What is actually the best option for developing kids?

[Unregistered]

At times, while entertaining, it can be dificult to cut through the noise and propaganda generated by this forum to find answers to your questions. Hopefully the question I'm posing can live independently from the inter-club mudslinging and coach bashing. I honestly want to know peoples opinions on this. I don't care who does it best, or worst for that matter. I don't care what it costs. I don't care how far I have to travel inside Massachusetts.

My simple question, with a complex answer:

What is the best method to develop a young soccer player?

I've heard that primarily skill based training prior to U12 is the best way to go. People have told me that they must play on a great team so that they face the best competition. Others suggest letting them find their own way, to some degree, in free form games. Coaches opine about the benefits of futsol. I've been preached to about 1v1, 6v6 & 8v8, but been told to avoid 11v11 at all costs.

Is training more important than playing games? If not, what's the optimal mix? Does an excellent training environment mitigate that fact that the team is weak? Would an excellent team with average training get the job done?

I know there isn't a right or wrong answer to this question, but I'm hoping there is a consensus.

[Unregistered]

You will find no consensus because everyone has their own agenda and wants to convince everyone that the choices they made are the only intelligent ones.

Personally, I would recommend instilling a true love of the game in your child. Most young players don't watch enough soccer and have no clue how to apply those wonderful skills they are being taught, so take your son or daughter to games and watch lots of soccer with them on TV. Help your kid make friends who also play soccer and let them tear up your backyard with pickup games that go on 24/7.

Whatever choice you make, don't start travelling too much or too far too early, because that's a great way to burn out your child and your family. When they're 17 or 18, no one cares who won the U13 or U14 regionals. So, I think your question about excellent training vs weak team is an important one, and at younger ages good training should trump lots of winning. Futsal is great training to play futsal and doesn't definitely translate to soccer success, but it is so much fun to play that it builds more of the enthusiasm I was mentioning above.

As a coach, my own bias is that practice is far more important than games (although clubs use success in games and tournaments to sell their product).

[Unregistered]

At times, while entertaining, it can be dificult to cut through the noise and propaganda generated by this forum to find answers to your questions. Hopefully the question I'm posing can live independently from the inter-club mudslinging and coach bashing. I honestly want to know peoples opinions on this. I don't care who does it best, or worst for that matter. I don't care what it costs. I don't care how far I have to travel inside Massachusetts.

My simple question, with a complex answer:

What is the best method to develop a young soccer player?

I've heard that primarily skill based training prior to U12 is the best way to go. People have told me that they must play on a great team so that they face the best competition. Others suggest letting them find their own way, to some degree, in free form games. Coaches opine about the benefits of futsol. I've been preached to about 1v1, 6v6 & 8v8, but been told to avoid 11v11 at all costs.

Is training more important than playing games? If not, what's the optimal mix? Does an excellent training environment mitigate that fact that the team is weak? Would an excellent team with average training get the job done?

I know there isn't a right or wrong answer to this question, but I'm hoping there is a consensus.

Is training more important than playing games? Yes and no. Training has to be at a higher ratio than playing games, but it is important to play games to test what you have learned in training. THAT'S WHY ALL YOUTH PLAYERS MUST BE GIVEN QUALITY PLAYING TIME IN GAMES. Of course there are many ways to do that and a lot depends on age, but the fact of the matter most coaches are not that creative in finding game time for their players lower down the roster.

If not, what's the optimal mix? It depends on what the goal of the player and the team is. Minimum is 2:1 practices to games, but if you goal is to play at a high level, it's going to have to be at a higher ratio. Something to keep in mind as well is the quality of the practice. You can practice all week long, but if what you are practicing is of a poor quality, it's not going to be helpful. It's not just "practice makes perfect" but "perfect practice makes perfect" and that is obviously dependent on the skill and experience of the coach.

Does an excellent training environment mitigate that fact that the team is weak? Would an excellent team with average training get the job done? A lot depends on the age of the players. Obviously the ideal is to have talented players getting coached by a talented coach as often as possible. This is called the Three Cs of Development: Coaching, Competition (which includes competition against your own teammates) and Contact time. But sometimes we have to make compromises, so the younger the player, the more important the coaching is and as the player ages, competition begins to gain more importance. So if I had a 10, 11, or 12 year old and had to make a decision between an excellent training environment, but a weak team over an excellent team, but just average training, I'd go for the excellent training because pre-puberty that excellent team may have more to do with more physically mature players than anything else. For girls, I start being more concerned about competition levels at age 13/14 and for boys 14/15.

[Unregistered]

P.S. The more you play, the better you get, but it doesn't have to be in a structured format. Kids who play on their own will learn a lot (it's amazing what they can learn from one another) and probably have a lot of fun in the process that will motivate them even more.

