CFBAL GAMES 2/10

ZenFutbol wrote:

Shelby427 wrote:

totalsoccer wrote:If I were to count the number of futsal games ,3v3 tournaments and 8v8 games she has played and is still playing a lot of futsal in her developement it would amount to double the amount of small sided games to 11v11. I think a lot of developing players do play a lot of small sided games and tons of futsal.

This is a good point. If you are getting the small sided work in practice or other leagues, 11v11 and 9v9 can be ok/good earlier, again for those who are ready.

Good for whom? I can think of a number of developmental advantages of small-sided ball, and even of playing 7v7 and 8v8, but what exactly are the developmental advantages to and for "the player" of playing 11v11 at a young age? What does "those who are ready" mean, exactly?

This is actually 9v9 played by U8 girls on a field sized for 11v11 (i.e. full field). I would guess that there are a couple of players on a couple of teams "who are ready" for this type of play at that age.

TatonkaBurger wrote:

ZenFutbol wrote:

Shelby427 wrote:

totalsoccer wrote:If I were to count the number of futsal games ,3v3 tournaments and 8v8 games she has played and is still playing a lot of futsal in her developement it would amount to double the amount of small sided games to 11v11. I think a lot of developing players do play a lot of small sided games and tons of futsal.

This is a good point. If you are getting the small sided work in practice or other leagues, 11v11 and 9v9 can be ok/good earlier, again for those who are ready.

Good for whom? I can think of a number of developmental advantages of small-sided ball, and even of playing 7v7 and 8v8, but what exactly are the developmental advantages to and for "the player" of playing 11v11 at a young age? What does "those who are ready" mean, exactly?

This is actually 9v9 played by U8 girls on a field sized for 11v11 (i.e. full field). I would guess that there are a couple of players on a couple of teams "who are ready" for this type of play at that age.

This doesn't actually address either of my questions. Furthermore, it poses another question about what is developmentally appropriate for young players. What developmental advantages are there for seven and eight year olds who play 9v9 "on a field sized for 11v11"?

ZenFutbol wrote:

TatonkaBurger wrote:

ZenFutbol wrote:

Shelby427 wrote:

totalsoccer wrote:If I were to count the number of futsal games ,3v3 tournaments and 8v8 games she has played and is still playing a lot of futsal in her developement it would amount to double the amount of small sided games to 11v11. I think a lot of developing players do play a lot of small sided games and tons of futsal.

This is a good point. If you are getting the small sided work in practice or other leagues, 11v11 and 9v9 can be ok/good earlier, again for those who are ready.

Good for whom? I can think of a number of developmental advantages of small-sided ball, and even of playing 7v7 and 8v8, but what exactly are the developmental advantages to and for "the player" of playing 11v11 at a young age? What does "those who are ready" mean, exactly?

This is actually 9v9 played by U8 girls on a field sized for 11v11 (i.e. full field). I would guess that there are a couple of players on a couple of teams "who are ready" for this type of play at that age.

This doesn't actually address either of my questions. Furthermore, it poses another question about what is developmentally appropriate for young players. What developmental advantages are there for seven and eight year olds who play 9v9 "on a field sized for 11v11"?

The really fast girl with the pony-tail and monster toe-poke can absolutely dominate in all of the open space???

(...oh wait, I'm thinking that may have been a rhetorical question...)

Shelby427 wrote:Part of the issue is that select leagues are 11v11. If you wait until the first year of select to try it, you will not do well.

Before the club academy system, nobody played 11v11 until that first year of select. Everybody adjusted just fine. Not that I agree 11v11 is necessary at U11 either.

ZenFutbol wrote:

Shelby427 wrote:

totalsoccer wrote:If I were to count the number of futsal games ,3v3 tournaments and 8v8 games she has played and is still playing a lot of futsal in her developement it would amount to double the amount of small sided games to 11v11. I think a lot of developing players do play a lot of small sided games and tons of futsal.

