To Bio-Band or Not...

I hate the idea of deliberate bio-banding, but it happens in less obvious ways... I think bio-banding is a natural tendency (however wrong it might be), but its a complicated issue.

Our ODP A and B teams seem clearly differentiated based on size, although I am sure if I notice it because it is the easiest measurement to make. Many of the bigger players are also the most skilled, but a few of them are clearly not. Im not sure if they coaches are fooled, think the players will grow into more skill, or if other factors (political, personal, etc) are at play...

Thinking that a 3 day tryout will allow a coach to get an accurate picture of the individual skill/potential of 45+ kids is ridiculous. Of course coaches have to take shortcuts, and size up (pun intended) the kids based on physical characteristics. The average coaches will fall into the bio-banding trap, because its easy to know what to look for. Good coaches already know what they are looking for.

What we really need is a system that allows kids to be formally evaluated and recommended over the course of a season. Maybe a standardized evaluation based on actual collected data like speed (50 yard dash), accuracy, etc. ? That could be submitted to the kids formal soccer record, much like a school transcript.

At multiple tryouts I have witnessed coaches picking kids based on their size, rather than skill - especially in the case of keepers (since a bigger keeper fills more of the goal ). This might seem like a good strategy, it has backfired dramatically 3 times. Twice keepers were picked for our team based on their height, and both times those keepers turned out to be less than average. The third time it worked to our teams benefit because our smaller keeper was overlooked at tryouts , and the larger (less skilled) keeper was chosen for the top team. We knew the other coach had made a mistake - if he had been paying attention at tryouts, he would have realized the smaller keeper was MUCH better. 

The kids know who to pick if they were choosing a team... even during a 3 day tryout. It is disappointing that often the coaches don't. 

Maybe coaches might think they can "train up" bigger kids... which plays into the individual skills development. This can work if the coach knows the kids well, and knows their potential, but with the club hopping / 3 day tryout system, it turns into a crap shoot. Some of the kids suffering through growth spurts go through periods of extreme awkwardness / slow decision making, so their natural skill gets hidden while they grow into their newer bigger bodies. 

My question to you would be when is developing players not a goal? Teams wont win consistently unless players develop their individual skills and teamwork. Soccer requires teamwork. Rarely if ever do I see a kid take a ball end to end and score. In our years of soccer, it is apparent that the top players gravitate towards each other. This happens starting around u13. Many small clubs lose their players to the bigger clubs because players know where colleges and scouts come to watch...its reality and it's just not soccer... Think East Cobb baseball.

In terms of bio-banding, I find the idea ridiculous. Kids need to get better and no better way than to play against bigger kids. Not all of best soccer players are 6 feet tall but they play well against them.

Agree - play a kid up if appropriate. Playing kids down is wrong. Also remember that there is a mental aspect of the game. Older kids should have greater understanding of the tactical aspect. This puts younger kids playing against an older bio-banding kid playing down at a disadvantage. I also at what age is this practice no longer appropriate? In high school, 9th graders (14 year olds) play against seniors who could be 20. In our kids experience, 4 year varsity starter. They learned to use their skills to make up for their physical differences...made them a better player.

I like the idea of bio-banding down with 2 player per team limit, in theory. Unfortunately, like so many well intentioned plans, there are unintended consequences. In reality, I’ve observed the practice as not one with player development in mind - instead, I’ve only seen clubs gaming the system with one thing in mind: wins. It’s early in the rollout so hopefully the issue will be addressed with stricter indicators and doctor confirmations, because I do believe it can be beneficial for some players. It’s always strange to me that even though he’s one in 100 million, half of a lot of DA roster spots are given to “the next Messi.”

  Wait, are you saying that half of DA spots are given to smaller, more skillful players? Because in my experience, those DA players are usually bigger (not necessarily more skillful)...

Its extremely difficult for the late bloomer in America. This isn't hoops, where a kid can sprout 6-10 inches their junior/senior of high school and shoot up the hoops scene. Soccer players don't get that kind of attention. Then you have kids that by that time have lost interest and choose alternative paths. I know a handful of kids that were small up until u15/u16, always 2nd and 3rd team players. They were slower, just physically and mentally not ready for the top sides.

At u15 & u16, they are basically grown men -- they weren't really savvy about the levels of play and had zero interest in DA, kids could play with anyone in this city for sure. Shocked that even the club didn't advocate for them more, but seems single coaches who coach each DA team for example control the cards. Either way, the kids have now quit to play other sports and focus on other endeavors.

