Soccer positions in academy and its impact on kid learning and enjoying the game

Soccer positions in academy and its impact on kid learning and enjoying the game:


I would like to hear as what you all think on the topic.

How much influence the kid, parent and coach have on what position the kids plays? What happens if the kid does not prefer the position the coach has asked the kid to play? Do you as parent talk to the coach about position of kids or just leave it to coach. What has been your experience after the talk? Obvious thing kid can is to gain the skills that suits for the position desired, but without the coach's support, it would not be very easy.

Does your dd's coach adopt pretty much fixed roster positions, or does she experment and provide opportunities for kids to experience all the positions/aspects of the game. At this stage in the game, is it decided the kids can only play certain positions, they have to get better at that position.

AT THIS AGE group (academy) are some positions inherently better in developing good soccer skills for the kid? center mid versus forward or back versus mid.

Some kids tend to prefer defense versus offense, or vice versa, some prefer to be goalies. I would think generally most kids want to score goals. Coaches want good defense and offense in a game. Where does he put his best player? Is it offense or defense. From what I have seen in several teams it is usually offense at this age group. So many times it is 'forward' position. So in the desired order of positions for a kid, does forward, midfielders come first and defense the last? Do coaches put the best player on those offensive positions first?

Game is only part of the learning, but game influences coach, kid and practices and vice versa.

I would like to hear from all.

I am one of the biggest proponents you'll ever meet of teaching young players to be capable in all positions with the possible exception of keeper.

Ideally, the coach and parent should be on the same page regarding this subject from the start. Coaches should NOT pigeon-hole players into positions because it suits their needs... which usually equates to winning games. Similarly, parents should NOT approach a coach with the mindset that their daughter is only a forward, mid, or defender.

Yes, I would agree that many players just seem to have certain natural tendencies for the spots into which they migrate. And it's fine after around U12 to start specializing. But not at the academy age. If I get a player who is defensive minded, the goal becomes to train her to know when to shift gears into an offensive approach (and vice versa). This is best accomplished by teaching the player to be reasonably proficient at the more offensive positions. A good forward is only as effective as her ability to defend (steal the ball back), and a good defender is only as effective as her ability to move the ball forward (especially from a flatback 4 lineup). And as a positive by-product, I am covered when any player is missing from a game in that I can play any of the girls at any position.

My daughter's academy coaches were the type to make sure she knew how to play all positions (except keeper). Now as a competitive player, she is comfortable to play in most positions. While she is mainly a midfielder, she can step back and play an outside back, or step forward as a winger. Her skills and knowledge that she was taught in Academy has now translated well in her competitive play. I think she will be a much more versatile player... hope that when she gets older and the coach asks her "what position do you play?", she can respond with "where does the team need me?" Yeah, my DD didn't like defender (where is the glory in that, right?), but as she has matured a bit, she understands the TEAM concept and that EVERY position is as vital as the other.

I agree with all of that. I'm a parent. Soccer is a team sport. As the kids get older, individuals dominate less and the better team wins more.

My daughter is now playing defender for the first time. She's played some as a forward and a good deal as an outside mid. She was not terribly excited about being a defender at first, but she is quickly learning it is a very important position. This next statement should in no way be interpreted as argumentitive. It is not intended that way at all. My daughter is finding that the glory in defender comes from shutting down the opposing teams best scorers. Eventually in almost every game the defender must make a play on the best scorer of the opposing team. After three league games, we have not been scored on. As one of the defenders, my daughter takes great pride in that and her teammates are thanking her for her efforts. Recognition from your peers is the glory.

Totally agree with that Gumby. My daughter was moved to outside back in yesterday's game and shut down their track star of a forward. She loved making that girl mad!

Thanks Bierluva, Justasport and Gumby. Good insight.

I completely agree with Gumby. As a coach, I've placed the girls I trust the most on the back line. They are the ones who are usually not the most skilled with the ball, but they are aggressive and have great defensive instincts. On my U12 rec team, my captain and MVP is my right back!

While I think it is smart for academy coaches to move players around, it certainly helps the younger girls if they consistently play the same position for several games in a row - maybe half a season. Once they get the hang of a certain position, then they might be ready to try another position. As the girls get older, they then have the experience to play wherever the team needs them to play. I would not specialize a player until U10-U11 age groups except for keepers.

Thanks Travelin light. Thanks for the input.

I got an opportunity to speak with a college coach when he was scouting my son and some other players a couple years ago, and although our little princesses won't be at that point for a few years, its still relvant to this topic:

He said a typical college recruiter does not evaluate the player on the position they play. If they are being scouted, and they play on a quality team, it is assumed they know how to play their position. They evaluate the player on one position back. If they are a forward, they are evaluated as a midfielder. If they are a midfielder, they are evaluated as a defender. The exceptions being fullbacks that are evaluated as midfielders.