This is a good point. If you are getting the small sided work in practice or other leagues, 11v11 and 9v9 can be ok/good earlier, again for those who are ready.

Good for whom? I can think of a number of developmental advantages of small-sided ball, and even of playing 7v7 and 8v8, but what exactly are the developmental advantages to and for "the player" of playing 11v11 at a young age? What does "those who are ready" mean, exactly?

I don't know the answer but I believe their is a develope mental balance that needs to be maintained. Futsal and futsal training is the direction my DD is taking to maintain her abilities.for her it seems to be working. Skills training, futsal, and 11v11

9 vs. 9 for 8-9 year olds on full size fields is inappropriate for true development. It is too much space to cover and too little opportunities for touches on the ball. Within the last 6 months or so, England has joined Spain and Japan in regulating and developing youth models of development. Players are not allowed to play 11 vs. 11 until they reach the age of 11-12. Until then, they continue to hone their skills in small sided games of 4 vs. 4 and 5 vs. 5. It allows for maximum touches, kids must learn to think on their own, and coaches cannot "hide" a weaker player. It is more age appropriate development instead of demanding that children play an adult style of tactical game.

We did not play 11v11 until the fall before select at we did that to begin our preparations for the QT's that are 11v11.

Indy28 wrote:9 vs. 9 for 8-9 year olds on full size fields is inappropriate for true development. It is too much space to cover and too little opportunities for touches on the ball. Within the last 6 months or so, England has joined Spain and Japan in regulating and developing youth models of development. Players are not allowed to play 11 vs. 11 until they reach the age of 11-12. Until then, they continue to hone their skills in small sided games of 4 vs. 4 and 5 vs. 5. It allows for maximum touches, kids must learn to think on their own, and coaches cannot "hide" a weaker player. It is more age appropriate development instead of demanding that children play an adult style of tactical game.

The model of play to the lowest common denominator is not good either. Just because a player is 14 doesn't mean they are ready for 11v11... age alone should not be the decider.

The top 10% of U9 players have better technical skills than 50% of U14s. Do we hold them back from getting a jump start on the big field just because of their age? This doesn't make sense.

I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play.

There are plenty of U9 and U10 players in the system today that started training two times a week and playing 2 games per week at the age of 6-7. They have more game experience than many U12s...

It may not apply to the majority of players in the younger age groups but we shouldn’t hold some players back because of blanket best-practice "theories".

Shelby427 wrote:

Indy28 wrote:9 vs. 9 for 8-9 year olds on full size fields is inappropriate for true development. It is too much space to cover and too little opportunities for touches on the ball. Within the last 6 months or so, England has joined Spain and Japan in regulating and developing youth models of development. Players are not allowed to play 11 vs. 11 until they reach the age of 11-12. Until then, they continue to hone their skills in small sided games of 4 vs. 4 and 5 vs. 5. It allows for maximum touches, kids must learn to think on their own, and coaches cannot "hide" a weaker player. It is more age appropriate development instead of demanding that children play an adult style of tactical game.

The model of play to the lowest common denominator is not good either. Just because a player is 14 doesn't mean they are ready for 11v11... age alone should not be the decider.

The top 10% of U9 players have better technical skills than 50% of U14s. Do we hold them back from getting a jump start on the big field just because of their age? This doesn't make sense.

I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play.

There are plenty of U9 and U10 players in the system today that started training two times a week and playing 2 games per week at the age of 6-7. They have more game experience than many U12s...

It may not apply to the majority of players in the younger age groups but we shouldn’t hold some players back because of blanket best-practice "theories".

I dont think what they have proven in places like Spain are considered "theories"

Spain plays 7v7 until U11 and then they jump to 11v11. So we advance to 9v9 in between and hit 11v11 one year earlier…. Yea, that’s why the US men’s team sucks, even though they were training in the US 15-20 years ago….

