|
Post by ilove8amgames on Oct 28, 2015 10:41:33 GMT -5
Most elite '04s are already playing 11v11.
If an '04 is not ready to play 11v11 essentially a year from now, then perhaps... just perhaps, they should not be in an Academy program. There are plenty of great REC programs that give you all the benefits sportsmanship, team mates, etc. Why is playing REC such a dirty thing/word for some? It shouldn't be.
It's ridiculous to try and force what is supposed to be an elite program, i.e. Academy soccer, into playing down to the least common denominator.
|
|
|
Post by letissier on Oct 28, 2015 10:55:15 GMT -5
The regulations for the UEFA 2015/16 U17 championship state that players must be born on or after Jan 1, 1999.
Qualification started in September 2015 and the finals take place in May 2016.
The stated aim is to be consistent internationally. To do so, needs the new age chart.
It may be slightly confusing as the U17 FIFA world cup is now being held in Chile. The teams in this competition were the U17 teams that qualified through their regional competitions in the 2014/15 season. Which is why to be playing now in the U17 FIFA world cup you must be born on or after Jan 1 1998. They are just holding this competition after their season is over.
But to be consistent internationally, our U17's for the 2016/17 season need to be born on or after Jan 1, 2000.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Oct 28, 2015 11:07:49 GMT -5
I have voiced my opinion on this subject a few times; not a fan of some of the changes. Larger-sided games, shorter games, breaking up of long standing teams, overall reduction in youth soccer participation, etc. Oh and don't forget the kooky 'three 15 minute periods' for U8 games, gotta love that one.
No, the bigger issue here is one of message management. If you have to announce something that you know is going to be construed as negative by your target audience (think layoffs at a business or higher taxes from government), for the love of Mike, get your story straight up front! Nothing can be worse than changing your mind multiple times, or not answering questions quickly or general stonewalling. Politicians that flip-flop this bad are voted out of office. Companies that announce layoffs but don't say who it will be, lose valuable employees who jump ship before the axe drops on them.
Making a terrible decision is one thing. But screwing up the messaging this bad is just (fill in your choice of adjectives here). I was going to say amateurish but I think that is too generous.
|
|
|
Post by soccerdadinga on Oct 28, 2015 11:12:58 GMT -5
There's a lot of stuff here to reply to (a good thing), but a couple of thoughts:
1. For small clubs, you will see teams disappear in Select, particularly on the Girls side. People drop out of soccer come Select time and there are clubs that may have 1 team in an age group. And if the younger players play up, the team will drop massively in competitiveness, and the older players cannot play down. Teams blow up when a couple of players leave for other clubs and this is a mandated blowing up. You can easily see how a team that's got half older and half younger players, with no younger or older teams between them will go away. (The younger players, in theory could just play up, but it will be much less competitive.) That would happen how ever you did this, but that's there.
Playing up, at that same club, may simply not be an option. The older -- now younger Girls, or Boys -- could want to remain competitive and the influx of really young players could hurt.
2. Playing 11v11 at an older age is exactly what doesn't work for US Soccer because there is no current curriculum, at home or otherwise, to improve ball handling skills. If US Soccer really wanted to improve competitiveness, they would embark on a national campaign to put Futsal in public elementary and middle schools and get current youth soccer players to juggle the ball at home or kick it against the wall. Even freestyle competitions. We have to have our kids get more touches on the ball, in creative ways, so that they can control the ball in large spaces. It makes no sense to not focus on that. Younger kids, particularly on the Girls side, struggle to get the ball to the goal on corner kicks and that's at some U13 divisions. Imagine younger kids trying that.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Oct 28, 2015 11:17:33 GMT -5
Most elite '04s are already playing 11v11. If an '04 is not ready to play 11v11 essentially a year from now, then perhaps... just perhaps, they should not be in an Academy program. There are plenty of great REC programs that give you all the benefits sportsmanship, team mates, etc. Why is playing REC such a dirty thing/word for some? It shouldn't be. It's ridiculous to try and force what is supposed to be an elite program, i.e. Academy soccer, into playing down to the least common denominator. yes most older jan - july 04s are currently playing 11v11. Just because they are playing 11v11 I wouldn't classify them as elite, nor would I classify all younger players playing 11v11 as elite. very few aug-dec 04s would be playing 11v11 unless they are currently playups etc. the truth is academy soccer is not an elite program. It is for most clubs you pay you can play and as long as clubs have the coaching/field space to accommodate another team, another team is added.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Oct 28, 2015 11:26:04 GMT -5
It's ridiculous to try and force what is supposed to be an elite program, i.e. Academy soccer, into playing down to the least common denominator. the truth is academy soccer is not an elite program. It is for most clubs you pay you can play and as long as clubs have the coaching/field space to accommodate another team, another team is added. I was going to say the same thing. Academy is a developmental league. Select you can get away with calling it 'elite', maybe.
