Smaller soccer players

[Unregistered]

Speed and skill are all that matter. Size is not a predictor of either speed or skill.

it certainly isn't. It is just a factor. However, to deny it as a factor is equally wrong, especially based on various age groups in youth vs adults.

[Unregistered]

it certainly isn't. It is just a factor. However, to deny it as a factor is equally wrong, especially based on various age groups in youth vs adults.

You do need some height. Very important in clearing balls in dangerous areas. Certainly some height on defense and mid is critical on corners.

- Cujo

[Unregistered]

You do need some height. Very important in clearing balls in dangerous areas. Certainly some height on defense and mid is critical on corners.

- Cujo

With all things being equal you take the size, speed, skill combo. The problem arises when size is overly considered in the equation.

Kids are ruled in or out off the bat often times due to size. The bias is set in after that. And we now know with the relative age effect that in the early years size is often equated with skill and is overly selected.

[OB1]

In the younger ages, size and speed generally match closely with age. The strongest teams generally are full of players born August through December. These players end up on the "fast" track with the others locked out.

Where things dramatically changed were in the ODP and District Select (when district select used birth year). The MAPLE/... hot shot players, ended up being the youngest players on their ODP or District Select teams. The by-passed players due to their month of birth ended up as the older players on the team and had a chance to show their strengths.

[Unregistered]

In the younger ages, size and speed generally match closely with age. The strongest teams generally are full of players born August through December. These players end up on the "fast" track with the others locked out.

Where things dramatically changed were in the ODP and District Select (when district select used birth year). The MAPLE/... hot shot players, ended up being the youngest players on their ODP or District Select teams. The by-passed players due to their month of birth ended up as the older players on the team and had a chance to show their strengths.

This is proven out in Malcolm Gladwell's "Outliers" - in the Junior Hockey chapter.

[Unregistered]

In the younger ages, size and speed generally match closely with age. The strongest teams generally are full of players born August through December. These players end up on the "fast" track with the others locked out.

Where things dramatically changed were in the ODP and District Select (when district select used birth year). The MAPLE/... hot shot players, ended up being the youngest players on their ODP or District Select teams. The by-passed players due to their month of birth ended up as the older players on the team and had a chance to show their strengths.

Does anyone know the birth dates of most of the national team players? Could be wrong but I believe that it is the 1st quarter of the calendar year.

[OB1]

By sophomore year in college for men and junior year in HS for girls, the age advantage is almost entirely gone. Unfortunately the "fast tracking" of players at too young an age generally discourages many of the February to July children from continuing in the sport.

Our youngest son was born in May. He was usually the youngest player on his team. While he was skilled and had good field vision, he was passed over in preference for bigger players. While being able to find a niche on his club team, he was cut from his HS team freshman and sophomore years. He made his HS soccer team junior year, attended a D1 college, walked on and made the team.

One thing that we are grateful about was a HS soccer coach who looked at everyone at tryouts with fresh eyes each year. In many HS's, once cut there are no second or third chances.

[Unregistered]

The ignorance of many (not all) parents here is amazing !! Don't blame you , you have only seen mediocre soccer and coaches (and that goes for DA level for the most part too, compared too , compared to world standards as da produces very few pro players)

Size is valued for certain positions of course. But it is absolutely ridiculous to say a smaller player can't play top soccer. Around the world in very top teams there are tons of small or avg height players.

What happens in the U.S. Is that it's a lower level of soccer - when there isn't a lot of ball skill and intelligence of course you are left with the physical big players being unduly valued.

The smaller players weren't trained to the level of high technical proficiency here so if everyone is mediocre on the ball of course the coaches will look for the big players !

However if players are trained high level speed is neutral for the most part.

Two of the absolute top U.S. Youth players - at top youth academies in UK and Spain now , are smaller players !

Anyone with a true eye watching a da game sees the same thing for the most part - top athetes not best trained. Physical ball. When i was overseas I watched a visiting u16 academy level team lose to a U14 team in pro academy by a wide margin. The little technical kids just made the bigger USA kids run around while the small kids made the ball do the work - was an easy win and exposed how untrained the USA "top" kids are by world standards size meant nothing.

Here , the smaller kid who is good on the ball is often overlooked at a young age and suffers from lack of training, in b and c team land. That's why they don't have a chance later.

There's nothing wrong with being big - the issue is that smaller players around the world reach top levels and are identified too if they have skill in almost every other country but ours.

It's the coaches fault. The parents of these kids don't know any better. They are coached to play college ball , in a physical style,at the most. Won't change in the near term.

When you are in a true academy where players are sold years later you better believe they will roll out the red carpet for a kid with skill and work the physical over time.

Ps. Of course you have to be athletic , but both big or smaller kids can be highly athletic by aoccer standards.

[Unregistered]

Agree.
If you look at our MNT, you will know our style is to build a big wall, park a big bus. Of course US soccer need to find some bigger player who can kick the ball.

The ignorance of many (not all) parents here is amazing !! Don't blame you , you have only seen mediocre soccer and coaches (and that goes for DA level for the most part too, compared too , compared to world standards as da produces very few pro players)

Size is valued for certain positions of course. But it is absolutely ridiculous to say a smaller player can't play top soccer. Around the world in very top teams there are tons of small or avg height players.

