I understand the the pre-academy teams are made up of kids from one certain birth year (Ie 98 is all 98 birthdates)

Whereas the regular soccer leagues have late year 98's (August to DEcember 98, play as 99 players) While this may help the late year kids during regular play, it will hurt them if they try to join a PRE-Academy team.

Are there any parents that had a late 98 player that played his regular club soccer as a 99 that then made the 98 year Pre-academy team? Did he play up during his regular club years or just have to step up during the pre-academy tryouts? Just curious as to how this has worked out.

While I don't have specifics to DFW teams, generally speaking, it is rare for the youngest players in a given age group to be the "impact players". With exceptions of course.

A good example would be the typical ODP team. Using 97 birth years as an example, the majority of the rosters are going to be loaded with players from the older club age group. U14's vs U13's.

Some states that field multiple teams try to seperate the players into "older" and "younger" groups.

A 'late year' 99 club aged player would need to be exceptional to be considered a top '98 preacademy level player. Given the relative age effect with boys at that age.

Running wrote:I understand the the pre-academy teams are made up of kids from one certain birth year (Ie 98 is all 98 birthdates)

Whereas the regular soccer leagues have late year 98's (August to DEcember 98, play as 99 players) While this may help the late year kids during regular play, it will hurt them if they try to join a PRE-Academy team.

Are there any parents that had a late 98 player that played his regular club soccer as a 99 that then made the 98 year Pre-academy team? Did he play up during his regular club years or just have to step up during the pre-academy tryouts? Just curious as to how this has worked out.

Our bb played 99 last year and is now a pre-academy player. I really don't see him suffering much. He used to attend 98 practices last year, and this year, he's also trying to fit in at least one 97 practice. I wouldn't worry too much about it.

Agreed Smurfie. It comes down to first touch, skill and IQ. We have a true 99 as a starter. So I don't buy into the general assumption that early birth year players are better by default. Too many factors to consider.

Yes, there are exceptions. But, if you look at the better teams, historically they have the bigger, faster and stronger players. Usually, physical maturation plays a big part of the equation.

That said, I have always put my son in situations where he was NOT the biggest or fastest. he had to rely on his football "brain" and his technical ability to increase his speed of play.

"Playing/training up" doesn't automatically make a player better. There are pros and cons associated with the practice. At some point, they have to compete against their age group peers in order to gauge their development.

Most clubs and coaches would prefer to keep a dominant player in their own age group. Their "success" is determined by wins. Many times at the expense of the individual player.

At 13 or 14, there's usually a huge difference between a kid born in January and a kid born in December.

All you have to do is take a look at the national team rosters and see the birth months within a given year. Or just google "relative age effect".

Personally, I'm not an advocate of having teams grouped by birth year. Not under the age of 15/16.

With ODP there's no getting around it because of the international rules aspect of team selections. Groupings based on school year make more sense for players below 15.

Laimport wrote:
"Playing/training up" doesn't automatically make a player better. There are pros and cons associated with the practice. At some point, they have to compete against their age group peers in order to gauge their development.

Actually, there are more advantages for the younger player practicing up. Since they often practice under the same coach, or within the same club, they are less likely to get hurt during practice. They get used to playing with bigger kids and learn the tricks on how to survive out there. Mine learned how to slide under the big guys and get the ball, for example. I know an 00 who does fine practicing with the 98s. I don't think it's for everyone, though. If the child cannot keep up with the bigger boys, you're going to have some parents angry at you for coming to their practice sessions. On the other hand, the child wouldn't be there unless the coach agreed, so you can always tell them to complain to the coach.

I completely agree with you. Last year my 98 played up one year. Trained up with a local 94 team. he didn't win a lot of sprints. But he could keep up physically. Even guest played in a friendly and held his own.

He still trains up with a 96 team. Trains once a week with his 98 team.

It has to be for the very best players though. A player that can't keep up physically, technically and tactically will only water down the training of the older players.

I always go out of my way to make sure the DOC and the coach are on the same page.

I generally could care less if the parents complain. Most of them don't know enough about the game to make any rational argument anyway.

I'd have to do some digging to find it, but there actually is a well received study that showed the older kids (1st 3 or 4 months) in an age group outperform their younger peers by a statistically significant margin. Don't ask me what they used as criteria because I just don't remember. I remember thinking that my son was at a bit of a disadvantage because he was late April...then I remembered it was just a game and all he wanted was to play and have fun.

Happy:

Malcom Gladwell’s book, “Outliers” devotes a chapter to this, primarily using the Canadian national hockey team as an example. There are other studies, but I bet this is the one you are thinking of.

The beauty of it all is that by 16, the field levels out.

Skill and brains, all things equal, reign supreme.

Laimport wrote:The beauty of it all is that by 16, the field levels out.

Skill and brains, all things equal, reign supreme.

not necessarily, that is why there are persons of different heights, weights, and strengths at all ages not just under 16.

My son is a December 98 b day and he is doing just fine.

happyfeet wrote:I'd have to do some digging to find it, but there actually is a well received study that showed the older kids (1st 3 or 4 months) in an age group outperform their younger peers by a statistically significant margin. Don't ask me what they used as criteria because I just don't remember. I remember thinking that my son was at a bit of a disadvantage because he was late April...then I remembered it was just a game and all he wanted was to play and have fun.

