Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[chadliz]

There is not a blanket theory that works here, the days (my days) of putting the football down and picking up a basketball on the first day of the season, and then picking up a baseball glove etc. are gone.  I wish they weren't, but they are GONE.  If you want to compete at a high level you have to do more advanced play.  My kids are 8-11 and I have seen bastketball, Volleyball, swimming  and a lot of soccer at both rec and club level for all of the above.

Rec sports are great for all kids and frankly all kids now play rec sports which is great.  BUT!!!  if you want to be good at a particular sport, by 10 years old IMHO you need to be moving beyond rec.  Your child will no longer be playing against any kids that can play and by staying in rec and you will be falling behind in skills very quickly.  Again, it's about what your child wants and what kind of athlete he/she is.  I would argue it would be very difficult for a kid to come out of rec at U-12 and make any quality soccer team, at most I think U-10 would be hard.  It doesn't mean it's the right way, it's just flat the facts of matter now.  If my daughter wants to win when she swims she needs to club swim, not a question, but a fact.  She does so she club swims.  I wish she could just swim in the summer and love getting killed by the club swimmers, but she doesn't. 
Soccer as we all know starts making real choices about kids at 12-13 in the US.  If you want to be in that mix at all you'd better put some time in. 
Again, I am not saying if it's right or wrong, I am just stating facts.  By 10-11 if you want to play any sport at a high level it's long time to leave rec behind(football I know doesn't apply).

[lastplanet]

I think it depends what you mean by "serious training".  My club has a U8-U10 development program that is not much more than a rec program at that age.  Fall/Spring seasons with 2 practices a week and 8 games a season.  Like most development programs, I would assume, it focuses on ball skills and small sided (1v1 up to 3v3 practice games and 6v6 league games).  The kids coming out of a dev program have much better ball control skills and are ready for possession-style play at higher levels.  Also these young kids see the older kids in the club and that image of good skills is in their head.  You really see the difference in kids that have worked a few years while young on their touch.   Go out and watch some U11 games of teams composed of rec kids coming out of U10 versus a team with kids coming from a development program.  The difference is striking.  Do those kids with poorer ball skills catch-up?  I'm not sure.  The kids with good skills are going to keep progressing while the others are trying to catch up.  Re burn-out.  I'm sure it depends on the kid.  No way could my son have done full-time soccer before U10 without burning out.  Even U10 was a stretch (he played up at U11).  Fall/Spring dev program with little pressure was what he needed at the younger ages.

[EWSoccer64]

Throw-ins are an individual skill which many if not most 7 yos can learn - but you have to ask them to.

I've seen "B" teams of 9 yos, all of whom can juggle. Have also seen (awhile ago) HS soccer teams where it was a rarity. It just comes down to what expectations have been set.

Ah, we should have known.  One of those who thinks that the skill of juggling is a definitive issue, a definitive characteristic of great players,   a bar that competitive players have to pass to be able to accomplish anything on the field.

If I were the competitive sort, I would say that I most dearly love coaching against teams and clubs which foolishly institute standards of juggling as part of their tryout process.  Alas, I merely feel sorry for the poor misled kids....... :'(

[onetouch]

There is not a blanket theory that works here, the days (my days) of putting the football down and picking up a basketball on the first day of the season, and then picking up a baseball glove etc. are gone.  I wish they weren't, but they are GONE.  If you want to compete at a high level you have to do more advanced play.  My kids are 8-11 and I have seen bastketball, Volleyball, swimming  and a lot of soccer at both rec and club level for all of the above.

Rec sports are great for all kids and frankly all kids now play rec sports which is great.  BUT!!!  if you want to be good at a particular sport, by 10 years old IMHO you need to be moving beyond rec.  Your child will no longer be playing against any kids that can play and by staying in rec and you will be falling behind in skills very quickly.  Again, it's about what your child wants and what kind of athlete he/she is.  I would argue it would be very difficult for a kid to come out of rec at U-12 and make any quality soccer team, at most I think U-10 would be hard.  It doesn't mean it's the right way, it's just flat the facts of matter now.  If my daughter wants to win when she swims she needs to club swim, not a question, but a fact.  She does so she club swims.  I wish she could just swim in the summer and love getting killed by the club swimmers, but she doesn't. 
Soccer as we all know starts making real choices about kids at 12-13 in the US.  If you want to be in that mix at all you'd better put some time in. 
Again, I am not saying if it's right or wrong, I am just stating facts.  By 10-11 if you want to play any sport at a high level it's long time to leave rec behind(football I know doesn't apply).

