satmar t1_j1zlb40 wrote on December 28, 2022 at 4:09 PM

Reply to comment by IIIllllIIlllIIlllIIl in The next youth sports arms race by eddytony96

There is a healthy middle ground though.. I think the moral is to remember it’s a game BUT there’s nothing wrong with some level of competition (organized).

The key is that it can’t be every second of every day only thinking about this one thing…

idk I’m not a parent, I’m not a sports expert or psychology expert but in my opinion the extremes are never the right solution.

IIIllllIIlllIIlllIIl t1_j1zs4j7 wrote on December 28, 2022 at 4:55 PM

What we need is for a bunch of coaches that understand that kids aren't small adults. They're kids. The leagues should reflect the appropriateness for the age of the kid. It just so happens that Americans view youth sports as miniature pro teams.

The way it works now is that counter-intuitively the more knowledgeable the coach is about the game the more likely he will get it wrong when it comes to youth. I can give a specific example. My son was invited to a 'training' academy at age 7. He basically hated it. The coaches knew a lot about soccer, but didn't understand that they were dealing with a small child. They ran a bunch of drills and wouldn't let him do the things he wanted to do as a kid. Just play the game without interference.

Kids need just a lot of play in local leagues with other kids in low-key recreational leagues up until around the age of 14, in which they could use more specific and harder drills and skills. But the siren call of all that money parents are willing to spend pushes clubs and public infrastructure to set up bigger and bigger tournaments for younger and younger kids. By the time kids hit 11 the rec leagues are picked clean of most of the skilled kids. It's way to early.

Clubs have a place. It's later in the process and it should still stay local so families don't have to travel so much.

getofftheirlawn t1_j21cytd wrote on December 28, 2022 at 11:13 PM

I agree with and wish for your sentiment but unfortunately your timetable is way off. By 14, if you want to play competitively you had better be well above the curve toward mastery of fundamental skills. What I am saying is that at age 14 you are in high school or about to be. Good luck making a high school team with only rec experience up until this point and you can just about forget entering club-level play at this age. Note, club-level sports long ago left behind high school level-play here in the states anyways.

The big problem here is that soccer clubs here in the states are run by for-profit 3rd party and sometimes nation-wide/regional companies with no real outlet to major league or professional-level. Where as in much of the rest of the world club soccer is about where you live and is therefore intrinsically local and does feed into the local professional team and or system of buying players.

In my experience youth sports here in the states, except basketball, dies recreationally around age 12, basketball has a strong rec presence until age 17 then if at 18 you still want to play you are playing with full on adults in adult rec leagues. Sure there are some rec soccer leagues, usually run by the club teams, but then it is typically just same 2-3 teams playing each other all season. By high school, kids are either playing high school or club/travel and high school and all the other kids that played when they were young quit.

IIIllllIIlllIIlllIIl t1_j21lvns wrote on December 29, 2022 at 12:16 AM

The problem with soccer in particular in the US is the lack of a real gradient in price and skill at the 12-16 ages. Below that most people are in rec anyways. But then there's either cheap rec leagues with hardly anyone playing, or $4000-$6000/yr with the skilled players. A pretty big contrast.

In other countries there's more options and all of them are cheaper. Some players do actually go off to academy after playing only locally at around the 14 age range. Part of that is due to having more options.

I still don't recommend anyone spend the $4-6k at age 12 here in the US. The likelihood of going pro or getting a scholarship are pretty low for those kids sitting in the back of SUV's for all that time. Travel ball needs to be phased out in most leagues. It drains local talent and keeps neighborhood kids away from their friends. Any league that pushes it is something I'll keep my kids far away from. There's just too much money in it though. Parents are easily duped.

There isn't any substitute for actually playing the game.

pioneer_grad t1_j2074g5 wrote on December 28, 2022 at 6:33 PM

Coached Rec level baseball for years and had kids in club baseball, soccer and track. What seemed to work best for us was rec level through 11 and started club at 12u. Our family is average athletically so our goal was to be able to complete in high school. We were not going to join a traveling team in our club because it doesn't make sense for us. Clubs will allow players to join a traveling team because they need more players to split the costs across. The kids are paying for the coaches expenses on the trip. The baseball club we are in has 30 players that traveled across the US for 2+ spring and fall seasons. Of those 30, 4 have signed to play ball at a college for a scholarship - this is baseball so that is a partial scholarship.

IIIllllIIlllIIlllIIl t1_j20b2ye wrote on December 28, 2022 at 6:59 PM

The biggest issue I see is the travel and cost. I don't necessarily hold a hard stance that competition can come into it much earlier. Just that the level of competition doesn't scale with distance. In a city of half a million there's more than enough competition within a few miles to find and nurture a good environment for the talented kids. I don't agree about separating kids too early. Breakouts happen all the time and those kids benefit from being around kids that are showing precociousness.

In soccer in the rest of the world the structure is funded through the pro leagues down. In the US it's reversed. Most funding in the sport comes from soccer parents at the bottom. The way it works in many European countries and elsewhere is that when a kid joins an academy (for a low price or free) if the kid moves onto another bigger club the club he's leaving will be paid a solidarity payment to subsidize the process. This fosters development of the child rather than aiming towards just winning.

In the US since clubs rely on parent funding and we don't have solidarity payments the clubs are dependent on wins to sell their services as 'elite'. The knock-on effects of that are obvious.

Spending the $4000+ per year amounts to gambling if scholarship is the goal. It's a problem.

But... if the USA sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold. We will see more and more countries adopting the monetization schemes we see here. We are far ahead in the sports investment versus the rest of the world. But to see if our obsession is serving children all you have to do is ask. I know a number of families that have already dropped out of club sports. Talented kids that just stopped having fun.