I don't have a solution-- The key is patience, but we have zero when it comes to player identification. Very few can look towards the future.
To me it's not just about identifying the top players and creating a special ID process for them, it's probably more important not to let the unknown player not slip through the cracks. Embrace every kid, not just your top 2-5 players in an age group -- why, because you never know. And lastly, no single coach should be deciding the fate of an athlete, let multiple coaches offer opinions.

Mental and physical toughness is a huge part also, sometimes the smaller kid just can't stick it in an lay some wood, the DA game is typical fast and physical. Refs let go many more fouls and tough play and seem to ref the games more like the adult game.


But the big question is why is bio-banding a thing only for DA if its so important?

 
  "And lastly, no single coach should be deciding the fate of an athlete, let multiple coaches offer opinions."

  I like this comment. It makes me think that we should have a better way to evaluate talent than our current "tryout" system...

Again, in theory the 2 bio-banded players would be taking the place of 2 other players that are also bio-banded, and so on down the age group line. So hurt feelings and snide remarks shouldn’t be an issue. In theory. Also, players can and have always played up - that’s not bio-banding. In my experience, parents and players are averse to “playing down” even though the lipstick is called bio-banding instead. Otherwise every team that could do it would be doing it and probably should be doing it - if it’s all it’s cracked up to be. Personally, I can take it or leave it - doesn’t make much difference to a team. Individually, I can see how some parents would have strong feelings about it if they have a late bloomer.

It’s not that they’re not good enough, it’s that they haven’t approached puberty. And size, btw, doesn’t matter at all. You don’t have to be big, but you have to be fast, physical AND execute technically. There is no such thing as technical skill in a vacuum - if a player can’t execute under extreme speed and physical conditions, that “skill” most like to talk about and see in lower level competition is nonexistent in reality. One of the smallest boys on our team Is a monster while another slightly bigger kid could use bio-banding. It’s pretty common.

Are you the “girls” soccer guy? Totally different with girls. Do you think so many 9th grade girls make varsity (a badge of honor for female players) because they’re so fantastic? No, it’s because most of them are effectively done maturing by 9th grade and there is not much of a fast, physical gap between female HS freshmen and seniors. It’s a chasm with boys.

Is this talk related to academy or U15/U16 players? In academy i can see playing a smaller/slower/less developed player down if there isn't a lower level team? But is the assumption that the player is better than everyone on the lower level team at their age but not quite good enough to make a real contribution on the higher team?

Here in the US.. it's 'big kid, run fast'.  Vision and intelligence are rarely noticed.

What's the assurance that the older kids that are late to develop physically actually WILL develop physically? So that you're not taking opportunities away from younger players who are in league with their peers? Is there some sort of metric they use to say that "this player will physically develop in XYZ fashion" and it works with 70% regularity? Or is it that this player's parents payed XYZ but that player cannot compete with their peers so we will bio-band down because we have to find somewhere for them to play at XYZ money?

Imagine if we simply provided high-level of coaching at all age/performance levels...so if a player has great skills but is 8 inches smaller and a tad slower than their peers that if they grow 12" next year, they've been getting the same great training at the C level that they would have at A and they are READY to COMPETE.

I mention this because I trained a couple sisters this spring who were playing at a big 5 club in C level but are at the very least B level players and were getting C-D level training at the club. I'm not a great trainer by any means but the parents were very praising of the training they were getting. I don't get it. Train every player like they're the next Messi, give them the tools and confidence to build upon and you will see great strides in their development.

I love this comment, clearly not the norm though.......-- "Train every player like they're the next Messi, give them the tools and confidence to build upon and you will see great strides in their development."

this could be my new religion!
We can call it Developmentalism of Equality. - I've already received non-profit status, so please begin sending www.DevelopmentalismofEquality.com 25% of your pay check.

my kids are always at training almost 30 minutes early, would love to see something "beneficial" to occur during that time. They are often in rondo's but I've always wanted a coach to give instructions to a few kids about how to start and run a Wednesday session and state that they the coach would be running late. and tell the kids, i'll be running late, do x y and z, and then scrimmage small sided until I arrive.

But --- the coach never shows up, but watches from a far to see what the kids are doing and how they behave and train on their own. Do they take responsibility, do they work hard, do they handle conflict on fouls and out of bounds, let them figure it out.