I don't think U-10 or U11 is when you make or break as a premier youth soccer player. I think U14 is when you can tell if one has a future in high-level soccer because the physical differences start to even out. From my observations, most U14 A teams have a very small percentage of the kids from the original U11 team. Many things can happen between U10/U11 to U14/U15 and usually a lot of early boomers do not make to the end once their physical advantages are gone. And, it's quite common to see kids making the jump from select to premier at the ages of 14 and 15. The difference maker is the time a kid puts in soccer over a period of 4-5 years, not which club team they made at U10/U11. Kids must spend a lot of hours in addition to the club training to become really good. US Youth Club teams typically train 3 hours per week but individually one should train at least 1-2 hours per day. A lot of time on the pitch and a lot of touches. 

[Independent]

I think it depends what you mean by "serious training".  My club has a U8-U10 development program that is not much more than a rec program at that age.  Fall/Spring seasons with 2 practices a week and 8 games a season.  Like most development programs, I would assume, it focuses on ball skills and small sided (1v1 up to 3v3 practice games and 6v6 league games).  The kids coming out of a dev program have much better ball control skills and are ready for possession-style play at higher levels.  Also these young kids see the older kids in the club and that image of good skills is in their head.  You really see the difference in kids that have worked a few years while young on their touch.   Go out and watch some U11 games of teams composed of rec kids coming out of U10 versus a team with kids coming from a development program.  The difference is striking.  Do those kids with poorer ball skills catch-up?  I'm not sure.  The kids with good skills are going to keep progressing while the others are trying to catch up.  Re burn-out.  I'm sure it depends on the kid.  No way could my son have done full-time soccer before U10 without burning out.  Even U10 was a stretch (he played up at U11).  Fall/Spring dev program with little pressure was what he needed at the younger ages.

Again, it really depends on opportunity.  A kid who grows up in an environment where they play in the backyard, street, or park informally, on a regular basis will develop more than a child who goes to formal training (twice a week + game) at that age.  I'm not against the idea of formal development for young kids, the problem I do have is when the charge is high, and is really intended to fund other programs.  That, in my opinion is a racket.

[tripleplay]

One factor not mentioned is player preference. They like select more than rec. The select programs have more energy and enthusiasm, and there is even pride in wearing fancy new club gear. The amount of formal training (2 practices and a game) isn't likely to burn out most people. In fact, being surrounded by people who are enthusiastic about soccer will encourage an increase in informal play. To a certain extent you are paying to join a party - and yes clubs know that and profit from it.

[jensco123]

We played in the PSPL U8 league last year and loved it!  DS got 2 1.5-hr practice sessions a week where they worked on all sorts of ball-skills.  The practices were really outstanding and had lots of ball-touches, with kids receiving far better coaching than DS had gotten when I was coaching him in rec-league, I'll assure you.  Games were a bit chaotic.  Some basic positioning was coached but none of our fullbacks were taught to over-lap the winger.  Kids at that age just don't get the advanced concepts.  It's enough if you can teach your defenders not to play forward.     We liked the league because of the better coaching during (more) practice sessions + the fact that kids on the team had to try-out so were of "like" ability.  Everyone wanted to be there and gave good effort.  We didn't see that in rec-league.  And we didn't have parent-coaches to contend with, either.  We're playing again this year at U9 because we liked it so well.  DS wasn't ready for the year-round premier league yet.  Still needs a "break" between seasons.  Kids vary and I think you just have to find the level of league that suits your child.  For us, the PSPL worked great this year.  Next year at U10, we hope DS is ready for year-round Premier but we'll have to wait and see. 

Just curious.  Are you really saying that you think it was unfortunate that your 7 year old daughter was not being taught the nuances of positional play or was that a bit of sarcasm?  And, interesting comment about not having to "contend" with parent coaches in rec, my experience with parent coached teams has always been a good one (even if the coach knows jack about soccer). 

LOL.  Not at all.  My son (DS) was one of the ones who had difficulty with staying in one position.  :-)  Comment was just to state that at 7 yrs of age, you just aren't going to be able to get all the concepts to sink-in.  So what I liked about it was that we had really nice practice sessions with lots of skill-work, twice a week.  The games were a bit chaotic because the boys were 7.  And I think some chaos is appropriate with 7yr olds.  :-)  I also liked that the boys - in general - had more skill and enjoyment of the game than what we saw in rec.  Could have been our bad luck but we had a poor experience with some of the boys on our last rec team.  As for parent-coaches, I think most parent-coaches have very good intensions.  But I also think there are some who insist that their child is the star forward - which can create problems.