Too much focus on elite athletes in youth sports to begin with. One thing I love about soccer is it is just about the only sport I know that has a truly recreational league all the way through high school. There's no rec football or baseball or anything like that. Just try to get field space at a county park for a rec sports league. Ha! Permit use only. Super competitive leagues only from U6 to 8th grade.
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Oct 28, 2015 11:36:24 GMT -5
I just think US Soccer is going to have shift up their standards chart by one year to accommodate their mandates, ie, u14 is the first age group kids play 11v11 The problem is that does not work for the International standard. U13s are playing full sided. Yeah but the most competitive academys in Europe and South America are ignoring that and playing 9V9 through U14, so U15s is when they go to 11v11. Now should we follow a Standard because some board said it was best? or a Standard set by youth academies that produce the best players in the world?
|
|
|
Post by jash on Oct 28, 2015 12:49:28 GMT -5
Most elite '04s are already playing 11v11. If an '04 is not ready to play 11v11 essentially a year from now, then perhaps... just perhaps, they should not be in an Academy program. There are plenty of great REC programs that give you all the benefits sportsmanship, team mates, etc. Why is playing REC such a dirty thing/word for some? It shouldn't be. It's ridiculous to try and force what is supposed to be an elite program, i.e. Academy soccer, into playing down to the least common denominator. Yeah, this is a lot of what I hate about the way soccer runs in the USA, and the way parents and coaches treat people. Academy is for players who are serious about the game to play like-minded players and get additional professional coaching. Period. You want to decide which players are elite by U11? Perhaps you haven't been through it yet, but trust me when I say that some of the players which the "elite" parents dismiss at U11 will come back strong and be much MUCH better than the "elite" U11s. I've seen it happen many times over.
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Oct 29, 2015 23:30:01 GMT -5
Most elite '04s are already playing 11v11. If an '04 is not ready to play 11v11 essentially a year from now, then perhaps... just perhaps, they should not be in an Academy program. There are plenty of great REC programs that give you all the benefits sportsmanship, team mates, etc. Why is playing REC such a dirty thing/word for some? It shouldn't be. It's ridiculous to try and force what is supposed to be an elite program, i.e. Academy soccer, into playing down to the least common denominator. Academy is for players who are serious about the game to play like-minded players and get additional professional coaching. Period. You're completely wrong there. Academy is about development, all players no matter how serious they are. You take the good, the bad, the annoying and the goofballs. They're 8 to 12 year olds so I would hope none of them are serious, they play to have fun first, and learn a game that we all love.
