U8 travel soccer is a waste of time

[Just My Personal Opinion]

In my opinion, having kids try out for a U8 travel team is counterproductive. Why would anyone want to tell a U7, a U8 or a U9 player that they only made a B team or no team at all? It's ridiculous to think that anyone knows who will or will not be a good player when they are older. By holding tryouts and making it competitive at that age you really alienate people. Some of those people leave and never come back. IMO it would make more sense to take all the younger kids and divide them into even teams and either have them play each other or get a neighboring town to buy in and do the same and play their teams. Taking a bunch of "A" U7 kids from northern RI to play in SC is a total waste of time. Let all the kids in your program at that age, keep it cheap and let them play each other. I know Superliga would howl at the moon if this idea ever caught on, but it's time to change things around here.

[Unregistered]

In my opinion, having kids try out for a U8 travel team is counterproductive. Why would anyone want to tell a U7, a U8 or a U9 player that they only made a B team or no team at all? It's ridiculous to think that anyone knows who will or will not be a good player when they are older. By holding tryouts and making it competitive at that age you really alienate people. Some of those people leave and never come back. IMO it would make more sense to take all the younger kids and divide them into even teams and either have them play each other or get a neighboring town to buy in and do the same and play their teams. Taking a bunch of "A" U7 kids from northern RI to play in SC is a total waste of time. Let all the kids in your program at that age, keep it cheap and let them play each other. I know Superliga would howl at the moon if this idea ever caught on, but it's time to change things around here.

You must be hitting the bottle today.

[COL]

It's against USSF best practices and player development guidance.

It's not optimal from a net revenue perspective for most programs.

It's generally not optimal for most programs from a facilities perspectives.

It's good for OL and Superliga

Most programs would be better off running an in-house, academy style training program with centralized coaching/training and then playing 6 v 6 friendlies against neighboring programs...mix up the teams and coaches so you avoid the "A"/B team..or Coach X now has his/her "kids." Form tournament teams for end of year local tournaments like Joe Strauss, Portsmouth, NKFD, Seaside, etc. as a reward/fun..and help with player evaluation for future U10 teams.

[JBsoccer]

In my opinion, having kids try out for a U8 travel team is counterproductive. Why would anyone want to tell a U7, a U8 or a U9 player that they only made a B team or no team at all? It's ridiculous to think that anyone knows who will or will not be a good player when they are older. By holding tryouts and making it competitive at that age you really alienate people. Some of those people leave and never come back. IMO it would make more sense to take all the younger kids and divide them into even teams and either have them play each other or get a neighboring town to buy in and do the same and play their teams. Taking a bunch of "A" U7 kids from northern RI to play in SC is a total waste of time. Let all the kids in your program at that age, keep it cheap and let them play each other. I know Superliga would howl at the moon if this idea ever caught on, but it's time to change things around here.

There is a very simple solution to this dilemma...

For those parents that agree with you - they should NOT have their kids try out for U8 travel teams.

For those parents that DISAGREE with you - they CAN have their kids try out, if they choose.

Making a blanket statement and then trying to outlaw something that there is obvious demand for is wrong. Nobody forces anyone to bring their U8 kid to a try out.

FYI - I happen to disagree with you. My kids enjoyed playing travel soccer and travel baseball at age 8. I'm guessing that since there were countless other 8 year old baseball and soccer teams that we competed with, a lot of other parents agree with me.

JB

[Singlethreaded]

There is a very simple solution to this dilemma...

For those parents that agree with you - they should NOT have their kids try out for U8 travel teams.

For those parents that DISAGREE with you - they CAN have their kids try out, if they choose.

Making a blanket statement and then trying to outlaw something that there is obvious demand for is wrong. Nobody forces anyone to bring their U8 kid to a try out.

FYI - I happen to disagree with you. My kids enjoyed playing travel soccer and travel baseball at age 8. I'm guessing that since there were countless other 8 year old baseball and soccer teams that we competed with, a lot of other parents agree with me.