[Unregistered]

Thanks for the opinions thus far, I like where this thread is headed.

[Unregistered]

Thanks for the opinions thus far, I like where this thread is headed.

Speaking of headed...you and your child should head to Europe. Best training to develop your child

[Unregistered]

Speaking of headed...you and your child should head to Europe. Best training to develop your child

Best is a relative term then, because that's NOT an option.

[Unregistered]

the right things matter...

This is a great debate, and I think there is some consensus on what is important for the development of the U-littles (*up to U-11/12). They need great training over top level competition, but both would be preferred. They also need more contact on the ball than they could possibly get in 2-3 sessions per week. I would like to delve furthur into those two topics: Playing on their own, and what is great training.

Players have to be inspired to play on their own. Coaches can help, but the environment the child is raised in has a much more important factor. Some of the best players being developed in MA come from 2nd/3rd generation US soccer families, or those whose families have emegrated here. Our growth as a soccer nation is going to come from these families versus the thought that we are somehow going to turn a hockey, football, or baseball family into a soccer family. On the girls side we may do better, but for boys, they generally choose the sports their fathers played, and we lose our best athletes to thoses sports consistently. Which kids are playing pick up with friends, or having a kick with mom or dad? The ones whose parents have played. Best thing for development: have a father or mother who have played the game!

Regarding great training, I think families in the US are so ignorant they think anyone who says "skill development" training is doing the right things with their child. This is the point of debate I wish to put forth...there are so many clubs out there who are "recruiting clubs" who say they develop players, and other "so-called" developmental clubs who aren't teaching the right things! The majority of coaches I see, don't have the accumen to recognize the important details of skill development, and parents are blind to the fact that their children are learning the wrong things, or not the right things anyway. I know it is easy to bash the "every coach with an english accent is a great coach" theory, but, in England (and every other football mad nation, their debate about soccer development began in 1900 and has continued every since. The poster who suggested move to Europe for the best training is right. Think about the city of Liverpool. Everton FC and Liverpool FC have a generations long battle to develop the best players to win the FA Cup, league trophy, and more recently European honors. Do you think they haven't studied, debated, and perfected the DETAILS of their training methods.

Conclusion is that 95% of the people on this forum wouldn't even know what the right skill development consisted of, or the details that are important to creating a great player. And that percentage only rises a little, if you are a 2nd or 3rd generation player in America...

[Unregistered]

Regarding great training, I think families in the US are so ignorant they think anyone who says "skill development" training is doing the right things with their child. This is the point of debate I wish to put forth...there are so many clubs out there who are "recruiting clubs" who say they develop players, and other "so-called" developmental clubs who aren't teaching the right things! The majority of coaches I see, don't have the accumen to recognize the important details of skill development, and parents are blind to the fact that their children are learning the wrong things, or not the right things anyway. I know it is easy to bash the "every coach with an english accent is a great coach" theory, but, in England (and every other football mad nation, their debate about soccer development began in 1900 and has continued every since. The poster who suggested move to Europe for the best training is right. Think about the city of Liverpool. Everton FC and Liverpool FC have a generations long battle to develop the best players to win the FA Cup, league trophy, and more recently European honors. Do you think they haven't studied, debated, and perfected the DETAILS of their training methods.

Do you think they haven't studied, debated, and perfected the DETAILS of their training methods...... and concluded that the English development system is crap.

[Unregistered]

At times, while entertaining, it can be dificult to cut through the noise and propaganda generated by this forum to find answers to your questions. Hopefully the question I'm posing can live independently from the inter-club mudslinging and coach bashing. I honestly want to know peoples opinions on this. I don't care who does it best, or worst for that matter. I don't care what it costs. I don't care how far I have to travel inside Massachusetts.

My simple question, with a complex answer:

What is the best method to develop a young soccer player?

I've heard that primarily skill based training prior to U12 is the best way to go. People have told me that they must play on a great team so that they face the best competition. Others suggest letting them find their own way, to some degree, in free form games. Coaches opine about the benefits of futsol. I've been preached to about 1v1, 6v6 & 8v8, but been told to avoid 11v11 at all costs.

Is training more important than playing games? If not, what's the optimal mix? Does an excellent training environment mitigate that fact that the team is weak? Would an excellent team with average training get the job done?

I know there isn't a right or wrong answer to this question, but I'm hoping there is a consensus.

Long time coach here. I have coached U6 all the way through college.

Focus on technical skills through u13. Tactical play will come later. Practice to game ratio ideally should be at least 2:1. 3:1 is better but sometimes difficult to achieve. Don't worry about being on the best team. In fact it may be better for your kid to be in the middle of the pack on a decent team. Playing in blow out games winning or losing is an absolute waste of time. Do not have your kid play for a team which does not grant relatively equivalent playing time through U12. Your kid should experience all positions during game situations up to U12.

