YNT's and the relative age effect

Looking at the 1997 (U15) pool roster, I made a few observations.

1. One in 4 players were born in January.
2. Half of the pool was born in the first quarter of the year.
3. Only 2 of the 48 players were born in the 4th quarter. (Both in October)
4. None were born in November or December.

There was a slight variation in the U18 pool. But not much.

Conclusions?

We all talk about technique and soccer iq being more important than size and speed. But, all things being equal, physical maturation (not just height and perceived strength) plays a huge role.

Especially certain positions. Defensive mids, outside backs and keepers.

While I don't have conclusive proof, I would be willing to bet that even the players born in say, the 3rd quarter are also physically mature for their relative age.

One thing is certain...it sucks to be born in December. Only one player (a u18 and U20) Jack Mcbean has a December birthday. He is a homegrown player for the Galaxy and has seen first team action.

Yes, eventually it levels out. But there's definitely an advantage in this country to being identified early.

We also only get a Christmas/Birthday gift as well. Oh all the bad memories that you have brought up again. Thanks Laimp

This is excellent news for my son. He was born on January 6th. He should be a lock to make the squad.

Laimport wrote:Looking at the 1997 (U15) pool roster, I made a few observations.

1. One in 4 players were born in January.
2. Half of the pool was born in the first quarter of the year.
3. Only 2 of the 48 players were born in the 4th quarter. (Both in October)
4. None were born in November or December.

There was a slight variation in the U18 pool. But not much.

Conclusions?

We all talk about technique and soccer iq being more important than size and speed. But, all things being equal, physical maturation (not just height and perceived strength) plays a huge role.

Especially certain positions. Defensive mids, outside backs and keepers.

While I don't have conclusive proof, I would be willing to bet that even the players born in say, the 3rd quarter are also physically mature for their relative age.

One thing is certain...it sucks to be born in December. Only one player (a u18 and U20) Jack Mcbean has a December birthday. He is a homegrown player for the Galaxy and has seen first team action.

Yes, eventually it levels out. But there's definitely an advantage in this country to being identified early.

I wish someone would have told me when I was babymaking that I should wait until May or June to conceive insted of January and February. Then my kid would have been a shoe in for soccer glory. Sorry son...


In truth, it may matter for National Teams, but it should not matter for making club teams and even having a shot at being a pro. If you are good enough, you should be able to play with kids older than you by the time you are 15 or 16. Your body has gone through puberty and you are probably the size you are going to be. ( Unless your Dennis Rodman) Plus, size shouldn't matter if you are gifted technically and have a high soccer IQ. ( Other things my kid did not get from me).

The National team issue looks clear and is unfortunate, but that only effects a very small number of kids.

Malcom Gladwell (Outliers) has written a lot about this.

You write about how Canadian hockey players are all coming from a few-month age gap because the more physically mature are considered talented, and we mistake talent for biology. Other countries like China always try to find innate talent very young and nurture it. Do you think we should do more, or let kids find their own way. MJ could have played baseball all along, right?

This discussion I have in birthday bias with hockey, baseball and soccer, where you see all the stars coming from certain months, those biases come about because we try to select All Stars at a very young age, and we confuse physical maturity with talent. As a result we're plucking all these kids for All-Star teams that are just big for their age, period. So there's dangers in intervening too early and trying to pick winners too early. So I'm not on board with the Chinese model. I think you have to provide a broad base of opportunities and let kids learn fundamentals and wait as long as possible to pick your winners

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3713412

With our continued desire to win now. Do we lose sight on the kid who may be a little smaller, a little younger but has a whole lot of potential and thus he never gets to develop. I always wonder if Messi and his greatness would have survived in North Texas if he his dad got a transfe and he moved here at age 12 right when he was hitting his grove. I doubt it but he is a June baby so he would have at least had a fighting chance. Though at 5'7 now and probably 5'2 or shorter at 14 he probably would have been left out to become a race horse jockie. Well thank God that that never happend and in our lifetime we get to enjoy true greatness.

The academy (pre select) age cutoff is interesting too. Right now, the august birthdays have an advantage, and probably get tagged as good players early on.

I wonder though whether the January kids benefit over the long haul from effectively playing "up" against all the older academy kids, and then suddenly becoming the oldest when they move to the Jan 1 cut-off.

My DD was born in late June and is consistently the youngest one on her team. She is NOT big for her age and that issue is dramatically compounded when she's matched up against a girl that's 10 months older than her. My DD does have excellent skill but the truth is, based on her age in her division, she's at a serious disadvantage. It's tough to show good skill when somebody else with less skill can simply bully you off the ball. That happens to her all the time.

Her coach's biggest concern for my DD is that she doesn't play physical enough. She has started to play more physically but she still doesn't have the strength. Can I blame her coach though for judging my DD by her results?

My problem now… When somebody says she needs to play more physically, what I've started to hear is "Your DD needs to be 4" taller and be 25 lbs heavier." (IMO, if she was 4” taller and 25 lbs heavier… we’d have coaches knocking on our door all the time asking her to play for them.)

The truth is though, whether you like it or not, sometimes you’re at a disadvantage. I don’t want that for her but it is what it is.