|
|
|
Post by soccerfutbolfam on Oct 30, 2015 6:49:33 GMT -5
Academy is for players who are serious about the game to play like-minded players and get additional professional coaching. Period. You're completely wrong there. Academy is about development, all players no matter how serious they are. You take the good, the bad, the annoying and the goofballs. They're 8 to 12 year olds so I would hope none of them are serious, they play to have fun first, and learn a game that we all love. I completely agree with you Jump.... And the parents pushing the kids to be so incredibly serious and win win win win win FIRST are one of the main reasons 7 out of 10 of these kids QUIT playing altogether when they turn 13/14. It drives me NUTS seeing parents and coaches screaming at these kids like their game is a world cup. I absolutely LOVE it when kids get on the field, they try something new - they fail, but they keep trying because their coach and parents are encouraging them. Good grief, they're KIDS. Let them try. Encourage them....even your opponents, but stop the 'gotta play like a pro' mentality. If a kid isn't a little serious, they won't put up with the increase time/practice days anyway....and rec is great for some kids who want more time to do other things. I have seen some amazing kids on rec teams who could give kids on top teams a run for their money. They keep playing because they love the game. Keep pushing these kids who are doing extra and they'll walk.... and not over to a rec team, but off the field altogether.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Oct 30, 2015 8:32:12 GMT -5
I think we only disagree in our definition of what serious means. You have to be more committed to the game to stick with the 2-3 practices/week, longer practices, more intense practices, multiple games/week, travel to games, and tournaments.
Isn't that a player who is more serious about the game than a rec player? I'm not judging the rec player, but other than terminology choice, it has to be someone more serious.
|
|
|
Post by soccerfutbolfam on Oct 30, 2015 13:10:04 GMT -5
I think we only disagree in our definition of what serious means. You have to be more committed to the game to stick with the 2-3 practices/week, longer practices, more intense practices, multiple games/week, travel to games, and tournaments. Isn't that a player who is more serious about the game than a rec player? I'm not judging the rec player, but other than terminology choice, it has to be someone more serious. Any kid can be serious, but it takes more dedication to go from rec to Academy. It's not just on the kid, but the family, too. However, any parent or coach standing on the sideline and screaming at kids - ought to be ashamed and absolutely NOT surprised when that kid says they don't want to return.
|
|
|
Post by spectator on Oct 30, 2015 14:12:05 GMT -5
This
needs to be put on a sign and hung over every single field in Georgia - regardless of the sport. Pushing kids to elite level sports or training or anything at these ages is a recipe for injury or burnout.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Oct 30, 2015 14:15:46 GMT -5
I think we only disagree in our definition of what serious means. You have to be more committed to the game to stick with the 2-3 practices/week, longer practices, more intense practices, multiple games/week, travel to games, and tournaments. Isn't that a player who is more serious about the game than a rec player? I'm not judging the rec player, but other than terminology choice, it has to be someone more serious. Any kid can be serious, but it takes more dedication to go from rec to Academy. It's not just on the kid, but the family, too. However, any parent or coach standing on the sideline and screaming at kids - ought to be ashamed and absolutely NOT surprised when that kid says they don't want to return. Sounds to me like we're on the same page. When I said this "Academy is for players who are serious about the game to play like-minded players and get additional professional coaching. Period." it was in response to this "It's ridiculous to try and force what is supposed to be an elite program, i.e. Academy soccer, into playing down to the least common denominator" Serious does not have to mean win at all costs or yell at the kids or treat them like they are not kids. I would hope by now my thoughts on that would be pretty clear
|
|
|
Post by Keeper on Oct 30, 2015 15:21:54 GMT -5
I think we only disagree in our definition of what serious means. You have to be more committed to the game to stick with the 2-3 practices/week, longer practices, more intense practices, multiple games/week, travel to games, and tournaments. Isn't that a player who is more serious about the game than a rec player? I'm not judging the rec player, but other than terminology choice, it has to be someone more serious. Again that definition of academy is wrong. Academy is playing at the closest club possible. Practicing twice a week the same as rec. That age group shouldn't be practicing 3 times a week, 2 times tops. Again intensity doesn't equal good or developing. I've seen rec coaches run more intense practices then my academy practices and accomplish the same. Travel, except at the big overrated clubs is typically still very local. And tournaments are so overused that anymore then 1-2 a season is just a way for clubs to make more more. Which is about the same a lot of u10/u12 rec teams go to them. If it was serious soccer then they'd keep score too. Kids shouldn't be forced into serious rolls until at least middle school and preferably High school unless it's academics.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Oct 30, 2015 15:45:09 GMT -5
That definition of academy is reality for everyone I know that plays academy at many clubs, large and small.
And when I coach rec, all our teams practice once a week.
The standard is, there is no standard.
|
|