Androfan aka Kicksfan wrote:

Shelby427 wrote:

Indy28 wrote:9 vs. 9 for 8-9 year olds on full size fields is inappropriate for true development. It is too much space to cover and too little opportunities for touches on the ball. Within the last 6 months or so, England has joined Spain and Japan in regulating and developing youth models of development. Players are not allowed to play 11 vs. 11 until they reach the age of 11-12. Until then, they continue to hone their skills in small sided games of 4 vs. 4 and 5 vs. 5. It allows for maximum touches, kids must learn to think on their own, and coaches cannot "hide" a weaker player. It is more age appropriate development instead of demanding that children play an adult style of tactical game.

The model of play to the lowest common denominator is not good either. Just because a player is 14 doesn't mean they are ready for 11v11... age alone should not be the decider.

The top 10% of U9 players have better technical skills than 50% of U14s. Do we hold them back from getting a jump start on the big field just because of their age? This doesn't make sense.

I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play.

There are plenty of U9 and U10 players in the system today that started training two times a week and playing 2 games per week at the age of 6-7. They have more game experience than many U12s...

It may not apply to the majority of players in the younger age groups but we shouldn’t hold some players back because of blanket best-practice "theories".

I dont think what they have proven in places like Spain are considered "theories"

I know of no other setting, be it Europe, S. America, Asia, Central America, Africa, Australia, or even here in N. America, where this topic would be given much consideration. The suggestion that playing 7v7 or 8v8 at seven, eight, or nine is somehow stifling or limiting development is baffling to me. Do the better players in Brazil, Argentina, Spain, France, Italy, Japan, or Germany not also play at least four times a week at 6-7 years of age? Were Messi or Van Persie or Rooney somehow hampered because they didn't play 11v11 at eight or nine? Honestly, what do you imagine a "jump start on a big field" would have done for them?

Europe's top athletes play soccer from the time they can walk. Does soccer in the US see the most elite athletes playing. I think we are getting closer, but their is a lot of competition between sports for the elite athletes.

The notion that the US wins only with big physical play is already out of date as far as youth development goes.

Sure there are teams in North Texas than focus on this style, but these teams are already losing to our best 02, 03, and 04 teams here in North Texas.

If you look at the top 3-4 teams in each of these age groups you would agree they are winning due to superior touch and skill... not size and brute force.

The original point was that the field is too big and therefore, as many others have said, the soccer cannot be beneficial to the 7 & 8 year old girls playing. It is kickball, kick and sprint, and little to no touches for girls on the field. I hope this discussion, which I have thoroughly enjoyed reading, helps to change the league. Hopefully they can work these girls back onto the 8v8 fields.

Excellent point Shelby427, physical play should never be emphasized at the academy level. It's all about learning skills and getting touches.

I think it will make change. It is already happening with a much greater influence of coaches and teams playing futsal, and the 3v3 tournaments seemed to be making a killing with player participation.

Shelby427 wrote: top 10% of U9 players have better technical skills than 50% of U14s.

Did you really just say that?

And how exactly is playing 5v5, 7v7, 8v8 holding them back?

futbollove wrote:

Shelby427 wrote: top 10% of U9 players have better technical skills than 50% of U14s.

Did you really just say that?

And how exactly is playing 5v5, 7v7, 8v8 holding them back?

It's actualy very true... Have you seen the bottom half of U14s and the top 10% of U9s? There is no question about it.

"I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play."

Shelby - the level of technical ability has nothing to do with moving up to the 11v11. It has everything to do with the size and speed of the players.

The thought process of 7v7, 8v8 or 9v9 is just a condensed version of the real thing. Speed of play, time on the ball and ability to make penetrating passes should be about the same for 7-8 year olds playing 7v7 as professionals playing 11v11.

The amount of touches a player gets in small sided games is a by product of the size of the field and the number of players on the field. I too agree that 11v11 for this age is too young and even further agree that 9v9 on a full size field is ridiculous and flys in the face of what the kids are trying to learn.

