...you might be a rec parent

I somewhat agree...expose them to all sports. But, let them play what they say they love...shucks, they may like socializing more than any sport. Different for girls than boys I think. Different possibilities. I mean, in soccer what's the highest pinnacle of success can our DD accomplsh vs our BB?

jack of all trades master of none

turftoe9 wrote:I'm not saying if there is no pressure don't cross within the 18, I'm saying it happens to often when there is pressure. I don't like kick ball but if you keep the ball to the outside you do do not give the opposing team a chance to cross the passing lane and have a chance to score.

I won't argue with you on this one. Putting the ball into a more risky area will surely give the opponents more opportunities to score. And if losing the game while players are figuring it all out is a serious consideration, I would suggest sticking with one of the many coaches who subscribe to the "unwritten rules" of safeguarding a win versus developing the players.

Of course, each coach may have certain methodologies based on the ages of their teams. I've seen some coaches instruct their players to always make throw-in's "down the line" for the first few years because, well, they don't consider throw-in's to be that meaningful to development in the younger age groups and it just keeps things simple. I get that.

But I also see a lot of them just going with whatever gets the win. They train players to specialize at a single position at the academy age, never let their keepers out in the field, insist on "through balls" to the fastest forwards even if the player with the ball has the time and space to do otherwise, etc. So I'm really leery of "rules" if they limit a player's ability to think for herself. This has worked out well for the kids I've coached.

But keep something in mind soccer is a difficult sport to master. It takes a lot of practice. I think similar to golf, many play few play really well..

Most of the greats in any sport, heck even most of the pretty darn goods and dang lucky to be getting a paycheck for playing sports grew up playing multiple sports. Now you can argue that playing mutliple sports robbed us of some of MJ's greatest years in basketball because he wanted to play baseball and I would agree, however growing up he played more than just basketball. He was a master of his trade but didn't start focusing on being a master of it until HS and college. It's actually quite easy to come up with a list of greats and all the other sports they played growing up that to argue you should be specializing at age 9 is simply moronic. Heck specializing at one position on the pitch is even moronic at this age as well. Simply browse through the profile of USWNT and almost everyone talks about playing multiple sports all the way up through HS. I wouldn't fear being a jack of all trades and a master of none if your DD wants to play other sports. If they love soccer then they will generally end up chosing soccer on down the road. If Sydney Leroux can play baseball from the age of 5-14 then I'm pretty sure if someone's DD wants to play something else then it's not going to stunt their soccer growth.

Now if you've tried other sports and your DD has no interest then rock on down the road with soccer and consider yourself lucky you don't have to drive all over for another sport.

I love how people bring up people who played from a time when there was no year around focused sports. It's like saying Micheal Jordan didn't play AAU so I don't have too. Players didn't do that waaaaay back then. Times have changed and the problem is not the multiple sports it's the time dedicated to the sport so I guess if you are playing and practicing soccer just as much as the next kid then it shouldn't matter. If you take half the time off to go play something else you can't be surprised that an equally talented player will become better. You will compete against kids who just put more into the sport. Life has changed. When I was a kid you played your sport during the season and then on to the next sport for the next season. Most kids should play whatever they want but don't expect that to make you the next national team player. And why is nobody complaining about all of those gymnast, skaters, swimmers with their stupid focus on one sport.

go99 wrote:I love how people bring up people who played from a time when there was no year around focused sports.  It's like saying Micheal Jordan didn't play AAU so I don't have too.  Players didn't do that waaaaay back then.  Times have changed and the problem is not the multiple sports it's the time dedicated to the sport so I guess if you are playing and practicing soccer just as much as the next kid then it shouldn't matter.  If you take half the time off to go play something else you can't be surprised that an equally talented player will become better.  You will compete against kids who just put more into the sport.  Life has changed.  When I was a kid you played your sport during the season and then on to the next sport for the next season. Most kids should play whatever they want but don't expect that to make you the next national team player.  And why is nobody complaining about all of those gymnast, skaters, swimmers with their stupid focus on one sport.

      

Best shot at a professional sport without constant training and residency programs would probably be football. Pure atheleticism can carry you far. Except maybe at QB

Several top QBs throughout history had the option to be a professional MLB pitcher or a QB - one of which just won a Super Bowl about a week ago.  Steve Nash could easily have played professional soccer at the national level (team Canada, eh) and specifically calls out soccer as being the reason why his footwork in basketball is at the level it is.
No one is complaining about all of those gymnasts, skaters, swimmers with their focus on one sport because they probably chose to work exclusively at their favorite sport in their early teens, not at age 6 - though I'm sure that's not entirely the case.  The greatest pro skater, snowboarder of all time (Shaun White) has won Olympic and X-games medals on skates, on a skateboard, and on a snowboard - in some cases all in one weekend! If players today are superior to those 10-15 years ago, why aren't the 16-20 year olds dominating the 30-35 year olds at the highest level, when many of the old guys grew up playing in the mud, sand or street without elite coaching until they were in their teens?  Just something to think about.