JB

Agree the discussion of U8 soccer has come and gone...if you don't like it don't participate, but there are many U7 and U8 programs that are well established and players that have been brought up with game and have not been given the chance to develop bad habits. The problem now lies in clubs trying to move it down to U6 and U5.

[Just My Personal Opinion]

There is a very simple solution to this dilemma...

For those parents that agree with you - they should NOT have their kids try out for U8 travel teams.

For those parents that DISAGREE with you - they CAN have their kids try out, if they choose.

Making a blanket statement and then trying to outlaw something that there is obvious demand for is wrong. Nobody forces anyone to bring their U8 kid to a try out.

FYI - I happen to disagree with you. My kids enjoyed playing travel soccer and travel baseball at age 8. I'm guessing that since there were countless other 8 year old baseball and soccer teams that we competed with, a lot of other parents agree with me.

JB

Like I said, In My Opinion it's a waste of time and exactly opposite of how the rest of the soccer world develops players. Of course playing U8 Competitive Games with a good coach is much better than simply training with a bad coach.

[Just My Personal Opinion]

Agree the discussion of U8 soccer has come and gone...if you don't like it don't participate, but there are many U7 and U8 programs that are well established and players that have been brought up with game and have not been given the chance to develop bad habits. The problem now lies in clubs trying to move it down to U6 and U5.

The exact mentality that keeps everything Status Quo while the rest of the world evolves. Name one club that puts players younger than U10 into anything but an in-house academy program.

[Unregistered]

The exact mentality that keeps everything Status Quo while the rest of the world evolves. Name one club that puts players younger than U10 into anything but an in-house academy program.

While trying to correct the wrongs of U8 soccer, can someone please tell me the rationale for playing two U8 games of 4 v. 4 side by side without goalies. I understand the theory that the kids will get more touches on the ball, but couldn't that be accomplished playing 6 v. 6 on a little larger field with a goalie (basically an indoor soccer lineup)?

[JBsoccer]

While trying to correct the wrongs of U8 soccer, can someone please tell me the rationale for playing two U8 games of 4 v. 4 side by side without goalies. I understand the theory that the kids will get more touches on the ball, but couldn't that be accomplished playing 6 v. 6 on a little larger field with a goalie (basically an indoor soccer lineup)?

Fun.

Maybe it's more fun that way for the U8's?

But frankly, either way is fine with me as long as the kids playing are enjoying themselves.

JB

[JBsoccer]

The exact mentality that keeps everything Status Quo while the rest of the world evolves. Name one club that puts players younger than U10 into anything but an in-house academy program.

I just don't understand that the level of importance of this issue - U8 travel soccer - reaches the point that the soccer powers-that-be need to regulate it one way or another. I mean, there's already too many soccer rules regarding where, when, what club, etc. a kid can play. Let the parents choose what they want for their own kids.

If you don't like U8 travel soccer for your kid, that's totally cool. Don't have your kid play.

But to impose your will on others who disagree over such a trivial matter .... come on...

JB

[Unregistered]

The truth of the matter is there is no difference between U8 Rec and a U8 travel team. There are absolutely no tactics involved in the game. The kids need technique to have any type of tactics so what you have is kids running around and if one team has a bigger faster player that team will win.

A in house program is the answer for the developement of the U8 Techniques and if the program is run well these kids will have an improved skill set to where Tactics can be introduced.

But this is against the Parent who lives through their kids I see it all the time Parents think that the kids need to play because it is "fun" so the Parents can then dream about how good their kids are.

I am sure I will get most of the parents who live through their kids complain about this statement because it is true and this is why the US program is the way it is today.

[COL]

JB - I usually agree with your points, but disagree with you (slightly) on this one.

Let's start with why USSF says U8 travel is not recommended.

"Children at this age should not be participating in a mandatory soccer program and should be free to participate at their own pace. There should not be a penalty or consequence for missing practice and no discussion about “commitment.” An effort should be made to include any child
that wishes to play soccer. It is healthy and appropriate to group players according to ability level, but movement between groups should be open and fluid"

As USSF points out, soccer at this age is NOT a team sport. It's all about individual development and small sided games are one way for individual players to start trying the things from training into more "match-like" situations.

