimal expense and those clubs that could, took their turn hosting a weekend. It was a great way to go. Kids were playing and competing without the added pressure of competitive league play and we got to coordinate on locations, times, and weekends that worked for everyone involved. None of this 8am nonsense in the middle of nowhere to play a team who's parents and coaches think they're playing in a WC final. Took a little bit of legwork, but the experience was great for the kids and parents.
Also, definitely recommend participation in a short-sided Spring league like...http://southbaypdl.com/.
Socal United
SILVER ELITE
That is what is done in San Diego. A U7 league has been set up for years amongst the clubs. The coaches send out an email and a league is put together and they play. They play on the same fields, wear the same uniforms, etc. They then put a little mini tournament together at the end of the season. That will now just be the case for U7 and U8 in the future, clubs are not going to stop having those teams.
Cal South could try to put their foot down with sanctions and warnings about insurance. I wonder what brought this on - another threat of a lawsuit?
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
Kind of crazy that Cal South made this mandate. Girls not so much, but boys participation at U8 level is significant. Some 30+ U8 teams in SCDSL alone.
mahrez
SILVER ELITE
You can almost bet this has something to do with liability, insurance, courts, and or $. Not making enough to cover those costs...
The State Associations are under scrutiny and their ultimate survival depends upon compliance with the USSF initiatives. There is a massive erosion and adjustment of power taking place, which will continue until the US reforms itself into a more European model. The recent player initiatives expressly call for a de-emphasis on "competitive" play for the U-Littles. The USSF believes 6 and 7 year olds should play for fun and not trophies. They (and their parents ... but mostly the little kids) should be spared BS (and there is alot) that surrounds competitive youth soccer.
This action is consistent with both the USSF and US Youth Soccer guidance. For example, the following is from the US Youth Soccer Player Development Guide:
At age 5, children start to compare themselves to other children. Even so they still don’t understand competition. They tend to play when they are having fun or winning, but lose interest when the opposite occurs. Even at 8 years old, children may not be physically or emotionally ready or have the cognitive skills to understand and meet the expectations that parents and coaches have of them. They may not have the social skills to understand turn-taking or be emotionally ready to handle criticism. The benefits soccer offers can be lost if results-oriented competition is emphasized too soon. (source: https://www.usyouthsoccer.org/assets/1/3/US_Youth_Soccer_Player_Development_Model.pdf)
The USSF takes a more direct approach and expressly states on Slide 16:
4v4 (U7 and under) that
* results and standing should not be recorded
* Travel should be limited
* Players should not be participating in events (tournaments, showcases, festivals, etc.)
See https://www.ussoccer.com/coaching-education/resources/us-soccer-player-development-initiatives-2016
Its not the threat of lawsuits, rather, compliance with the prevailing thoughts of the USSF and US Youth Soccer.
I personally see the wisdom keeping development at these ages free from those things that interfere with keeping the game fun.
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
The USSF mandate is against competitive play at U8 and younger ... not U7 and younger. To the extent I wrote U7 in my previous post ... that was a mistake. Cal South is consistent with US Youth Soccer and the USSF.
U6-U8 are all supposed to be 4v4 in 2017. There is no "State Tournament" for U8's and younger ... it starts at U9 when the players go to 7v7 and get Referees, GKs, penalty kicks and offside. U9 and up is when the FIFA rules really start to come into play, so it makes sense. If there are no referees at U8 and below, how does one ensure a fair/impartial competition?
Here is the USSF Standards chart:
https://usys-assets.ae-admin.com/assets/1/15/Standards Chart SSG.pdf
https://usys-assets.ae-admin.com/assets/1/15/Standards Chart SSG.pdf
Surfref
PREMIER
About time. I always thought that 6/7 year olds were too young to be playing club soccer. My DD did not start rec soccer until U10 and club until U11, and she is now playing college soccer. Players do not need to start club soccer at 6-8 years old. Good coaches and trainers can get a kid that starts at 10 years old into college soccer.
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
For famliies that have two or more kids playing soccer, which scenario is more common?
I'm actually fine with the new mandate. It's not a big deal if there are no competitve tournaments for U8's...provided that they do get to play some games/scrimmages against area teams on a semi-regular basis.
- 1st child starts club U10 (or later) and 2nd child(ren) starts club at an earlier age (since they saw value in U8/U9 club)
- 1st child starts club U8 and 2nd child(ren) starts club at a later age (since they saw no value in U8/U9 club)
I'm actually fine with the new mandate. It's not a big deal if there are no competitve tournaments for U8's...provided that they do get to play some games/scrimmages against area teams on a semi-regular basis.
TheyBothPlay
BRONZE
Scenario 3
1st child starts Club U10 or later and you start child 2 at an earlier age all the while shaking your head that you're actually doing it.
You do it not because you necessarily see huge value (although there's no denying good technical training at those ages is pretty neat and Child 2 is way ahead of where child 1 was at that age) or want the extra time commitment for a 7 or 8 year old. You do it because child 2 falls in love with the game, wants to be like big brother or sister, wants to play much more than rec offers, gets much better with all the extra exposure/working in at practices and skills trainings for Child 1, and just hanging out generally with child 1.
Ideally you'd just piece together something higher than level for young Child 2 without the rigid commitment and increased expense through a combination of Mexican league, futsal, guesting with their friends who make the Club plunge, AYSO all stars, clinics, etc., but instead you end up letting Child 2 play club at a younger age than Child 1 even started playing rec.
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
I would also make the argument that if I had to pick two years between the ages of 6 to 18 where club soccer is most beneficial I would pick something in the 7 - 10 age range. The development at those ages establishes a solid foundation which helps their future developmental trajectory. If anything, I would think the oldest age groups are the least worthwhile for club (U17/U18) if the player is not realistically going to play college soccer..and they can just play high school soccer, right?