Personally I think 7 v 7 is advisable until U12. Differing opinions on Futsal but I am not a big fan of it. Get playing/training time at an indoor facility without boards.

Most importantly keep an eye on your child for soccer burnout. Here is a trick I used with my daughter. From U11 onward towards the end of the spring season I would not say a word about the upcoming game other than to mention once the time of the game. Then I would wait to see if my kid had her bag packed and was up and ready to go in time to leave for the game. If they play during the summer try districts. The competition is not bad, the coaching is usually good and in some cases excellent but most importantly it is a nice time for the players to play the game mostly for the fun of it. My daughter started at U8 Rec then U10-U14 played travel, played club from U11 to U18. Mostly MAPLE D and D2. Never played a minute of D1 soccer. She had one partial D1 offer for college, a few D2 (no money), and pretty much her pick of local D3 schools. She played two years in college until injuries and the demands of her major changed her priorities.

There were bumps in the road from some idiot parents and one toolbag for a coach at U11 but by and large it was a great experience.

Good luck.

[Unregistered]

Long time coach here. I have coached U6 all the way through college.

Focus on technical skills through u13. Tactical play will come later. Practice to game ratio ideally should be at least 2:1. 3:1 is better but sometimes difficult to achieve. Don't worry about being on the best team. In fact it may be better for your kid to be in the middle of the pack on a decent team. Playing in blow out games winning or losing is an absolute waste of time. Do not have your kid play for a team which does not grant relatively equivalent playing time through U12. Your kid should experience all positions during game situations up to U12.

Personally I think 7 v 7 is advisable until U12. Differing opinions on Futsal but I am not a big fan of it. Get playing/training time at an indoor facility without boards.

Most importantly keep an eye on your child for soccer burnout. Here is a trick I used with my daughter. From U11 onward towards the end of the spring season I would not say a word about the upcoming game other than to mention once the time of the game. Then I would wait to see if my kid had her bag packed and was up and ready to go in time to leave for the game. If they play during the summer try districts. The competition is not bad, the coaching is usually good and in some cases excellent but most importantly it is a nice time for the players to play the game mostly for the fun of it. My daughter started at U8 Rec then U10-U14 played travel, played club from U11 to U18. Mostly MAPLE D and D2. Never played a minute of D1 soccer. She had one partial D1 offer for college, a few D2 (no money), and pretty much her pick of local D3 schools. She played two years in college until injuries and the demands of her major changed her priorities.

There were bumps in the road from some idiot parents and one toolbag for a coach at U11 but by and large it was a great experience.

Good luck.

Thanks for the constructive post.

[Unregistered]

Its about the journey

You will find no consensus because everyone has their own agenda and wants to convince everyone that the choices they made are the only intelligent ones.

Personally, I would recommend instilling a true love of the game in your child. Most young players don't watch enough soccer and have no clue how to apply those wonderful skills they are being taught, so take your son or daughter to games and watch lots of soccer with them on TV. Help your kid make friends who also play soccer and let them tear up your backyard with pickup games that go on 24/7.

Whatever choice you make, don't start travelling too much or too far too early, because that's a great way to burn out your child and your family. When they're 17 or 18, no one cares who won the U13 or U14 regionals. So, I think your question about excellent training vs weak team is an important one, and at younger ages good training should trump lots of winning. Futsal is great training to play futsal and doesn't definitely translate to soccer success, but it is so much fun to play that it builds more of the enthusiasm I was mentioning above.

As a coach, my own bias is that practice is far more important than games (although clubs use success in games and tournaments to sell their product).

Great comment. Thanks for that. I am someone who found athletic success in swimming. Competed in National Championships, NCAAs, Olympic Trials. Went to college on a swimming scholarship. I have a son that swims and plays soccer. Believe me I have seen it all when it comes to athletics. Also am a researcher by nature, so read all the scientific research on athletic development.

Here is my opinion. If you kid develops a passion for a sport[s], then feed that passion. If you kid has talent at a sport, you will know. If your kid doesn't have the talent, but loves to compete, cheer them on. But above all remember it is the journey they take that is important, not what games they win at U12 or what team they play on, etc. Don't be fooled into believing their is only one team that develops skills or that there is a need to travel all over the country to compete at age 12. These are untrue.