ZenFutbol wrote:

Androfan aka Kicksfan wrote:

Shelby427 wrote:

Indy28 wrote:9 vs. 9 for 8-9 year olds on full size fields is inappropriate for true development. It is too much space to cover and too little opportunities for touches on the ball. Within the last 6 months or so, England has joined Spain and Japan in regulating and developing youth models of development. Players are not allowed to play 11 vs. 11 until they reach the age of 11-12. Until then, they continue to hone their skills in small sided games of 4 vs. 4 and 5 vs. 5. It allows for maximum touches, kids must learn to think on their own, and coaches cannot "hide" a weaker player. It is more age appropriate development instead of demanding that children play an adult style of tactical game.

The model of play to the lowest common denominator is not good either. Just because a player is 14 doesn't mean they are ready for 11v11... age alone should not be the decider.

The top 10% of U9 players have better technical skills than 50% of U14s. Do we hold them back from getting a jump start on the big field just because of their age? This doesn't make sense.

I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play.

There are plenty of U9 and U10 players in the system today that started training two times a week and playing 2 games per week at the age of 6-7. They have more game experience than many U12s...

It may not apply to the majority of players in the younger age groups but we shouldn’t hold some players back because of blanket best-practice "theories".

I dont think what they have proven in places like Spain are considered "theories"

I know of no other setting, be it Europe, S. America, Asia, Central America, Africa, Australia, or even here in N. America, where this topic would be given much consideration. The suggestion that playing 7v7 or 8v8 at seven, eight, or nine is somehow stifling or limiting development is baffling to me. Do the better players in Brazil, Argentina, Spain, France, Italy, Japan, or Germany not also play at least four times a week at 6-7 years of age? Were Messi or Van Persie or Rooney somehow hampered because they didn't play 11v11 at eight or nine? Honestly, what do you imagine a "jump start on a big field" would have done for them?

I believe a jump start on a big field could have hampered their development if that had become their focus of play. You may have misinterpreted my comment.

I am not a fan of big field. My DD has and will continue to play 2 or 3 times as many futsal/small sided games than big field games.

I give credit where credit is due. Totalsoccer started her on that path and it is paying diviends for her now. She has confidence in traffic and the first touch on the ball that is beyond her years.

That did not come from playing on an oversized field.

Regardless of how we got to where we are now. If a player is not getting the small sided games, be it in practice or actuall small sided games their development will be hampered. IMO

Androfan aka Kicksfan wrote:

ZenFutbol wrote:

Androfan aka Kicksfan wrote:

Shelby427 wrote:

Indy28 wrote:9 vs. 9 for 8-9 year olds on full size fields is inappropriate for true development. It is too much space to cover and too little opportunities for touches on the ball. Within the last 6 months or so, England has joined Spain and Japan in regulating and developing youth models of development. Players are not allowed to play 11 vs. 11 until they reach the age of 11-12. Until then, they continue to hone their skills in small sided games of 4 vs. 4 and 5 vs. 5. It allows for maximum touches, kids must learn to think on their own, and coaches cannot "hide" a weaker player. It is more age appropriate development instead of demanding that children play an adult style of tactical game.

The model of play to the lowest common denominator is not good either. Just because a player is 14 doesn't mean they are ready for 11v11... age alone should not be the decider.

The top 10% of U9 players have better technical skills than 50% of U14s. Do we hold them back from getting a jump start on the big field just because of their age? This doesn't make sense.

I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play.

There are plenty of U9 and U10 players in the system today that started training two times a week and playing 2 games per week at the age of 6-7. They have more game experience than many U12s...

It may not apply to the majority of players in the younger age groups but we shouldn’t hold some players back because of blanket best-practice "theories".

I dont think what they have proven in places like Spain are considered "theories"

I know of no other setting, be it Europe, S. America, Asia, Central America, Africa, Australia, or even here in N. America, where this topic would be given much consideration. The suggestion that playing 7v7 or 8v8 at seven, eight, or nine is somehow stifling or limiting development is baffling to me. Do the better players in Brazil, Argentina, Spain, France, Italy, Japan, or Germany not also play at least four times a week at 6-7 years of age? Were Messi or Van Persie or Rooney somehow hampered because they didn't play 11v11 at eight or nine? Honestly, what do you imagine a "jump start on a big field" would have done for them?