What happens in the U.S. Is that it's a lower level of soccer - when there isn't a lot of ball skill and intelligence of course you are left with the physical big players being unduly valued.

The smaller players weren't trained to the level of high technical proficiency here so if everyone is mediocre on the ball of course the coaches will look for the big players !

However if players are trained high level speed is neutral for the most part.

Two of the absolute top U.S. Youth players - at top youth academies in UK and Spain now , are smaller players !

Anyone with a true eye watching a da game sees the same thing for the most part - top athetes not best trained. Physical ball. When i was overseas I watched a visiting u16 academy level team lose to a U14 team in pro academy by a wide margin. The little technical kids just made the bigger USA kids run around while the small kids made the ball do the work - was an easy win and exposed how untrained the USA "top" kids are by world standards size meant nothing.

Here , the smaller kid who is good on the ball is often overlooked at a young age and suffers from lack of training, in b and c team land. That's why they don't have a chance later.

There's nothing wrong with being big - the issue is that smaller players around the world reach top levels and are identified too if they have skill in almost every other country but ours.

It's the coaches fault. The parents of these kids don't know any better. They are coached to play college ball , in a physical style,at the most. Won't change in the near term.

When you are in a true academy where players are sold years later you better believe they will roll out the red carpet for a kid with skill and work the physical over time.

Ps. Of course you have to be athletic , but both big or smaller kids can be highly athletic by aoccer standards.

[Unregistered]

The ignorance of many (not all) parents here is amazing !! Don't blame you , you have only seen mediocre soccer and coaches (and that goes for DA level for the most part too, compared too , compared to world standards as da produces very few pro players)

Size is valued for certain positions of course. But it is absolutely ridiculous to say a smaller player can't play top soccer. Around the world in very top teams there are tons of small or avg height players.

What happens in the U.S. Is that it's a lower level of soccer - when there isn't a lot of ball skill and intelligence of course you are left with the physical big players being unduly valued.

The smaller players weren't trained to the level of high technical proficiency here so if everyone is mediocre on the ball of course the coaches will look for the big players !

However if players are trained high level speed is neutral for the most part.

Two of the absolute top U.S. Youth players - at top youth academies in UK and Spain now , are smaller players !

Anyone with a true eye watching a da game sees the same thing for the most part - top athetes not best trained. Physical ball. When i was overseas I watched a visiting u16 academy level team lose to a U14 team in pro academy by a wide margin. The little technical kids just made the bigger USA kids run around while the small kids made the ball do the work - was an easy win and exposed how untrained the USA "top" kids are by world standards size meant nothing.

Here , the smaller kid who is good on the ball is often overlooked at a young age and suffers from lack of training, in b and c team land. That's why they don't have a chance later.

There's nothing wrong with being big - the issue is that smaller players around the world reach top levels and are identified too if they have skill in almost every other country but ours.

It's the coaches fault. The parents of these kids don't know any better. They are coached to play college ball , in a physical style,at the most. Won't change in the near term.

When you are in a true academy where players are sold years later you better believe they will roll out the red carpet for a kid with skill and work the physical over time.

Ps. Of course you have to be athletic , but both big or smaller kids can be highly athletic by aoccer standards.

Yeah, let's start a Lilliputian league.

[Unregistered]

Yeah, let's start a Lilliputian league.

Nice try. Nowhere in that post did it say anything against big players, just that you don't have to be tall to play top level soccer (top level, not typical USA soccer).

Don't think a llilipulitian team would work here, although Barcelona did try it-- even the man up front, neymar is 5'9"" - he prob would be discounted as a forward in your kids club a team when he was young,cause not the tallest in terms of those headers from midfield :)

[Unregistered]

Yeah, let's start a Lilliputian league.

You are exactly who he is referring to in regards to U.S. appreciation of skill players. Bigger players will always be taken over smaller equally skilled players because with a bigger player, even if you are wrong about their projection, you can still adapt a style of play that takes advantage of their size.

It is unfortunate that bigger kids who may be less skilled in the long run still win out because they can at least be used to park the bus.

A parallel sport with similar issues is hockey. There is still room in the NHL for small, skilled players but it is easier to pick "cant miss" bigger players and convert them to space filling, trapping players if their skill projection does not pan out.

The game is then adjusted to the benefits of size over skill by developing systems that utilize physical attributes over ability.

[Unregistered]

The silly part is, your angst and a few tens of thousands spent on club is not going to change the reality that coaches value athleticism.

[Unregistered]

The silly part is, your angst and a few tens of thousands spent on club is not going to change the reality that coaches value athleticism.

Well, they should be valuing talented, skilled soccer players over raw athleticism. It isn't angst, it is simply the wrong prioritization in a pay to play, win now system.

[Unregistered]

What about extending DAP by a few years? That way, those players who have come up through the system and are identified as having exceptional ball skills and field vision, but need to develop more physically (having been passed over by the best college programs), can continue on training in an environment which values their development, rather than languishing on a sub-par college team or quitting altogether. The club should be invested in these kids, having put in years training them, so want to see them succeed. The players could be taking college classes while training. Yes, yes, I know, there is always the funding issue.