Most college rosters only have one upperclassmen and one underclassmen forward, for a total of 2 "pure" forwards on the entire roster. They also only have 2-4 designated defenders. The rest are midfielders. You can be a shutdown defender, but if you can only boot the ball up rather than work it out of the defensive end by passing, winning 1-v-1s etc., then you are of no use. If you are a dominant forward that can't defend, then you are of no use. Midfielders need to be able to defend as well as shoot.

Forwards are evaluated as wings - attacking mids are evaluated as center-mids - halfbacks (wings) are evaluated as fullbacks - center-mids are evaluated as attacking mid, stopper and sweeper - fullbacks are evaluated as halfbacks (wings) - stoppers as center-mids - and sweepers are evaluated as center-mids or stoppers.

The point is, the pure position player is at a disadvantage when it comes to college recruiting - the players that are better rounded have the advantage in that department. If your DD wants to play as a "pure" forward at Stanford, and she is a pure forward now, she had better be the best forward hands-down in region I,II and III combined, and hope that Stanford did not pick up a forward last year...cuz there isn't a spot for one - maybe middle tennesee state has an opening.

10sDad wrote:I got an opportunity to speak with a college coach when he was scouting my son and some other players a couple years ago, and although our little princesses won't be at that point for a few years, its still relvant to this topic:

He said a typical college recruiter does not evaluate the player on the position they play. If they are being scouted, and they play on a quality team, it is assumed they know how to play their position. They evaluate the player on one position back. If they are a forward, they are evaluated as a midfielder. If they are a midfielder, they are evaluated as a defender. The exceptions being fullbacks that are evaluated as midfielders.

Most college rosters only have one upperclassmen and one underclassmen forward, for a total of 2 "pure" forwards on the entire roster. They also only have 2-4 designated defenders. The rest are midfielders. You can be a shutdown defender, but if you can only boot the ball up rather than work it out of the defensive end by passing, winning 1-v-1s etc., then you are of no use. If you are a dominant forward that can't defend, then you are of no use. Midfielders need to be able to defend as well as shoot.

Forwards are evaluated as wings - attacking mids are evaluated as center-mids - halfbacks (wings) are evaluated as fullbacks - center-mids are evaluated as attacking mid, stopper and sweeper - fullbacks are evaluated as halfbacks (wings) - stoppers as center-mids - and sweepers are evaluated as center-mids or stoppers.

The point is, the pure position player is at a disadvantage when it comes to college recruiting - the players that are better rounded have the advantage in that department. If your DD wants to play as a "pure" forward at Stanford, and she is a pure forward now, she had better be the best forward hands-down in region I,II and III combined, and hope that Stanford did not pick up a forward last year...cuz there isn't a spot for one - maybe middle tennesee state has an opening.

Interesting Dad, and I can see that! I am not sure about the percentage, but many many DDs who play in college DO NOT play their club position. College coaches do look for players who can contribute in many areas of the field, and who have the potential for playing other positions. To give just one example, Hope Solo was a forward I think even some in college!

By way of experience, DD played defense in Academy and Rec. By developing more ball skills and game awareness, she is now CM in a strong team. Can she go back to playing D? Probably. She has also played outside mid and F.

The best players are the ones who, although they excel and are most comfortable in one position, can be relied on to play others.

young players should play multiple positions, they need to learn to defend and attack. The first yr my son played on the U16 national team there were 10 center mids on a roster of 18, so maybe that tells you something... oh and there was only 1 kid who played defender on his club team, Tommy Meyer (6'2"), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Meyer the other defenders were converted forwards like sheannon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheanon_Williams ... they were athletic and had attacking skills that club defenders never developed. So if you want to play defender in college or higher, be a fwd in club. If you want to increase your chances of developing attacking and defending skills play mid, preferably attacking... If you just want her to be part of a team and have fun then just play any position that the coach wants and enjoy.

waw, really interesting thoughts. I am learning a lot.

Dr Soccer, lucky you, son went to U16.

This is good stuff from everyone. So the way I am understanding all of this, if your DD at age 9-10 wants to be a universal player (play all positions of the field, but goalie), let her. Your coach should allow her to train in ALL positions on the field. What a simple concept.