It's not just a question of relative age. 'We' also select players using skewed criteria such as club affiliation and other 'artifical' means.

The real problem here is that, once you are 'in' you tend to stay 'in'. Cronyism, politics, whatever term you want to choose.

The vast majority of American players are scouted through the youth national team programs.

Although I think that is starting to change somewhat.

There are alot more American players 'good enough' to get professional opportunities than most people realize.

It comes down to "matters of circumstance" as much or even more so than actual ability.

footbull wrote:Malcom Gladwell (Outliers) has written a lot about this.

You write about how Canadian hockey players are all coming from a few-month age gap because the more physically mature are considered talented, and we mistake talent for biology. Other countries like China always try to find innate talent very young and nurture it. Do you think we should do more, or let kids find their own way. MJ could have played baseball all along, right?

This discussion I have in birthday bias with hockey, baseball and soccer, where you see all the stars coming from certain months, those biases come about because we try to select All Stars at a very young age, and we confuse physical maturity with talent. As a result we're plucking all these kids for All-Star teams that are just big for their age, period. So there's dangers in intervening too early and trying to pick winners too early. So I'm not on board with the Chinese model. I think you have to provide a broad base of opportunities and let kids learn fundamentals and wait as long as possible to pick your winners

http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3713412

Excellent point. Which is why a fair percentage of these 'youth prodigies' fade early and never make it.

Laimport wrote:It's not just a question of relative age. 'We' also select players using skewed criteria such as club affiliation and other 'artifical' means.

The real problem here is that, once you are 'in' you tend to stay 'in'. Cronyism, politics, whatever term you want to choose.

The vast majority of American players are scouted through the youth national team programs.

Although I think that is starting to change somewhat.

There are alot more American players 'good enough' to get professional opportunities than most people realize.

It comes down to "matters of circumstance" as much or even more so than actual ability.

There is no dispute that it matters where you play and who you play for sometimes more than how you play. There are probably many kids out there that should get a shot or a look by a pro team, but because of circumstances do not. The prevailing thought is probably that most of the very best players somehow make their way to DA or top level club team by the time they are 15 or so. While this is not always true, I think this thought will get stronger as time goes on.

For kids living in places without DA teams or top leagues, like your ETX team from LA, it is definately unfair. They have the deck stacked against them from the get go in terms of moving up the soccer ladder.

Marvelousmar wrote:With our continued desire to win now. Do we lose sight on the kid who may be a little smaller, a little younger but has a whole lot of potential and thus he never gets to develop. I always wonder if Messi and his greatness would have survived in North Texas if he his dad got a transfe and he moved here at age 12 right when he was hitting his grove. I doubt it but he is a June baby so he would have at least had a fighting chance. Though at 5'7 now and probably 5'2 or shorter at 14 he probably would have been left out to become a race horse jockie. Well thank God that that never happend and in our lifetime we get to enjoy true greatness.

I bet Ronaldo wishes Messi had moved to NTX rather than La Maisa

I think you are looking at the wrong end of the age spectrum. By the time they are pro age the birth year no longer matters and if you are better than your peers you can make it. If nothing other than going to a walk on tryout and being the best player you can get found. If soccer talent can't hide in a village in africa it can't hide in ETX either. Now the problem is at a younger age the push for BFS leads them to take older kids and spend the time, money and effort developing those players. So the younger kid doesn't reach his full potential and doesn't develop into a viable player later. In the meantime the kid that recieved all of the attention doesn't reach the level either because he never had the talent and only learned to play thru power and size.

The Chinese model (which I don't agree with) doesn't just take BFS they are looking for certian innate traits in children that will allow them to develope into the particular sports. A professional scout could probably look at your kid and tell if he has any potential or not. In truth for many of the kids their coach could probably do the same. He won't because he has to win games and he needs to keep the dream alive so you keep paying.

footbull wrote:The academy (pre select) age cutoff is interesting too. Right now, the august birthdays have an advantage, and probably get tagged as good players early on.

I wonder though whether the January kids benefit over the long haul from effectively playing "up" against all the older academy kids, and then suddenly becoming the oldest when they move to the Jan 1 cut-off.

Same thing has occurred to me. My son has an April birthday so he will go from being one of the youngest in CL to one of the oldest in ODP or PA. It is funny to think of him playing down with the 03s.

They younger CL kids just need to change perspective. My bb is a late july and in CL is quite a bit yourger than his peers. If you look at what would be the best players in the next younger age group he is closer in age to those kids than his actual peers. The kids just have to keep playing, keep getting better, and not get discouraged. Eventually those extra months will not be enough to overcome talent and ability.

Agree with go on this, but definitely do not agree with the poster whom said most bb's are as big as they are going to get by 15-16. For many kids, the major, major growth spurt doesn't hit until 15 or 16!

I agree that the age difference levels out. But often it isn't until it is damn near too late.

The DA players are being funneled into the youth national teams.

Why? because that's where the scouts are looking.

Foreign scouts primarily pull from youth national teams...because that's where they are looking.

More and more U20 pool players are coming from pro clubs/academies.

In 4 or 5 years very few U20 pool players will come from the college ranks.