Started By
Message

re: Can someone explain to me why our youth system is bad?

Posted on 10/19/17 at 11:53 am to
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
36387 posts
Posted on 10/19/17 at 11:53 am to
Given the size requirements, soccer isn't competing for the same sorts of athletes that other sports are. Technical coaching is far more important.
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
125494 posts
Posted on 10/19/17 at 11:56 am to
quote:

The minimum salary is more important than the guys at the top.


Yup and MLS on average is around League One
Posted by Gaston
Dirty Coast
Member since Aug 2008
39120 posts
Posted on 10/19/17 at 1:10 pm to
I think short little kids are more dexterous ball handlers at a young age. The kids who end up being great athletes just can't compete or aren't as sharp as the littler kids. Instead of getting the best training, the athlete kid's don't make the best club teams when it really matters for their development.

Just my opinion from watching youth soccer.
Posted by The Mick
Member since Oct 2010
43285 posts
Posted on 10/19/17 at 2:04 pm to
quote:

Given the size requirements, soccer isn't competing for the same sorts of athletes that other sports are.
Disagree.

PS - meaning of course 6-10 and 7ft guys are out the pool, but center backs are usually big tall and physical over 6 ft typically. Tons of NFL corner backs and wide receivers are 5'9 - 6'0 range which would be no problem for soccer.


If you took every NFL, NBA, and MLB player (Americans of course) and trained them in soccer all their life instead of football/basketball, do you think your talent pool for US mens team would be better or worse? And if you think our USMNT is loaded with athletes on par with NFL players then that's insane.
This post was edited on 10/19/17 at 3:02 pm
Posted by The Mick
Member since Oct 2010
43285 posts
Posted on 10/19/17 at 2:57 pm to
quote:

Yup and MLS on average is around League One
Didn't realize this, interesting.
Posted by chalmetteowl
Chalmette
Member since Jan 2008
47959 posts
Posted on 10/19/17 at 3:04 pm to
quote:

Yup and MLS on average is around League One


with average attendance at the level of the Championship...
Posted by DoreonthePlains
Auburn, AL
Member since Nov 2013
7436 posts
Posted on 10/19/17 at 3:10 pm to
quote:

And if you think our USMNT is loaded with athletes on par with NFL players then that's insane.


How many NFL players have the endurance to play a full match? The difference in our best soccer players athletically and similarly sized athletes in other sports is mostly down to training. As a soccer player, you're trained in endurance, quickness, and other sport-specific skills and movements. Meanwhile, football players are, by-and-large, trained in power, strength, and other burst abilities without the same endurance.

The problem is still much more about the quality of instruction and not quality of athlete being instructed in this country. We have so many more people than most every country we face in soccer that we have enough athletes to support the different sports IF the soccer players we have are trained properly. The development of the ones who choose soccer is the problem.
Posted by Bill Parker?
Member since Jan 2013
4493 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 1:03 am to
quote:

I think short little kids are more dexterous ball handlers at a young age. The kids who end up being great athletes just can't compete or aren't as sharp as the littler kids. Instead of getting the best training, the athlete kid's don't make the best club teams when it really matters for their development. Just my opinion from watching youth soccer.


I've seen the exact opposite in my kid's club. However, it is most likely a numbers and demographics issue - if the kids stick with it over a few years and have high level coaching, the cream always rises to the top.
Posted by The Mick
Member since Oct 2010
43285 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 9:28 am to
quote:

How many NFL players have the endurance to play a full match? The difference in our best soccer players athletically and similarly sized athletes in other sports is mostly down to training. As a soccer player, you're trained in endurance, quickness, and other sport-specific skills and movements. Meanwhile, football players are, by-and-large, trained in power, strength, and other burst abilities without the same endurance.
I think you're missing my point. I'm not talking about taking present-day NFL players and flipping them over to soccer. The "would be NFL" athletes would be trained as soccer players their entire life instead of trained as football players. I agree with your comments but I guess I'm not doing a good enough job explaining myself.

I agree skills and development are extremely important. I'm just saying that if soccer attracted the same level of athletes as the NFL, NBA, etc then we'd have better soccer players no doubt. How could we not? The larger the pool of players being developed, the greater the odds of producing top notch players.
Posted by pvilleguru
Member since Jun 2009
60453 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 9:36 am to
quote:

I agree skills and development are extremely important.

It's way more important than getting "top notch athletes". I don't care how fast you can run or how far you can jump. If you can't make a 15 yard pass, you are of no use.
Posted by The Mick
Member since Oct 2010
43285 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 9:56 am to
quote:

It's way more important than getting "top notch athletes". I don't care how fast you can run or how far you can jump. If you can't make a 15 yard pass, you are of no use.
Again you're missing my point. I have never said skills development isn't important. I said we'd be much better off training and developing the skills of superior athletes. It's a simple concept. You're immediately taking the superior athlete and making him spastic or untrainable which is ignorant. I'm talking apples to apples - 6 year old jimmy the average athlete, and 6 year old Johnny the stud athlete. They are both trained in skills and endurance for soccer their entire lives. Who will likely be the better player later on?


Unless you're saying speed, agility, strength, etc have no place in soccer?



Posted by pvilleguru
Member since Jun 2009
60453 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 10:17 am to
quote:

They are both trained in skills and endurance for soccer their entire lives. Who will likely be the better player later on?