[Independent]

LOL.  Not at all.  My son (DS) was one of the ones who had difficulty with staying in one position.  :-)  Comment was just to state that at 7 yrs of age, you just aren't going to be able to get all the concepts to sink-in.  So what I liked about it was that we had really nice practice sessions with lots of skill-work, twice a week.  The games were a bit chaotic because the boys were 7.  And I think some chaos is appropriate with 7yr olds.  :-)  I also liked that the boys - in general - had more skill and enjoyment of the game than what we saw in rec.  Could have been our bad luck but we had a poor experience with some of the boys on our last rec team.  As for parent-coaches, I think most parent-coaches have very good intensions.  But I also think there are some who insist that their child is the star forward - which can create problems.

My youngest son had a terrible (for him) experience with U8 rec last year.  Similar to you there were kids there (no fault of their own) who had no desire to be there.  The team sucked badly, and he hated the losing.  But, he got over the losses quickly, though he remembers them.  We are giving rec one more try this year before we consider having him try out for a club.  I just wish our rec association (Lake Hills) offered something in the middle (ie Select) for something younger than U12.  I don't know if there is agreement with EFC not to have a program so that more kids get funneled into their tier, but there really is a huge gap between their micro program and select program that needs to be addressed.

[lastplanet]

There are alternatives to an expensive U8-U10 development program.  Lots of clubs have academy programs that run about $100-200 a season (1 session a week).  Even cheaper is to hire a trainer to come work with a team, that might run $30-50 per session divided among 6-10 kids.  You can look for an independent team, the list of PSPL development teams is a place to start.  Some of these will run quite a bit cheaper than a club dev team.  If you have indoor soccer, you can organize an indoor team and select a team of more dedicated/interested kids (it helps to have some kid with good foot skills on the team for other kids to copy and learn from).   Don't think that rec or club soccer are the only options at that age. There are lots of alternatives or supplements.

[tripleplay]

There are alternatives to an expensive U8-U10 development program.  Lots of clubs have academy programs that run about $100-200 a season (1 session a week).  Even cheaper is to hire a trainer to come work with a team, that might run $30-50 per session divided among 6-10 kids.  You can look for an independent team, the list of PSPL development teams is a place to start.  Some of these will run quite a bit cheaper than a club dev team.  If you have indoor soccer, you can organize an indoor team and select a team of more dedicated/interested kids (it helps to have some kid with good foot skills on the team for other kids to copy and learn from).   Don't think that rec or club soccer are the only options at that age. There are lots of alternatives or supplements.

Most rec teams are randomly formed and are going to have players not interested in hiring a  trainer. The academy programs are a fancy name for soccer camp. Good training for those who want it, but not as fun as a dev team. Indoor is quite expensive and also doesn't usually involve practice. In my experience, it's just come and play.

It's a real shame that most rec programs don't tap into the interest that is there.  You can't really fault the premier clubs/soccer professionals for moving into fill the void.

[Independent]

There are alternatives to an expensive U8-U10 development program.  Lots of clubs have academy programs that run about $100-200 a season (1 session a week).  Even cheaper is to hire a trainer to come work with a team, that might run $30-50 per session divided among 6-10 kids.  You can look for an independent team, the list of PSPL development teams is a place to start.  Some of these will run quite a bit cheaper than a club dev team.  If you have indoor soccer, you can organize an indoor team and select a team of more dedicated/interested kids (it helps to have some kid with good foot skills on the team for other kids to copy and learn from).   Don't think that rec or club soccer are the only options at that age. There are lots of alternatives or supplements.

My elder son plays on an independent team, and that has been a good experience; this included forming indoor teams  The challenge with independence is finding or happening upon a group of like-minded parents willing to commit to such a venture.  I have learned more about "kids" soccer over the last year and a half than I ever really wanted to.

But, It just hasn't been easy yet with the younger one yet.   I wasn't really aware of any "academy" options, other than some once a week offers from clubs that are advertised as training sessions in preparation for tryouts.  Would be interested to hear more about this.

[Independent]

There are alternatives to an expensive U8-U10 development program.  Lots of clubs have academy programs that run about $100-200 a season (1 session a week).  Even cheaper is to hire a trainer to come work with a team, that might run $30-50 per session divided among 6-10 kids.  You can look for an independent team, the list of PSPL development teams is a place to start.  Some of these will run quite a bit cheaper than a club dev team.  If you have indoor soccer, you can organize an indoor team and select a team of more dedicated/interested kids (it helps to have some kid with good foot skills on the team for other kids to copy and learn from).   Don't think that rec or club soccer are the only options at that age. There are lots of alternatives or supplements.

