Talent and depth of age groups?

This might be an impossible question to answer, but I am sure there are some who know and some that just have an opinion. Is there any age group of boys that stand out from the 00's - 94's? I am well aware that it can change but then again maybe it doesn't change that much. Maybe the people to ask that question would be the coaches or parents with multiple kids playing select soccer to get an objective answer.

clearly it's the 99's. I have also heard this from several coaches. Then it's the 97's

CLUB31 wrote:This might be an impossible question to answer, but I am sure there are some who know and some that just have an opinion. Is there any age group of boys that stand out from the 00's - 94's? I am well aware that it can change but then again maybe it doesn't change that much. Maybe the people to ask that question would be the coaches or parents with multiple kids playing select soccer to get an objective answer.

ah - you speak of great research and needs to go no further than this post - you speak of all the given talent - and you speak of depth - then you speak purely of my own bb. He is by far the most talented player in any age group, yet chooses to let others play in front of him so that they themselves can improve their skills - with all that talent, he too, is the ultimate depth.

How subjective is this topic?

soccerrus2 wrote:How subjective is this topic?

Let me guess - Go99 has a 99 BB! ROFL

Not sure where the best talent was but the 99's and 97's had a lot of talented kids. What interests me more the amount of teams this year. 93s had over 60 teams going into the qualifying now the 00s had 40. What's the reason for less and less teams playing in the qt?

60 teams in the 93s! Interesting to see the number go down. My bet is that with academy starting way before it use to, the differentiation between the level of a rec independent team who wants to make Classic and the actual academy level is more obvious and more pronounced. I know of a rec coach who wanted to go classic this year with a decent team and did not chose that route knowing his roster wasn't strong enough. The economy should also give you part of the answer : money to register and time you spend practicing kids when you may actually need to work in order to make money...

The German wrote:Not sure where the best talent was but the 99's and 97's had a lot of talented kids. What interests me more the amount of teams this year. 93s had over 60 teams going into the qualifying now the 00s had 40. What's the reason for less and less teams playing in the qt?

Economics maybe? When my '91 started, Andromeda (practicing at Point North Park) was $1200, and family finances were more secure.
Or maybe all the years of pre-select soccer are turning off some kids before the teams go select. I think the academy concept started with the '94's. Before that, some young players participated in some skills training while playing rec soccer and indoor. Many others just played rec and showed up in June and July for try-outs. Compared with today, more of those families really didn't know what they were getting into.

cornerkick96 wrote:

soccerrus2 wrote:How subjective is this topic?

Let me guess - Go99 has a 99 BB! ROFL

yes and I am not biased at all

gababa wrote:60 teams in the 93s! Interesting to see the number go down. My bet is that with academy starting way before it use to, the differentiation between the level of a rec independent team who wants to make Classic and the actual academy level is more obvious and more pronounced. I know of a rec coach who wanted to go classic this year with a decent team and did not chose that route knowing his roster wasn't strong enough. The economy should also give you part of the answer : money to register and time you spend practicing kids when you may actually need to work in order to make money...

The '92s had in the 60s as well. The 95's in the 50s if I remember correctly. Maybe its indicative that soccer is becoming less popular

I know that this year a lot of teams did not even try and plan to go straight to Plano / Arlington. Maybe the 650 did it...maybe it was knowing that they were not ready and getting spanked 15-0 was not going to help them...but i remember the 96's had 1 classic spot for every 2 teams trying to qualify or something and this year 3 of 4 teams who wanted a classic spot got one...

Aswan wrote:I have a theory that advanced training and competitive play at the early ages will reduce the number of children playing soccer in their later years. Most kids are experimenting with various sports throughout the grade school years. As the system is becoming, if they do not decide on soccer as a primary sport by age seven, when decision time comes at age 11 it will seem that the train has long since left the station. These kids then will not enter the club system, but rather will select other more accessible, community- based sports. Moreover, fewer kids will elect to play even in the early years because the sport ceases to be a communal experience-kids at young ages mainly just want to play with their friends. The main detriment of this developing system will be erosion of a broad fan base, a necessary condition for the ultimate level of success of the sport.

all sports, not just soccer...