As you and probably most others who read these threads know, the competitive travel team system, even those run by the most well meaning and "lesser" ego coaches and parents, is fraught with politics over team formation, playing time, A/B teams, practice commitments, etc. And once teams are established as U8 and U9, watch out for the coaches who are already grooming "their kids."

That's not to say there should not be something available for kids who want more development, and yes, to play against better/different competition than their in-house league provides. It's more a point that imposing the model used at the U10 and above is not best at the younger ages. I'm all for bridge programs that can expose U8/9 to different coaches, a variety of higher level technical development opportunities than the standard rec program will provide, and the ability to play in 6 v 6 matches with different kids in their cohort in a "competitive" setting. Then, let the parents decide if that is something for their child or not.

I actually think you would get more of that (or even more creative programs) if there was no official U8 league.

Here's the USYSA guidance on U8 (why 4 v 4). Note there is no requirement for 2 games at once, but it's more an efficiency (and $$ maker) to field teams of 8-10 and play 2 4 x 4 games than only field a team of 6 and play 1 4 x 4 game.

Again, small sided games as a concept is heavily promoted. The problem when translating it from training to "competitive" matches is the intended effects get lost. If you have suffered through the following situations, you know what I mean:

4 x 4 where the refs require the opposition to be in their defending half on goal kicks -- ball is played to strongest kid who takes few dribbles and launches booming shot on goal..ball either scores, goes past everyone, or hits someone who is way to young to receive it and bounces out.. this is repeated dozens of times and the only training value is for the kids with the strongest kick.

4 x 4 where the refs do not require opposition to be back..team puts all their strongest kids forward..immediate swarming on goal kick..swarming team wins ball, takes shot..repeat until a goal occurs or coach tells team to just boot the ball down the field and go chase it.

yes, even at U10 you get the bigger/faster/stronger kids who can dribble, run past, or muscle past kids and score, but at least the pitch size is more conducive to introducing better concepts and encouraging play more in line with USYSA developmental guidance than the 4 x 4 -- which again, I think is better in more controlled training situations than for travel team leagues.

http://www.usyouthsoccer.org/doc_lib...cial_rules.pdf

[JBsoccer]

JB - I usually agree with your points, but disagree with you (slightly) on this one.

Let's start with why USSF says U8 travel is not recommended.

"Children at this age should not be participating in a mandatory soccer program and should be free to participate at their own pace. There should not be a penalty or consequence for missing practice and no discussion about “commitment.” An effort should be made to include any child
that wishes to play soccer. It is healthy and appropriate to group players according to ability level, but movement between groups should be open and fluid"

As USSF points out, soccer at this age is NOT a team sport. It's all about individual development and small sided games are one way for individual players to start trying the things from training into more "match-like" situations.

As you and probably most others who read these threads know, the competitive travel team system, even those run by the most well meaning and "lesser" ego coaches and parents, is fraught with politics over team formation, playing time, A/B teams, practice commitments, etc. And once teams are established as U8 and U9, watch out for the coaches who are already grooming "their kids."

That's not to say there should not be something available for kids who want more development, and yes, to play against better/different competition than their in-house league provides. It's more a point that imposing the model used at the U10 and above is not best at the younger ages. I'm all for bridge programs that can expose U8/9 to different coaches, a variety of higher level technical development opportunities than the standard rec program will provide, and the ability to play in 6 v 6 matches with different kids in their cohort in a "competitive" setting. Then, let the parents decide if that is something for their child or not.

I actually think you would get more of that (or even more creative programs) if there was no official U8 league.

Here's the USYSA guidance on U8 (why 4 v 4). Note there is no requirement for 2 games at once, but it's more an efficiency (and $$ maker) to field teams of 8-10 and play 2 4 x 4 games than only field a team of 6 and play 1 4 x 4 game.