Most rec teams are randomly formed and are going to have players not interested in hiring a  trainer. The academy programs are a fancy name for soccer camp. Good training for those who want it, but not as fun as a dev team. Indoor is quite expensive and also doesn't usually involve practice. In my experience, it's just come and play.

It's a real shame that most rec programs don't tap into the interest that is there.  You can't really fault the premier clubs/soccer professionals for moving into fill the void.

I certainly don't fault the clubs, they are running a business, and they have identified a need.  But, from what I have seen, it is not great value for the cost.  I agree that there is a significantly under served market that could be tapped. 

[lastplanet]

Certainly a development program run by a good club is better (and more fun) than doing a bunch of camps or academies. But my club's dev team is $500 per 3-month season.  So $1000 for the fall/spring seasons.  Ouch, but yeah the kids love it and there is loads of club spirit and the coaches are good.  An academy program is quite a bit cheaper.  I know xFire, Eastside, and SU run U8-10 "academy" programs (1 day per week).  My son did some of the SU sessions and did learn a lot.  I thought it was worth the $200 for 10 sessions.  He also did lots of camps with different groups: Coerver, Intnl Soccer School, Fewing, UW, NW Soccer School, Skyhawks, Arena Sports.  Coerver was the best for him, but he got something out of most of them.  He wasn't on a dev team because I didn't know about them at the time.  After doing a mish-mash of different camps, clinics and academies, it was a relief to just get him on a club team at U10 and stop having to search around for clinics.  The wallet hurts but it's easier this way.   I do like the whole rah-rah club spirit part.  I mean I'm hoping son does not become a professional footballer---honestly I'd rather he grow up to be an engineer---so I don't see the club years as necessarily 'preparing' him for something else so much as the club years as being the goal themselves (and all the good things that come with learning to work hard as a team to achieve goals).   Then again back in the rec world, we didn't have the angst of club politics either.....  and we didn't have the angst of yearly tryouts....  oh well....

[EWSoccer64]

There must be a lot of dismal rec programs and rec coaches out in TP's neck of the woods.   My kids had varying quality of rec coaches, but at a minimum they all helped foster a love of the game and developed skills.   And it was usually 2 practices and 1 game per week.   And the cost was miniscule, which helped keep numbers up.  And some of the coaches they had were excellent by anyone's standards.

The RCL has already driven "elite, premier" standards down to the level that select used to be at, and much of select into the arena of upper level rec.  This RCL club business of going ever lower in age is designed to enrich and further empower the clubs, pure and simple.

[eastofthe206]

@ Independent:  EFC has an "academy" program, on Friday nights, that is oriented toward supporting the the select/rec clubs for the EYSA, of which your local club Lake Hills is a member.  There has been a significant amount of time and effort put in the last three years building the program and making sure that the constituent clubs see this a support to their dev efforts, as opposed to a siphon of talent.  In that respect things are better than they were three years ago, and there continues to be room for improvement.

Your Lake Hills club has some killer talent, and good coaches...keep up the searching and questioning, and I am sure you'll find a place that energizes and challenges your DK.

For those kids that want to go to a level past rec or select ... well ... of course the academy serves as a marketing tool for the RCL club.  I don't see a thing wrong with that, so long as there is clear communication up and down the local Association about it.  And I think that has been done in this case.

[Southend soccer mom]

Love Coerver training...wish I would have gotten my son into it sooner.

[tripleplay]

There must be a lot of dismal rec programs and rec coaches out in TP's neck of the woods.   My kids had varying quality of rec coaches,

Rec is so popular in your town that the association had to limit select and when one club dared to actually give players what they want, they kicked the club out of the association.

And my neck of the woods has close to 4 times the per capita (i.e. players / population) wys soccer participation that yours has. One reasonable default strategy would be to see what the self-described "experts" like you come up with and do the exact opposite.

[tripleplay]

@ Independent:  EFC has an "academy" program, on Friday nights, that is oriented toward supporting the the select/rec clubs for the EYSA, of which your local club Lake Hills is a member.  There has been a significant amount of time and effort put in the last three years building the program and making sure that the constituent clubs see this a support to their dev efforts, as opposed to a siphon of talent.  In that respect things are better than they were three years ago, and there continues to be room for improvement.

EFC is responding to the Crossfire Jr. and ISC Gunners' low-age offerings, which have been attracting lots of players from EFC families over the last few years.