16 year old soccer players here are well beyond where any of the us national team players were at when they were 16. And if all you manage to be is as good as a current national team players is you will not make the national team. The soccer is better, skill is better, athleticism is higher. And the nash thing just isn't true. At no point was it a given that he could have easily made the canadian national team. His brother who was the soccer player did play for the canadian team. BTW at the highest levels of soccer there are almost no 30-35 yr olds. But the biggest error is the belief that much of our coaching is "elite"

My BB's soccer game got exponentially better after a couple seasons of middle school basketball. He was a center mid - by playing basketball, he learned quicker how to recognize successful runs and spot passing lanes, how movement away from the ball is necessary instead of standing there waiting for the ball, etc. It was a huge development boost! At this age, his rec coach (no academy at that time), had them playing rugby at soccer practice (get them used to passing backward).
My point is that playing other sports highlights similar, successful strategies that are not always successfully communicated as important, and thusly not focused on as much in practice. Many coaches stress moving without the ball, but its really hard to impress upon these kids how critical it really is - in basketball, its paramount...so they get it - they just don't realize its a soccer skill too...

The level of soccer in this country is getting better because there are more qualified coaches than ever before and due to the highest levels of participation in history.  But even then, the national team relative to everywhere else in the world is no better or worse than it was 15 years ago, 30 years ago, or 50 years ago. The players are better here vs their predecessors, but to say it's because players are focusing just on soccer is debatable.

On Steve Nash: "Nash grew up playing soccer—he stated in a 2005 interview that he could have played professionally if he had focused on it" how on earth did he become a NBA MVP if he didn't start playing basketball from the crib?

On "BTW at the highest levels of soccer there are almost no 30-35 yr olds."
7 of the current players on Manchester United alone are in their 30's, one of which is 40 years old. At least 4 players are in their 30s on Barcelona, Arsenal, Real Madrid, and Manchester City each - 11 on Juventus.  8 on the Men's US National Team.

As I manU fan that stings because it highlights why they are losing. If you chose to beieve that 30-35 year olds are still dominating on those teams then that is your choice. Yes HE stated that if he had focused on it. (so you agree it requires focus) And Nash did play basketball from a very young age. Jordan believed that if he had focused on baseball or golf that he could have done it at the highest level but that doesn't make it true. But the reality is that Nash didn't focus on soccer and didn't become a pro at it. He found the sport he loved and put in the work to excel at it.

With all that being said...soccer is a good foundation for other sports

without a doubt a great foundation particuarly football (not a big deal on the girls side). I HS friend who used to coach HS and now college football said that he used to prefer kids who grew up playing soccer for his football team.

ummm Tony Romo's off season is soccer...maybe he should call ohshan for a foundation check...

go99 wrote:without a doubt a great foundation particuarly football (not a big deal on the girls side). I HS friend who used to coach HS and now college football said that he used to prefer kids who grew up playing soccer for his football team.

Ummm......not to many soccer players on the offensive and defensive lines at the higher levels.

some kids who play soccer grow up to be really big kids with great feet who play football but no longer play soccer.

go99 wrote:without a doubt a great foundation particuarly football (not a big deal on the girls side). I HS friend who used to coach HS and now college football said that he used to prefer kids who grew up playing soccer for his football team.

I'm gonna have to disagree with that one Go. American footbal is a specialized position sport. Each position requires a certain skill set. Outside of the cardio/endurance or kicker, I don't see how it relates.

Now rugby league or rugby union would be a better natural progression. The edurance factor weighs much heavier there and all players need to be able to take penalty kicks, punts and drop kicks.

well basically what he said is a kid is big enough, strong enough and fast enough to play football or he isn't. He said kids who played it from young age often had bad habits that he needed to break and the soccer kid if you tell him how to tackle he just does it because he has no from of reference. Football is a sport of athleticism. You can have the best technique on the planet but 5'8" 180 isn't going to put you on the O line. You can have the sweetest moves and a 40 time that was poured from a honey bottle and you won't be a running back. Football does require skill but it is trumped by athleticism.

Cleansheets wrote:Now rugby league or rugby union would be a better natural progression. The edurance factor weighs much heavier there and all players need to be able to take penalty kicks, punts and drop kicks.

Watching a prop take a drop-kick would be like watching an offensive guard go deep on a pass route - not pretty!   

show me a talented 6 ft 4 300 lb soccer player who's never played football and i will show you a potentially great football player, show me any football player who hasnt played soccer and i will show you someone who will not ever be a great soccer player...

Gunner9 wrote:

Cleansheets wrote:Now rugby league or rugby union would be a better natural progression. The edurance factor weighs much heavier there and all players need to be able to take penalty kicks, punts and drop kicks.

Watching a prop take a drop-kick would be like watching an offensive guard go deep on a pass route - not pretty!   

I knew a lock forward once who could out kick any back on the pitch.

silentparent wrote:show me a talented 6 ft 4 300 lb soccer player who's never played football and i will show you a potentially great football player, show me any football player who hasnt played soccer and i will show you someone who will not ever be a great soccer player...

Isn't that an oxymoron.

silentparent wrote:show me a talented 6 ft 4 300 lb soccer player who's never played football and i will show you a potentially great football player, show me any football player who hasnt played soccer and i will show you someone who will not ever be a great soccer player...

Not always, not every tall person is a candidate for a good basketball player.......Manute Bol......hello,anyone.....anyone.

Sean Bradley also...but Sheets...
Look at all the Basketball Players who made the transition easily to football...Antonio Gates, Earnest Graham...that's all I can name lol but any agile tall mofo with athletic background and size looks like they have a shot at TE. Oh...and Julius Peppers at DE...