|
Post by fanatic21 on Dec 9, 2015 14:35:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by silverback on Dec 9, 2015 15:06:09 GMT -5
I totally agree. This age change never made sense to me, especially when you consider that the goal (and realistic expectations) of most serious players is to gain a college scholarship, not be the next "American Messi". As the article states, most kids also want to play with their friends in their current school class, especially if they are not an elite player.
It definitely makes college recruiting more difficult as coaches now have to compare/contrast across different age groups for the same class year. You see the challenges now in DA and ODP. The two year gap in DA smoothes this out a bit, but the real impact is Junior year, when it really matters for most players. The Aug-Dec birth years are playing U18 and the Jan-July birth years are playing U16. Makes it tough for the older boys to shine as they are mostly playing against Seniors who are born Jan-July, while their younger classmates (same school year) could be playing against Sophomores who are Aug-Dec. Big difference in maturity at these ages.
I realize others can debate the advantage the older kids have against the younger kids within the class year, but for me, I prefer to keep the kids in their same class year, and let players play up if they have the skill and desire, not have the system dictate. Fortunately, all worked out for my son, but unfortunately, can't say the same for others.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Dec 10, 2015 9:47:18 GMT -5
"What they are changing is requiring that younger players participate in smaller sided games so they can get more touches on the ball. That makes sense to me and I haven't heard one person complain about those changes."
Not going to create a ChicagoNow account, but I wish I could post a comment to let him know that there is at least one person complaining about that change. The change does the opposite. It is requiring younger players to play in larger, shorter games and forces fewer touches on the ball.
|
|
|
Post by lovethegame on Dec 14, 2015 9:41:14 GMT -5
That article says it all. Perhaps I'm more in tune with the school year because my August birthday player always played with girls a year behind her in school. It created some issues along the way, but she survived them and is now playing in college which was her goal all along. There were only three girls on her Ecnl team who were a grade ahead and one ultimately decided not to play in college and to go with a school that was best academic fit. In the end that's two of 18 who were affected by the current rules. Once they go to birth year that same team would have six girls with no place to play this fall. Two of them are going to top programs and three are going to solid mid major programs. How do they prepare to compete in college? I am with the author of the article and am all for the changes made on the developmental side. Having goalkeepers learn to roll it out helps teams learn and become comfortable building from the back. Smaller fields with fewer players for a longer time allows for more touches. From what I see the issue in the US has been the reliance on choosing the big, fast and athletic over the small kid who has technical and skill and understands the game. The US women are the number one team in the world, but even they have been forced to make some changes as it became apparent that big, strong and fast wasn't going to cut it anymore.
|
|
|
Post by infoguy on Dec 14, 2015 10:30:51 GMT -5
Wow, I read the article. As informed as the author sounds, I do think it boils down to how this age thing affects the individual. I think most of the complaints that I've heard have more to do with parent pride and unnecessary concern over change.
Regarding the author's concern about players playing with kids in different grades, I believe if your child is confident, social and talented, then it should not be a problem.
I hear his concern about U15/8th graders missing Spring club soccer. But as the author points out, that is already an issue ... On that note, why doesn't Georgia Soccer and the Georgia high schools just allow club soccer in the spring anyways -- like Texas? It's not like the HS booster clubs give a crud anyways about the quality of the high school soccer programs (for them, it's all about American football). And currently, the top state players (if you believe DA is the best of the best) aren't allowed to play high school soccer anyways in GA.
As for US producing the top woman's program, heck yes - and I'm proud of it. However, I believe it's more to do with being an advanced nation with equal opportunity vs. having a great youth development program. Because after all, if our youth development program was great, then our men's team would be considered tops. But it isn't, so I applaud the new youth model.
|
|