Traditionally clubs like Lake Hills (widely regarded as an excellent club) have sought to curtail younger age offerings in order to preserve their rec monopoly as long as possible. Don't think that's going to work any more.

[lastplanet]

Though I've been posting on academy/dev offerings at the U8/U10 level, I'd never knock the rec system.  I'm a rec coach for a U14 and a U10 team, both of which have been together since U7.  So I've invested  a lot in the rec system.  I try to offer the best training and "team spirit" experience I can for my rec teams, but I believe that "rec" is rec.  By that I mean it is for all kids, regardless of ability/skill, with equal play time and attention.   I want to teach the kids on my team that being a "klutz" doesn't mean you can't be an athlete and enjoy team sports---which frankly is what kids learn by the time they hit middle school at least and what they are going to face, sadly, when they don't make a team at select tryouts.   Also, I only do 1 required practice a week for my boys team since a lot of them play multiple sports and I don't want them to have to give up playing on their rec team with friends.  That's all well and good and lovely yada, yada, BUT you always have some kids who are "more into soccer" or more into challenging themselves (at whatever sport).  Innate talent is good, but I've seen "klutz"s who I'd never think could play select, improve dramatically over 2 years and make teams by sheer determination and hard work.   These kids seem to thrive on higher challenges and lots more training time.  If they aren't pushed to stop kicking-and-running and work on ball control with a specific training program that between the age of 8 and 12, IMHO I think it is really hard for them to develop good touch and control later. Prior to 2 years ago these kids were not served well by the rec clubs in my area (SYSA); they had to go out of area, find independent clinics or play up (if they were really advanced).  It's gotten much better with SU now offering a rec academy program starting at U8.  That's been great for kids (and their parents who want more training at a reasonable cost and time commitment.   There are also lots of other options too now, though I have to be a careful about not "promoting" non-SYSA programs.  My son's club, ECFC, has a U8/U10 dev team program, but for obvious reasons I do not mention that to parents on my SYSA rec teams!

Re: Coerver, from another comment.  I LOVE Coerver, my son got so much from that.  Wish they had their act together more (hello do you even look at email?) and offered shorter programs.  Now that my son plays club soccer, doing a year-round once a week extra training is not possible.  He needs at least 1 day off a week!

[eastofthe206]

TP: you are correct on both points, or at least I share your opinion.  EFC has responded to the changing market, and is meeting demand.  Def XC and ISC got there first, I suppose that has a lot to do with the different ways the organizations are structured.

The Lake Hills select program, I think, is the best example I've seen of a soccer environment that provides a challenging level of play to the multi-sport athletes.  As said before, killer talent in that club...just that those guys are playing club baseball, or AAU/Select basketball, etc.  I'm sure there are other just as good examples, LH is just the one I know.

Getting back to the "starting them early" part of this topic, as parents I think we monitor and guide our young athletes, but ultimately it has to be their own inner desire and ambition that determines how much training, what competitive level, etc.  I have a DK in the younger set that is really into B'ball and Soccer, and has been with an RCL club for a few years now.  He really wants to play AAU b'ball, and is good enough to do so.  The rule around our house, though, is you cannot play RCL and AAU, as parents we can't conceive how there would be time to do that and maintain good grades and a little bit of a social life outside sports.  So...compromise is he can choose Select soccer and AAU B'ball...but it is gonna' be his choice, not ours.  Will be interesting to see what choices are made - but we know that if the choice isn't made this year (12 going on 13) that the window is closed for AAU.  He just won't be able to catch up.  We'll see, and I hope as parents we are making the right decisions.

[tripleplay]

 I want to teach the kids on my team that being a "klutz" doesn't mean you can't be an athlete and enjoy team sports---which frankly is what kids learn by the time they hit middle school at least and what they are going to face, sadly, when they don't make a team at select tryouts. 

In my area it is worse than this. When the U9s go off to join a dev team, the U8 teammates left behind in rec already start to feel second class - even those with more talent than some who leave. Personally I think upgrading rec and, especially, removing its' stigma should be the highest priority of WYS (instead of micromanaging the premier sphere) I think the way to do this is to tier rec from the very beginning - I.e. Implement like v like. Many of our clubs have rigid policies in theory designed to create perfectly equal teams, but it really just leaves everybody not at the center of a team somewhat unsatisfied. You could improve things without even looking at talent. For example, there are people who care enough about soccer to arrive to practice on time and there are people who don't. I shouldn't have to spend $2000 and drive 30 mins to a
game in order to play with people who have similar priorities.