Again, small sided games as a concept is heavily promoted. The problem when translating it from training to "competitive" matches is the intended effects get lost. If you have suffered through the following situations, you know what I mean:

4 x 4 where the refs require the opposition to be in their defending half on goal kicks -- ball is played to strongest kid who takes few dribbles and launches booming shot on goal..ball either scores, goes past everyone, or hits someone who is way to young to receive it and bounces out.. this is repeated dozens of times and the only training value is for the kids with the strongest kick.

4 x 4 where the refs do not require opposition to be back..team puts all their strongest kids forward..immediate swarming on goal kick..swarming team wins ball, takes shot..repeat until a goal occurs or coach tells team to just boot the ball down the field and go chase it.

yes, even at U10 you get the bigger/faster/stronger kids who can dribble, run past, or muscle past kids and score, but at least the pitch size is more conducive to introducing better concepts and encouraging play more in line with USYSA developmental guidance than the 4 x 4 -- which again, I think is better in more controlled training situations than for travel team leagues.

http://www.usyouthsoccer.org/doc_lib...cial_rules.pdf

As usual a thoughtful, well-made argument COL,...

But to me, the bigger picture is, if there is enough demand for a U8 travel team and/or league - which obviously there is based on the existing plethora of U8 teams - then who is anyone to say "you can't do that any more."

And as far as the USSF goes, I'm not overly impressed with the results of ANY of their policies to date. So quoting USSF recommendations isn't likely to sway me.

I guess I just don't understand this "one size fits all" mentality of youth soccer. Let parents decide what's best for their kids. Andif they are living vicariously through their kids - so what? I've seen just as many parents live vicariously thorugh their kids in academics, drama, dance, etc. Is it right? No. But you can pretty much point a finger at any parent who pushes their kids to excel at ANYTHING and make a case that they're living vicariously through their kid.

You might also define "living vicariously" as "wanting their kid to have a better life". But I suppose it depends if you want to look at the positive side of things versus the negative side of things.

And, back to the original topic, I simply think that the overall positives of U8 travel soccer far outweigh the negatives.

To that point, even if you did away with U8 travel soccer - do you really think doing so would make a dent in what's wrong with youth soccer? Really?

JB

[Unregistered]

The problem is that the parents rarely have any notion of what is good in terms of soccer. Pretty much they are all running under "more is better" banner.

The fact is - it really is up to the coaches, club admins, state admins and up - to define boundaries for the "good of the game." Whether it's USSF, USYS, or SRI, they have a responsibility to create boundaries. If you let parents do what they want, the kids would hop out of the stroller, practice corner kicks and play 11 a side soccer.

I had neighbors traveling to an adjacent town so their kid could play U5 (YES U5!!) soccer so they could get a jump start!!! People are crazy.

[JBsoccer]

The problem is that the parents rarely have any notion of what is good in terms of soccer. Pretty much they are all running under "more is better" banner.

The fact is - it really is up to the coaches, club admins, state admins and up - to define boundaries for the "good of the game." Whether it's USSF, USYS, or SRI, they have a responsibility to create boundaries. If you let parents do what they want, the kids would hop out of the stroller, practice corner kicks and play 11 a side soccer.

I had neighbors traveling to an adjacent town so their kid could play U5 (YES U5!!) soccer so they could get a jump start!!! People are crazy.

I hear ya....but what about those knuckleheads that put their 3 year olds in those stupid kid beauty pageants. Is that any different? Or how about parents that enroll grade school kids in extra-curricular math classes ( I know one that does this)?

And how are you going to make all these parents "behave" to YOUR sytandards? Who's to say that YOU are right and THEY are wrong? (by YOU I mean anyone).

We live in a free society. Part of living in a free society is that people are given choices. Hopefully people will make responsible choices when given that freedom....but we all know that doesn't always happen. But to them over-regulate everything makes life miserable.

I've got enough faith in parents that I believe they can figure out what's best for their own individual kids - for the most part. I know as a Dad I don't want other knucklehead parents making decisions for me and my kids. I feel pretty confident that I know better than anyone else what's best for MY kids. By the same token, I feel pretty confident that I have NO CLUE what's best for YOUR kid. You do your thing, I'll do mine and I'll bet all of our kids turn out just fine.

JB