Aswan wrote:I have a theory that advanced training and competitive play at the early ages will reduce the number of children playing soccer in their later years. Most kids are experimenting with various sports throughout the grade school years. As the system is becoming, if they do not decide on soccer as a primary sport by age seven, when decision time comes at age 11 it will seem that the train has long since left the station. These kids then will not enter the club system, but rather will select other more accessible, community- based sports. Moreover, fewer kids will elect to play even in the early years because the sport ceases to be a communal experience-kids at young ages mainly just want to play with their friends. The main detriment of this developing system will be erosion of a broad fan base, a necessary condition for the ultimate level of success of the sport.

Well stated oh wise one.

... It's '04's most definitely with the '06's a close second. 'Been cruising the pre-school day-cares and have seen some REEAALLL talent! ...

nuchad wrote:

Aswan wrote:I have a theory that advanced training and competitive play at the early ages will reduce the number of children playing soccer in their later years. Most kids are experimenting with various sports throughout the grade school years. As the system is becoming, if they do not decide on soccer as a primary sport by age seven, when decision time comes at age 11 it will seem that the train has long since left the station. These kids then will not enter the club system, but rather will select other more accessible, community- based sports. Moreover, fewer kids will elect to play even in the early years because the sport ceases to be a communal experience-kids at young ages mainly just want to play with their friends. The main detriment of this developing system will be erosion of a broad fan base, a necessary condition for the ultimate level of success of the sport.

all sports, not just soccer...

School as well - earlier pressure/emphasis often does not 'take' - much like a preacher's daughter's behavior, the path of least resistance is the one not intended. There are more and more 4-5 year olds practicing every day of every week (because....according to their parent...they want to do it).

REASON for fewer teams each year - I have a theory, and I think I've seen it in play. The youth Academy system is (PAL and SDL leagues) are driving out competition. The bigger clubs are consolidating talented players on fewer and fewer teams. In the past, the talent was more spread out, so more teams could compete. Once these Academy teams started consolidating these "super" teams at age 8, then teams that had 4-5 nice players can no longer compete with teams that have 12 nice players. The team that had the 4-5 players nowdays folds because those players eventually move onto the other teams. This creates teams with lots of talented players, but fewer teams. It also drives out borderline kids who might possibly become good players later on (late bloomers). I think the system is shooting itself in the foot.

R1 wrote:REASON for fewer teams each year - I have a theory, and I think I've seen it in play. The youth Academy system is (PAL and SDL leagues) are driving out competition. The bigger clubs are consolidating talented players on fewer and fewer teams. In the past, the talent was more spread out, so more teams could compete. Once these Academy teams started consolidating these "super" teams at age 8, then teams that had 4-5 nice players can no longer compete with teams that have 12 nice players. The team that had the 4-5 players nowdays folds because those players eventually move onto the other teams. This creates teams with lots of talented players, but fewer teams. It also drives out borderline kids who might possibly become good players later on (late bloomers). I think the system is shooting itself in the foot.

WOW! You could not be more correct.
The only part of the equation you left off is the over zealous parents diving over one another to get to these so -called top teams . Everyone is to blame.

The system builds super teams so good, that in the course of regular competition within their geographic areas they are not challenged thus detering the long term growth.

by the way, soccer is the only youth system that deals with this club rules the world deal. The other select sports, baseball and basketball, (and I or my wife has coached national traveling teams in the past in both), have a core group of kids and parents that make the call, manage the team, find facilities, and also finds a coach. You know what the coach does? Coach. LOL.

What that means is there are a few super teams, but that is based on the level the players are. Most will look at teams for what tourneys they participate in, if there is national tourneys, etc. But it still comes down to this...if a team doesn't like a coach, the coach doesn't keep his/her job with that team, they find a new coach. There is a flaw in the system because EVERY parent is at someone's mercy, and if they don't like it they can leave. The fault is never at the top.

With that, I have a dd that is 10 mo old. She was crawling at hit the ball with her foot. I think she is now going to be great at soccer...anyone want to put a team together at a club for $100 a month to train her?

Bottom line is that if we are starting academy at U5/U6...it is ridiculous. Most rec leagues are using 3x3 goals at that age...do we need keeper training too? Let them play rec until 8, and start academy play at 9...until then, let the kids have some fun (you know, maybe take em swimming at some point or something)...