I believe a jump start on a big field could have hampered their development if that had become their focus of play. You may have misinterpreted my comment.

I am not a fan of big field. My DD has and will continue to play 2 or 3 times as many futsal/small sided games than big field games.

I give credit where credit is due. Totalsoccer started her on that path and it is paying diviends for her now. She has confidence in traffic and the first touch on the ball that is beyond her years.

That did not come from playing on an oversized field.

Regardless of how we got to where we are now. If a player is not getting the small sided games, be it in practice or actuall small sided games their development will be hampered. IMO

No, Andro/Kicks, since I agreed with you, I was merely trying to expand on your comment a bit. Sorry for the confusion.

slrsoccer wrote:"I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play."

Shelby - the level of technical ability has nothing to do with moving up to the 11v11. It has everything to do with the size and speed of the players.

The thought process of 7v7, 8v8 or 9v9 is just a condensed version of the real thing. Speed of play, time on the ball and ability to make penetrating passes should be about the same for 7-8 year olds playing 7v7 as professionals playing 11v11.

The amount of touches a player gets in small sided games is a by product of the size of the field and the number of players on the field. I too agree that 11v11 for this age is too young and even further agree that 9v9 on a full size field is ridiculous and flys in the face of what the kids are trying to learn.

I agree that 11v11 at U9 is too young. I don't mind the idea of 9v9 on the medium field for the kids who can hit the back post on the corner kicks and clear the goal box ect...

My point is that age alone should not be a factor and 7v7 until U14-16 is ridiculous.

Keep in mind the U9s of today even when playing larger sided games, are getting more touches than kids 10 years ago because they are playing plenty of small sided in practice, futsal, and 3v3 tournaments ect.

slrsoccer wrote:"I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play."

Shelby - the level of technical ability has nothing to do with moving up to the 11v11. It has everything to do with the size and speed of the players.

The thought process of 7v7, 8v8 or 9v9 is just a condensed version of the real thing. Speed of play, time on the ball and ability to make penetrating passes should be about the same for 7-8 year olds playing 7v7 as professionals playing 11v11.

The amount of touches a player gets in small sided games is a by product of the size of the field and the number of players on the field. I too agree that 11v11 for this age is too young and even further agree that 9v9 on a full size field is ridiculous and flys in the face of what the kids are trying to learn.

Very thoughtful post. Spot on.

I was one of the anti 11v11, abolitionist parents back in the day. You couldn't get me off my soapbox about how NTX must be bassackwards having kids running around on high school stadium fields with 11v11 at 9 and 10.

After watching our kids go through it, I'm not so sure there was that much wrong with it. Comparing 9v9 to 11v11, the # of touches an individual player gets will be driven far more by the team's playing style and their skill & awareness on and off the ball. I've seen kick and chase teams playing futsal (and that's 5v5). I've also seen young teams playing two / three touch soccer in 11v11 because most the team was skilled enough to play with their head up. The format is not the driving factor, it's more about the amount of time a kid spends playing the game and perfecting their craft.

Shelby427 wrote:

slrsoccer wrote:"I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play."

Shelby - the level of technical ability has nothing to do with moving up to the 11v11. It has everything to do with the size and speed of the players.

The thought process of 7v7, 8v8 or 9v9 is just a condensed version of the real thing. Speed of play, time on the ball and ability to make penetrating passes should be about the same for 7-8 year olds playing 7v7 as professionals playing 11v11.

The amount of touches a player gets in small sided games is a by product of the size of the field and the number of players on the field. I too agree that 11v11 for this age is too young and even further agree that 9v9 on a full size field is ridiculous and flys in the face of what the kids are trying to learn.

I agree that 11v11 at U9 is too young. I don't mind the idea of 9v9 on the medium field for the kids who can hit the back post on the corner kicks and clear the goal box ect...