Apparently some Classic League board members buy into that idealogy. Good thing we are playing soccer and not hockey. Small late birth year kids need not apply.

Guess everyone's child is a prodigy. At least in their eyes.

I find it hard to believe (because it is so rare)that one of the youngest players on a reputedly 'top team' is the top player.

Unless that player is so exceptional technically, tactically and athletically....

And if they are there relative physical maturity has something to do with it.

arsenalfan, I understand that different players have different strengths, physical abilities, etc...

My point is that those 'inequities' are greatly diminished after puberty. Usually around the age of 16 or 17. It's not strictly based on actual physical size.

Unfortunately, that is one of the key problems with youth soccer. Instead of focusing on technical development, the MO has always been to go after the big, fast kids.

Consequently, overlooking skill and intelligence.

LP, I agree with your last point. Regarding prodigy, don't misunderstand my view. My prodigy is me. Sports are a distraction to video games at my house. Ultimately, though, it's academics over athletics. The rules are simple, no grades, no sports. No sports, no video games.

Same here.

Didn't mean to offend.

Ultimately, the ones that put in the time and effort to develop their game will end up being the best players.

It's a process. And I've seen far too many thinking they can take shortcuts.

My philosophy has always been that, if a player is the most 'advanced' and otherwise dominant, then he probably isn't being challenged enough. At a minimum, that player needs to be put into situations where they aren't the 'best player'.

I'll admit to being curious watching this play out for my kid's age group. Watching the 02,03 & 04 players, with the August/September birthdays, dominate because they use their size advantage makes me wonder what will happen to them IF they ever hit an age pure team.

I have seen too many rely solely on their age advantage and ignore other elements of their game.

wetgrass wrote:I'll admit to being curious watching this play out for my kid's age group. Watching the 02,03 & 04 players, with the August/September birthdays, dominate because they use their size advantage makes me wonder what will happen to them IF they ever hit an age pure team.

I have seen too many rely solely on their age advantage and ignore other elements of their game.

It would be interesting but if I am correct in the way I understand these things, if the players stay in Classic league, they will never have to be on an age pure team. It will only effect them if they try to go to Pre-Academy, Academy and I think ODP. It is a built in advantage for the late month birth folks now but I guess they had to make a cut off somewhere.

What???

Either way, there are going to be kids at a disadvantage.

With ODP/PA/DA it's the Nov-Dec b'days.

In club, it's the June/July b'days.

August/September tend to reap the benefits.

It's not just birth month either. It's the rate of physical maturation relative to their peers. Not just height or even weight. Muscle development, coordination, balance....

wetgrass wrote:I'll admit to being curious watching this play out for my kid's age group. Watching the 02,03 & 04 players, with the August/September birthdays, dominate because they use their size advantage makes me wonder what will happen to them IF they ever hit an age pure team.
I have seen too many rely solely on their age advantage and ignore other elements of their game.

I know a few short 03s and 04s who would love to prove you wrong. If your bb can play, you shouldn't worry about age pure teams. There's a pre-academy game this Sunday, somewhere in Denton,I'll need to look it up... If you come out and watch, you might see our 00 developmental player on the 98 DT team...he's tiny, but boy can he play!

wow. Reading comprehension around here stinks. I was ONLY commenting on the kids who rely on their size and age advantage.

Didn't in any shape or form state they were the only ones capable of playing.

I don't doubt that all things being equal, older kids have an inherent advantage over younger kids.

However, (at the risk of getting nerdy...) I think there may be an underlying statistical effect that is being overlooked since most people seem to define "young" players as the last 3 months in an age group.

Take a team of 12 kids, one born in each month of the year. 3 out of the 12 will be "young" players (May, June, July for CL or Oct, Nov Dec for ODP/PA) vs 9 others.

So the probability the top player is "young" is 3/12 (or 1/4) and the probability that the top player is one of the others i.e. not "young" is 9/12 (or 3/4).

So on average young players are 3x less likely to be the top player on a team just because of how we define "young".

great thread!

All kidding aside, it sounds like there are some talented players coming up through the pipeline. That's always encouraging to hear.

Puberty tends to mix things up a bit. Some players tend to go through an 'awkward/clumsy' phase that may cause damage to their touch. However, the more time they spend on the ball, the more the effect is lessened.

I'm a firm believer in taking talented technical and tactical players and giving them the chance to really sharpen their abilities as players.

You have to find the right balance of challenge of success.

Up early for a garage sale. Smurfie, I believe your 00 PA DP is a late 99 birth year. Speaking of Sunday, is HN going to let the parents watch?


Davito, love your stats. Numbers don't lie, right?


LP, you are spot on.

finish1 wrote: Is HN going to let the parents watch?

Yes! I get to watch, at my own risk, and I'm also allowed to bring children under 16! Life is good

finish1 wrote: Sports are a distraction to video games at my house.

That explains everything!!

I'll play. Explains what?

finish1 wrote:I'll play. Explains what?

not too sure