Interesting

I keep seeing "except keeper" in a lot in comments. So who plays keeper? A kid shouldn't be boxed into that position at this age either. We allowed that to happen to our daughter at about 8. She was big, not terribly fast and willing to play in the goal...so she became a dedicated keeper. At nearly 11 yrs old, guess where she still is? She's a decent keeper and can play on a really good team...but is never given an opportunity on the field. She has really gotten far behind in her field game. I hope we have time to repair some of the damage by her playing dedicated keeper so long. We find ourselves at a crossroad right now, and have an opportunity to make a change, our dilemma is to have her continue as keeper or take a big step back and give her a chance to develop on the field with a coach that will take her on as a project. Her experience and skills are there...just need someone with patience to see if she can figure it out on the field. We are in the middle of deciding that now. Wish we'd figured this out a few years ago!

I'd strongly discourage letting any player, whether in the goal or in the field, be stuck in one position all the time.

jj4mel wrote:This is good stuff from everyone. So the way I am understanding all of this, if your DD at age 9-10 wants to be a universal player (play all positions of the field, but goalie), let her. Your coach should allow her to train in ALL positions on the field. What a simple concept.

You dont train to play in ALL positions you train the players to understand the concept of 1v1 defending and attacking, where they play is irrelevant. Everytime I hear "you need to train my daughter/son to play in that position because they dont understand" from a parent thats the biggest red flag because that player has no concept of 1v1. When they get to U14 and up then start specializing in positions

jj4mel wrote:This is good stuff from everyone. So the way I am understanding all of this, if your DD at age 9-10 wants to be a universal player (play all positions of the field, but goalie), let her. Your coach should allow her to train in ALL positions on the field. What a simple concept.

At this age, position shouldn't matter - ball skills matter. Things to work on at this age: They should be able to shoot/pass with their opposite leg. They should be able to shoot a lifted shot with some power. They should be able to dribble the ball while looking up. They should know what an overlap or a cover is. They should understand basic defending. They should be starting to juggle.

The skills they should know or are learning at this age are not exclusive to any position - they still apply to all positions. If a youngster has all of the above mastered at this age, they will be dominant at any position, but coaches will usually either play them as forward or sweeper.

10sDad wrote:

jj4mel wrote:This is good stuff from everyone. So the way I am understanding all of this, if your DD at age 9-10 wants to be a universal player (play all positions of the field, but goalie), let her. Your coach should allow her to train in ALL positions on the field. What a simple concept.

At this age, position shouldn't matter - ball skills matter. Things to work on at this age: They should be able to shoot/pass with their opposite leg. They should be able to shoot a lifted shot with some power. They should be able to dribble the ball while looking up. They should know what an overlap or a cover is. They should understand basic defending. They should be starting to juggle.

The skills they should know or are learning at this age are not exclusive to any position - they still apply to all positions. If a youngster has all of the above mastered at this age, they will be dominant at any position, but coaches will usually either play them as forward or sweeper.

If I shoot the ball with my good left foot thats opposite to my right!
I know you meant their weaker side

If I could build my team’s roster constructed entirely out of kids that had been playing center midfield, I would. The experience of playing center midfield generally produces very complete and well-rounded players. When I’m looking for a team’s best player, I usually start there first.

I know many of the academy parents on this board have moved their DD exclusively to their academy teams and are not participating in Rec. I think that makes a lot of sense to avoid burnout. BUT… if you could do it without risking burnout, I would recommend putting her on a lowly Rec team that needs her to play well in the middle of the field. Let her get familiar with operating the ball in small spaces in heavy traffic. Whatever position she plays in Academy will be fine because she’ll be getting a lot of excellent touches on the Rec field.

I never understood why people insist that their child play in the forward spot. Center midfield touches the ball a lot more, is always involved in the action, and generally produces very complete players.

Big uns in the back lil ones in the front. Any questions?

JustaSport wrote:I am one of the biggest proponents you'll ever meet of teaching young players to be capable in all positions with the possible exception of keeper.

Ideally, the coach and parent should be on the same page regarding this subject from the start. Coaches should NOT pigeon-hole players into positions because it suits their needs... which usually equates to winning games. Similarly, parents should NOT approach a coach with the mindset that their daughter is only a forward, mid, or defender.

Yes, I would agree that many players just seem to have certain natural tendencies for the spots into which they migrate. And it's fine after around U12 to start specializing. But not at the academy age. If I get a player who is defensive minded, the goal becomes to train her to know when to shift gears into an offensive approach (and vice versa). This is best accomplished by teaching the player to be reasonably proficient at the more offensive positions. A good forward is only as effective as her ability to defend (steal the ball back), and a good defender is only as effective as her ability to move the ball forward (especially from a flatback 4 lineup). And as a positive by-product, I am covered when any player is missing from a game in that I can play any of the girls at any position.

WELL SAID!!!!!!!!