My point is that age alone should not be a factor and 7v7 until U14-16 is ridiculous.

Keep in mind the U9s of today even when playing larger sided games, are getting more touches than kids 10 years ago because they are playing plenty of small sided in practice, futsal, and 3v3 tournaments ect.

7v7 until U14-U16? Did I miss this suggestion somewhere along this serpentine thread--which is possible--or is this simply an example of Straw Man? I do believe the ages in question were U8-U10, yes? Your assertion above, that younger NTX players today are getting more touches and are more technically sound than players the same age were a few years ago--and quite a few older players now, I believe you said--while very supportable, does nothing really to address that bigger fields do nothing really for developing little players, despite how amazingly technical or even tactically brilliant they may be. Quite the contrary, in fact. There's more than enough time for 11v11 later; why rush it?

3-4-3 wrote:I was one of the anti 11v11, abolitionist parents back in the day. You couldn't get me off my soapbox about how NTX must be bassackwards having kids running around on high school stadium fields with 11v11 at 9 and 10.

After watching our kids go through it, I'm not so sure there was that much wrong with it. Comparing 9v9 to 11v11, the # of touches an individual player gets will be driven far more by the team's playing style and their skill & awareness on and off the ball. I've seen kick and chase teams playing futsal (and that's 5v5). I've also seen young teams playing two / three touch soccer in 11v11 because most the team was skilled enough to play with their head up. The format is not the driving factor, it's more about the amount of time a kid spends playing the game and perfecting their craft.

The size of the field plays a role. How can it not for second and third graders? And while I agree that the style of play is huge, which is why my daughter plays where she does, the same club yours plays with, by the way, the same player on the same team, playing 2-3 touch soccer, at U9, let's say, playing 9v9 on a small field will get significantly more touches over the course of a season than that player would were she to play 11v11 on a full size field. I see no way around it.

ZenFutbol wrote:

Shelby427 wrote:

slrsoccer wrote:"I think the issue should be one of reaching a certain set of technical abilities that decides when one moves up to the next level of field play."

Shelby - the level of technical ability has nothing to do with moving up to the 11v11. It has everything to do with the size and speed of the players.

The thought process of 7v7, 8v8 or 9v9 is just a condensed version of the real thing. Speed of play, time on the ball and ability to make penetrating passes should be about the same for 7-8 year olds playing 7v7 as professionals playing 11v11.

The amount of touches a player gets in small sided games is a by product of the size of the field and the number of players on the field. I too agree that 11v11 for this age is too young and even further agree that 9v9 on a full size field is ridiculous and flys in the face of what the kids are trying to learn.

I agree that 11v11 at U9 is too young. I don't mind the idea of 9v9 on the medium field for the kids who can hit the back post on the corner kicks and clear the goal box ect...

My point is that age alone should not be a factor and 7v7 until U14-16 is ridiculous.

Keep in mind the U9s of today even when playing larger sided games, are getting more touches than kids 10 years ago because they are playing plenty of small sided in practice, futsal, and 3v3 tournaments ect.

7v7 until U14-U16? Did I miss this suggestion somewhere along this serpentine thread--which is possible--or is this simply an example of Straw Man? I do believe the ages in question were U8-U10, yes? Your assertion above, that younger NTX players today are getting more touches and are more technically sound than players the same age were a few years ago--and quite a few older players now, I believe you said--while very supportable, does nothing really to address that bigger fields do nothing really for developing little players, despite how amazingly technical or even tactically brilliant they may be. Quite the contrary, in fact. There's more than enough time for 11v11 later; why rush it?

In post #13 wolf suggested no 11v11 until U14. I have also seen people on here advocate not until U16. It is a bit subjective... why not until college which 99% of these girls will never see (playing soccer).

As I said U9 is too early but you will never have coaches going into select with a new format the first year. If you wanted to push back 11v11 until U12, then you would need to push select back to U14 and in truth... that might not be a bad idea.