Understanding the "why"
- Thread starter full90
- Start date
From what I’ve seen of DA, the coaching is good but the talent identification sucks ass. The coaches have their favorites, or players who have been in the organization for a long time that they are loyal to, and it blinds their judgment. At some point they realize the kid is not going to work out but in the meantime the wrong player has taken playing time away from better talent.
Depends on the club. I know at least 2 are like what you've stated and at least 3 that looks at the whole process as an open source for new talent each year right off the top of my head.
Those that have more open look are at the older ages, since there are limited number of clubs at U16+ and they feel they should attract the best. Cannot comment one way or another for younger ages....
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
Some fair points regarding athleticism and soccer IQ.
One thing I would add (which might seem obvious) is that slower 12 year olds tend to remain that way and the ‘fast’ young kids generally remain the fastest. You can make incremental improvements through training but speed and athleticism is largely genetic.
There was a large scale study at pro academies (in Holland I believe) regarding speed and the fastest/slowest kids. Regardless of developmental age or growth spurts, the fast kids at young ages remained the fast kids when they were older. Same goes for the slower kids. Nothing much changes in that regard with age.
Soccer IQ and decision making should always be the absolute priority for every practice though IMO. The athletic side largely takes care of itself so we need to help nurture better decision makers and players who are self-sufficient learners, self-motivated and creative enough to compete with the top talent around the world.
One thing I would add (which might seem obvious) is that slower 12 year olds tend to remain that way and the ‘fast’ young kids generally remain the fastest. You can make incremental improvements through training but speed and athleticism is largely genetic.
There was a large scale study at pro academies (in Holland I believe) regarding speed and the fastest/slowest kids. Regardless of developmental age or growth spurts, the fast kids at young ages remained the fast kids when they were older. Same goes for the slower kids. Nothing much changes in that regard with age.
Soccer IQ and decision making should always be the absolute priority for every practice though IMO. The athletic side largely takes care of itself so we need to help nurture better decision makers and players who are self-sufficient learners, self-motivated and creative enough to compete with the top talent around the world.
I believe the research to date indicates that what you wrote for boys is generally true. Puberty for boys tends to simply enhance athletic performance, shoulders widen and muscle mass increases. The rich get richer.
Girls are not-so-lucky. Puberty causes the female skeleton to go through some negative changes from an athletic performance standpoint, the pelvis becomes wider, total bone density peaks, and the center of mass decreases (i.e. weight goes to hips). The wider pelvis causes two problems (again, athletically speaking). Speed declines because the hips widen, which also causes the legs/knees to rotate inward. The fact that females have looser joints and the increased pressure on the ACL due to the rotation of the legs causes by the widening of the pelvis puts post-puberty female athletes are greater risk of non-contact knee injuries.
So yes for boys, but no for girls.
The elite generally make it through, but about half are negatively impacted where performance drops. Read this:
https://sportsday.dallasnews.com/hi...0513-Track-skills-often-decline-as-girls-6083
Great article and pretty much accords with what I’ve seen. In my observations, the “elite” girl is one who either 1) is naturally low on female hormones and was always very slim hipped and slim breasted as a girl and after puberty, and/or 2) was exposed to a lot of male hormones in the womb during mom’s pregnancy which can happen for a number of reasons (male fraternal twin, mom has endometriosis and produces excess androgens), so she develops more like a man.
Otherwise the girls generally get worse as they mature. If you read books by gymnasts and dancers, coaches try to delay puberty or lessen its effects by focusing on the girls weight, which has the effect of making the girls starve themselves.
I know this first hand, My kids evaluation was praised on IQ, speed, decision making and technical abilities. BUT his coach actually referenced his size as part of not having more playing time... TWICE! Just goes to show where the development is.
While it won't happen at the regular club level, US Soccer is exploring solutions to this problem. There is no dispute that we are leaving some kids behind or the smaller kids are not getting a fair shake. Your experience is not unique. One response is the "bio-banding" experiment that attempts to place players into training and gaming teams based on their biological age. Thus, an older smaller kid is playing with athletes of his same relative size.
My kid is on the opposite side of the spectrum. A 2003 goalkeeper that is 6'2" (14 year old (U15s-->U16s)) that is now playing on a Flight 1 2001 team (2 years up) (16/17 year olds). He has the opportunity to play up, which will aid his development, whereas, smaller (but older) kids don't have that opportunity to play down.