My dd started at when she was an 04 playing up with the 03's. Now that the 04's have started their first year of academy she is going back down. She will still play with her rec team but it wasn't exactly good for her. She could win the ball, dribble around all the other kids, shoot and score. Wash, rinse, repeat. She didn't need to pass or use her teammates so she wasn't learning too. We have seen on this board how people hate lopsided scores so after quickly running up 11 goals or more she would spend large portions of the game on the sideline playing with her brother. Other parents and coaches would politely ask "when is she going select". At her academy team she still scores but much less and has to work much harder for it. She now passes the ball and uses her teammates. Much of it is coaching but some of it is the reality of a more competative situation. So staying in rec longer is not always the solution, but making sure they have fun is.

go99 wrote:My dd started at when she was an 04 playing up with the 03's. Now that the 04's have started their first year of academy she is going back down. She will still play with her rec team but it wasn't exactly good for her. She could win the ball, dribble around all the other kids, shoot and score. Wash, rinse, repeat. She didn't need to pass or use her teammates so she wasn't learning too. We have seen on this board how people hate lopsided scores so after quickly running up 11 goals or more she would spend large portions of the game on the sideline playing with her brother. Other parents and coaches would politely ask "when is she going select". At her academy team she still scores but much less and has to work much harder for it. She now passes the ball and uses her teammates. Much of it is coaching but some of it is the reality of a more competative situation. So staying in rec longer is not always the solution, but making sure they have fun is.

At age 6? Most kids who are 6 who know how to play at all will run circles around 99% of the other kids their age. Kids who listen well, or who have older siblings they have listened to or watched, will understand some of the concepts better than other kids.
Mind you, this is all theory on my part, but I think this is part of the problem. Unfortunately, kids like yours end up on teams like the one you are describing, and most independent or small club teams that try to build themselves up are so far behind at age 6-8, that they never catch up. Anyone who's kid suddenly starts standing out from the crowd (who is playing for an independent or small club) then seeks out one of the teams like your daughter's - with the parents feeling like their kid is not getting proper competition for their level, and the teams that they leave get worse by comparison. Many of the independent and small club teams decide they can't compete to get into Classic/LH, etc, and either fold or don't try. Where before all these super teams were around by age 6-8, teams that had a few really nice players could compete to qualify, so there were more entries, and more players.
You aren't doing anything that 90% of the parents out there are or would do if in your same situation, so you aren't to blame, but the system (allowing these Academy teams associated with clubs - which really just makes a farce of "no competitive soccer until U11") has fostered this and caused it to happen. Does anyone really believe that the games at SDL and PAL are not competitive soccer? Coaches can't get you to sign contracts, but they do verbally "warn" you to not let your child play on another team, or else your child will lose their spot. They make exceptions for kids they are trying to recruit, but once they have you, the rules start coming in.
If they got rid of these Academy teams, the parents of those kids involved would be upset that their kids don't get proper coaching, etc. So I don't know what the solution would be, but I do feel that the Academy teams under U11 are part of the problem of a shrinking base of teams willing to attempt to qualify come time for QT's.

So ? I think it is better to have "only" 40 teams trying QT with 30 decent teams than 60 teams coming in with just 15 that have an idea what to do. Better players (at that age, doesn't that just mean more dedicated parents?) gather together early in academy to make top teams. That not only is natural but beneficial for the overall level of soccer in the area. As early academy is beneficial too. I think it is great, it just means that youth soccer is progressing; there is still a place for everybody, Rec for the not so dedicated parents/player and Classic for those who wants more. Just make academy cheaper and we will then have a good environment ! 

Cheaper would be good.

gababa wrote:So ? I think it is better to have "only" 40 teams trying QT with 30 decent teams than 60 teams coming in with just 15 that have an idea what to do.

Well remember back in the day before academy there were 60 teams trying out for D-1 in U11. Two divisions didn't start until U12.

gababa wrote:So ? I think it is better to have "only" 40 teams trying QT with 30 decent teams than 60 teams coming in with just 15 that have an idea what to do. Better players (at that age, doesn't that just mean more dedicated parents?) gather together early in academy to make top teams. That not only is natural but beneficial for the overall level of soccer in the area. As early academy is beneficial too. I think it is great, it just means that youth soccer is progressing; there is still a place for everybody, Rec for the not so dedicated parents/player and Classic for those who wants more. Just make academy cheaper and we will then have a good environment !

You mean for everyone with $2000-$3000 per child . The current system is ridiculous. Professional coaches making a full time income working part time teaching children a game. Wonder why there are so many accents on the sidelines? Because there is no where else in the world doing this to the extent it is done here. I can only imagine their calls home " you won't believe this but..."
You would be surprised how many kids can't play even rec because of finances. The current system financially excludes probably at least half of the pool of rec players on financial basis alone.