Here is the hard part for parents. In all my experience as an athlete there is one truism. Talent wins out. You can't out coach talent, you can't out develop talent, you can't fool talent. There are always going to be kids with more talent than yours. It is a good lesson to learn for your kids. But, talent can be wasted by lack of passion or crazy parents putting on too much pressure on their kids, or bad coaching. I know of many [meaning more than 6] folks with a Olympic gold medal that were multi sport kids, or simply played around for fun in a sport, or weren't interested in working hard until their HS years. The research demonstrates that somewhere between 10% and 25% of elite youth [under 16] sports stars actually become elite senior competitors. Most sports concentrate on those 10-25% thinking they can identify them at a young age??? That is factually wrong. No one can. They should be asking how we can keep kids interested and playing [competing] through HS so those with talent can rise in a positive environment.

And that is the question I ask myself. How can I feed my son's passion to keep him competing in sport through at least HS. I believe it is a good guide to parents. So instead of worrying about the perfect development system, make the journey worthwhile for your child whether [s]he ends up a professional superstar or a bench warmer on their HS team. Because there is no perfect development system only the best one for your child.

[Unregistered]

You will find no consensus because everyone has their own agenda and wants to convince everyone that the choices they made are the only intelligent ones.

Personally, I would recommend instilling a true love of the game in your child. Most young players don't watch enough soccer and have no clue how to apply those wonderful skills they are being taught, so take your son or daughter to games and watch lots of soccer with them on TV. Help your kid make friends who also play soccer and let them tear up your backyard with pickup games that go on 24/7.

Whatever choice you make, don't start travelling too much or too far too early, because that's a great way to burn out your child and your family. When they're 17 or 18, no one cares who won the U13 or U14 regionals. So, I think your question about excellent training vs weak team is an important one, and at younger ages good training should trump lots of winning. Futsal is great training to play futsal and doesn't definitely translate to soccer success, but it is so much fun to play that it builds more of the enthusiasm I was mentioning above.

As a coach, my own bias is that practice is far more important than games (although clubs use success in games and tournaments to sell their product).

What do you do if your area is lacking quality soccer training and you must travel an hour or more for good training?

[Unregistered]

What do you do if your area is lacking quality soccer training and you must travel an hour or more for good training?

In Mass? That seems hard to believe.
I did hear of a kid playing ODP that drives/boats from Marthas Vineyard to Lancaster every week though.

[Unregistered]

Great comment. Thanks for that. I am someone who found athletic success in swimming. Competed in National Championships, NCAAs, Olympic Trials. Went to college on a swimming scholarship. I have a son that swims and plays soccer. Believe me I have seen it all when it comes to athletics. Also am a researcher by nature, so read all the scientific research on athletic development.

Here is my opinion. If you kid develops a passion for a sport[s], then feed that passion. If you kid has talent at a sport, you will know. If your kid doesn't have the talent, but loves to compete, cheer them on. But above all remember it is the journey they take that is important, not what games they win at U12 or what team they play on, etc. Don't be fooled into believing their is only one team that develops skills or that there is a need to travel all over the country to compete at age 12. These are untrue.

Here is the hard part for parents. In all my experience as an athlete there is one truism. Talent wins out. You can't out coach talent, you can't out develop talent, you can't fool talent. There are always going to be kids with more talent than yours. It is a good lesson to learn for your kids. But, talent can be wasted by lack of passion or crazy parents putting on too much pressure on their kids, or bad coaching. I know of many [meaning more than 6] folks with a Olympic gold medal that were multi sport kids, or simply played around for fun in a sport, or weren't interested in working hard until their HS years. The research demonstrates that somewhere between 10% and 25% of elite youth [under 16] sports stars actually become elite senior competitors. Most sports concentrate on those 10-25% thinking they can identify them at a young age??? That is factually wrong. No one can. They should be asking how we can keep kids interested and playing [competing] through HS so those with talent can rise in a positive environment.

And that is the question I ask myself. How can I feed my son's passion to keep him competing in sport through at least HS. I believe it is a good guide to parents. So instead of worrying about the perfect development system, make the journey worthwhile for your child whether [s]he ends up a professional superstar or a bench warmer on their HS team. Because there is no perfect development system only the best one for your child.

Agree with the overwhelming majority of what your write except for two points.

I think that you are a little too nostalgic when it comes to sports because the kids in todays world have very little if anything in common with the world you grew up in years ago. Back then sports were our entertainment and we individually sought them out which created a sort of natural selection to things where as kids today generally get put into sports by their parents as sort of an after school activity. That changes the dynamics considerably and even if you know a thing or two about sports as you seem to, your kids are surrounded by other kids whose parents don't and they infuse all sorts of agendas into the mix that you or I never had to deal with. I would suggest you need to evolve your thinking some to account for the general watering down of all sports that has resulted since you were a kid.

I also think you are giving short shrift to the role genetics play in athletic success. While it is true that no one has a crystal ball the overwhelming majority of kids can get crossed off the list simply because it's usually obvious quite young that they don't have the genetics to be a high level athlete. It is much easier to tell who will not make it and that is a pretty good starting point for identifying and training potential.