Honestly? Probably the average athlete. It's more likely that the better athlete will try to just out athlete the other guy. Your average athlete will probably be in a better position when it's time to turn pro.
Posted by pvilleguru
Member since Jun 2009
60453 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 10:18 am to
quote:

Unless you're saying speed, agility, strength, etc have no place in soccer?

Literally no one is saying this.
Posted by The Mick
Member since Oct 2010
43285 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 10:35 am to
quote:

Honestly? Probably the average athlete. It's more likely that the better athlete will try to just out athlete the other guy. Your average athlete will probably be in a better position when it's time to turn pro.
I'll end our discussion with this....





quote:

Literally no one is saying this.
You just did. You want inferior athletes so they don't try to "out athlete" the other team.
This post was edited on 10/20/17 at 10:48 am
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
36387 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 11:58 am to
quote:

Unless you're saying speed, agility, strength, etc have no place in soccer?



They have a major place, but you can't really use them very well without the ability to hold the ball in dangerous positions. We have plenty of athletic talent. Jozy is bigger and stronger than most strikers. Bradley is massive in comparison to most other central midfielders, etc.

According to Soccernomics, you only need to be able to run 7 m/s to be a professional soccer player. That translates to a 14 second 100 m, and I bet most people on this board could run one 14 second 100 m. Stamina is the more important athletic trait of a potential player, and players with a lot of natural stamina generally have more slow-twitch muscle fiber.

So in response to your question, we don't know who the better player is and won't know. If the average athlete has the better technical skills, then he would be the better player. If the good athlete has better technical skills, then he would be the better player.

The point of technique is to showcase your natural gifts as though the technique is secondary. But technique is learned, it is a skill, and anyone can learn it, and in situations where the youth coaching is poor, there will be a great variable between two players from the same system. That most soccer players are not over 6 foot means that we aren't even competing for the same sorts of athletes as other sports.
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
36387 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 12:04 pm to
quote:

You want inferior athletes so they don't try to "out athlete" the other team


You aren't seeing the other side of this. Good athletes tend to move up the youth ranks very quickly, but if at any point their technical or tactical skills do not develop with them, they are very likely to plateau. I could name a host of youth starlets who are physical specimens who destroyed their age groups who have turned out to be average to below average players. And these starlets are generally considered good athletes too. What you will end up with is a situation like England, who has tons of very fast wingers who love nothing more than dribbling out of bounds.

This is the conundrum of good athletes. You have to have the technical training reinforced, especially during that period where boys become men, and real variance develops. It simply isn't the case that being a good athlete insures that you will be a better professional player. If technical skills aren't reinforced, as they often aren't, even in European systems, then most of the time athleticism is wasted. I wish people could see this. There are so many variables with youth development, and we have numerous models that work, and none of those models discriminates on the basis of athleticism. That's not to say they don't want good athletes, but countries who have had recent reorganizations at the youth level emphasize one thing, technique, over athleticism in every instance. This emphasis allows for their athletes to shine. It doesn't make intuitive sense but the proof is there.
Posted by pvilleguru
Member since Jun 2009
60453 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 12:07 pm to
quote:

You just did. You want inferior athletes so they don't try to "out athlete" the other team
maybe you should actually read my post next time.

There's a huge gulf between saying you don't need speed, endurance, strength, etc. and willing to sacrifice some speed and strength for better skill.
Posted by wm72
Brooklyn
Member since Mar 2010
7800 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 12:45 pm to
quote:

. If technical skills aren't reinforced, as they often aren't, even in European systems, then most of the time athleticism is wasted. I wish people could see this.



This is the point that I think a lot of people who actually do watch a lot of soccer seem to overlook.

I used to watch the Roma youth teams on occasion since they played free matches near my ex gf's parents' villa and what you say about the top European youth teams rings quite true.

First, Roma always had a few super athletes in the youth teams (many African-Italians). At 15-17yo, many seem like the next Pogba or Balotelli but it's only 1 out of every 20 highly hyped players that even end up being as good Stefano Okaka when moving up to top flight.

These are players that came though the exact system as Totti, De Rossi etc. . .

You also watch Roma play a youth match against an EPL team like Chelsea etc and the EPL team often just dominates physically. Aside from maybe 2 Roma players, the simple physical difference looks like Jr high prep school kids against college 5 star recruits.

However, 5 years down the road, it's often that all the athletes dominating the youth games at best at playing Championship level or Serie B whereas the kids getting run over were Alessandro Florenzi or Lorenzo Pellegrini.

Not to say, athletic skills aren't helpful but just that anyone who really closely follows a European club has learned to never really associate it to closely with which players become world class. The kid who actually immediately controls anything he touches even if he's getting completely overrun at 15 years old is most often the one the watch.




Posted by dsides
Member since Jan 2013
5432 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 12:46 pm to
quote:

Above that you have the Da for boys, and ECNL for girls. With the new DA for girls, ECNL will quickly go away in Texas though.


They just started ECNL for boys this year
Posted by crazy4lsu
Member since May 2005
36387 posts
Posted on 10/20/17 at 1:10 pm to
quote:

Not to say, athletic skills aren't helpful but just that anyone who really closely follows a European club has learned to never really associate it to closely with which players become world class. The kid who actually immediately controls anything he touches even if he's getting completely overrun at 15 years old is most often the one the watch.



This is the problem. People don't seem to understand how hard it is to produce athletic, technical players.
They don't seem to realize that you are more likely to end up with Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain (or much, much worse) rather than Thierry Henry.
first pageprev pagePage 5 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram