Cornfield- I hear what you are saying and I have 2 nephews in your neck of the woods that were in the exact same spot as your friend's son a few years ago. They had only played rec soccer but really wanted to play for the high school. They are a year apart and when the older was a freshman he was the JV starting keeper as a freshman, in spite of having never really played keeper before and by the end of the year was getting some varsity minutes. Fast forward a year and he was the varsity starter and his younger brother the JV starter. Things were great for the time being and they loved that by being in a smaller community they had "by passed" my son (same age as the younger nephew) as he was only starting on the freshman team, ignoring the fact that the varsity won state that year as opposed to going out in the first round. Fast forward one more year and a club keeper came in as a freshman and immediately took the starting varsity job. This drove the older nephew to quit as he couldn't handle the demotion after feeling the high. The younger (a sophomore) continued plugging along in the backup varsity role. He ended up quitting this year, his senior year, because he didn't want to be the senior that got pity minutes. The sad part is he still loves the game and is playing this spring in a rec program for the love of the game. Granted playing in goal is a feast or famine position, because there is only one as opposed to the rest of the field players but things are cyclical and in small programs a small influx of talent or club players can vastly impact the casual player.
Sounds like the age change did the exact opposite for both of us. Not sure if it's been mentioned but I am wondering whether their are far more kids growing up in club rather then just rec then there were 25-30 years ago when I played? I would argue the answer is yes - and that this has limited players as to what they can do in high school in terms of playing - as you mentioned in your example above.
2 or 3 years is a LONG time at this age (pre-teen/early teen), especially, regarding youth sports…things can change pretty quickly and out of the blue; in many cases, involving things you have no control or direct say in the matter… There have been a couple times with my son and soccer that I thought we were “set” (on and off the field) and had it all planned out…only to have those circumstances and plans evaporate rather quickly…the age change was one, but there have been others… Those tight-knit teams are something special…lot good times, for both kids and parents…they seem to come easier early on, but require a little effort as they grow older…
Change of direction here. I was at a bon fire these weekend with a few other soccer parents and the topic of high school soccer was on the block. One of the fathers explained that his daughter (sophmore) failed to make JV and as a result she decided to play a different sport. Both father and daughter are modest - dad is a coach for a local small club and his daughter played both travel soccer for that club as well as rec soccer. Neither felt entitled but were moreso just shocked that she did not make the JV team. Parent #2 has a son who is a freshman this year - tall and athletic (probably should have been a runner). He's played rec soccer his entire life - starting at an early age which was followed by soccer in jr high. This kid is not lighting the world on fire - even in the smallest sense. But he failed to make even the freshman team. Another parent who's daughter is now in college had a similar experience to parent #2. His daughter gave up soccer for track/cross country. The conversation quickly turned to the expansion of club play which some felt, indirectly excludes rec players from having a chance to play in high school. I frankly don't know the metrics for this at all - how many rec players played in years past vs today for example. Thoughts?
The idea that making a HS team requires pre-HS training and participation in that sport, I thought, was pretty well established in most communities… Almost regardless of the sport, with football being the most notable exception, it’s pretty rare that anyone walks into HS and on to a team, without years of club or travel or rec experience…and if you are playing rec, you are at least aware of other options… I naively thought differently when my kids were still very young; I didn’t think you had to worry/think about HS at age 9 or 10; I thought we were too “small town” for that…I was wrong, way wrong… I am not saying you have to obsess about/over it, but you do have to keep up…or you risk your kid being leave behind… Is this a good thing or a bad thing with regard to soccer? I don’t know…sure, on one hand, it may cut out or limit the number of more “casual” players from playing in HS…yet, if that is happening because the talent/skill level is increasing, isn’t that a good thing? HS sports can be brutally honest…and maybe for the first time for both kid and parent…I don’t know the parents or kids involved in your examples above; so none of what I say is directed at them personally… Yes, there are clubs that make cuts and are highly competitive…yet, there are also plenty of clubs that will cash your check and make room from almost any player (which isn’t necessarily a bad thing either)….but just because you play club or travel, or play on team that says “elite” or “select” doesn’t necessarily mean you’re all that good relatively speaking…
There was once a time (pre-early 90's) that most the kids were out of rec with maybe 2-3 players from clubs - at least that's how it was by me. That's dramatically changes which is great but it is also problematic in that it reveals that while USSF and state bodies have focused on club play, there has been little done for rec play - which is likely the largest pool of all. Should that change?
To further Wulf's point, I was fortunate to have a co-worker with kids a couple of years older than mine and while they were in different sports in a different area he laid out the foundation of what was expected by the time they got to high school. He let me know (close to 10 years ago) that the first day of baseball tryouts the question was asked what travel team do you play for and those that said they played little league or another rec program were cut, never saw the field. Was this wrong, yes, did they miss players, probably but with the flood of travel kids this was the easiest way to cut the numbers. My brother in law, in central Illinois, has always had his kids in rec soccer and baseball. I have told the story above about soccer, baseball was another matter. His youngest was cut from the junior high baseball team and they were furious that the only kids that made the team were travel players. I have seen my nephew play and he is not great and I can see why he would get cut but this is junior high public school. The need to specialize or get specialized training is getting younger and younger. My oldest coaches a summer rec water polo program, every neighborhood pool has a team. This is as entry level as you can get starting at age 8. While my son does a great job with playing time and never cutting kids, by the time you age up to 13 or 14 if you haven't started a club program during the winter you are left behind and when high school comes around you will have a tough road to ever see meaningful playing time. While water polo is a small sport (60 or so schools field teams) in Illinois there is a direct correlation between high schools with clubs in the area and the top teams year over year in the state. The big clubs are centered in LaGrange (Lyons Township # 4 right now)), Oak Park (Fenwick #6), Lincolnshire (Stevenson #1), and Naperville (North #5 and Central #3).
And wasn’t that really bad soccer being played? Maybe HS soccer is worse than club soccer in many cases, but certainly the HS soccer being played today is generally far better than the soccer being played the late 80’s/early 90’s… Doesn’t this assume that rec play should be the primary and direct feeder system into HS? I don’t necessarily agree with that… In many sports, kids start off playing local rec and then in many cases, transition into club or travel play as they get older, better and closer to HS…and then play for their HS teams… Once again, and not to beat our well deceased horse, but only soccer seems to have an issue with that setup….
You can talk all you wanna, but it's different than it was. No it ain't, no it ain't, but you gotta know the territory! * Nice dialogue going on here, don't want to interrupt the flow, but it's clear there must be considerable variation from place to place around the country. At the outset, I would definitely distinguish HS girls' sports from boys' sports. Two examples: Field Hockey (Fall sport)(Girls only) - virtually no local girl plays organized field hockey here before HS, so they're all new to the sport. Coaches (presumably) look for the most basic ingredients - athleticism and coach-ability. Lacrosse (Spring sport)(Boys; Girls) - virtually all the boys have played serious club lacrosse before HS (although obviously some are not very good at it); many of the girls have, but many others have played very little or not at all. [Early question for little boys: Would you rather kick other boys (soccer) or hit them with a stick (lacrosse)?] Soccer here (near the Swamp) is very highly developed for both girls and boys. HS teams still have a lot of appeal for both, and only the 'highest-potential' boys disdain HS ball (for Bradenton, Europe or the local DAs). [A college scholarship (not a pro contract) remains the holy grail (no capital letters, please).] Another point: (early) preparation is essential for success. This is easy to see/understand with academics, and so too with athletics. Take softball/baseball as a reference point. Tee ball at five-six, then parent pitch, then machine pitch, rec teams, travel teams, select teams (with year-round batting practice, indoors in the winter) etc. If you want your daughter to 'try' softball at 10, she's many years behind, unfortunately, and even at 8 she will 'feel' behind - because so much of what is already automatic/reflexive to others is unfamiliar to her. And yes, this is crazy (and not good) but very much the reality. Here, at least, but it might be (and obviously should be) more relaxed elsewhere. Carry on ... ++++++++++++++++++++ From The Music Man, of course.
Yes, I’ve seen with my daughter and volleyball…its starts in 6th grade….50 girls tryout for 25 spots….its where the weaning out process begins and doesn’t stop into you’re lucky to have 5 Seniors left playing Varsity….DD to be a Junior next year, and has so far survived (kinda a horrible way to look at it, but it is what it is)…but she didn’t play club over the winter due to burnout and terrible HS coach the last couple of seasons (now replaced)…but we/she are under no illusions she’s on the bubble now…probably will still make the team, but her days of starting are probably over….
In OH (metropolitan areas), if you haven't played club soccer, volleyball, lacrosse, baseball/softball, AAU basketball & even rowing you are very unlikely to make HS team. We are even seeing the onset of club tackle football. You can almost throw swimming into that mix. Top track/cross country runners are even getting a head start on HS with clubs. Throw in cheerleading too. If you weren't competitive cheerleader you might not make HS squad. For perspective, my daughter will have 25-30 freshman girls tryout for soccer. Nearly all play club at some level (local league up through national league). Our HS's have 2 JV teams and even with that club girls won't make a team. It has raised the level of HS soccer to a degree, but now we are seeing some kids choosing to not even play HS and focus on club only (even non DA kids) - for reasons I won't bring into this discussion as they are debated routinely on other threads. I, like many others, wish the specialization in 1 sport wasn't happening, but I also see the level of play in all sports rising as a result. But I also want all kids who want to play a sport have a chance so I still support rec programs having their place. Parents just need to understand realities of today and set expectations accordingly.
In my experience, a lot of parents simply don't understand that youth sports aren't similar to what we grew up with, when you could start just about any sport at age 10-12 and become good enough to make your high school team. Back in the late 80s, most high school soccer teams had maybe 4-5 travel players, 6-7 rec players and 5-6 kids who'd never played the sport at all before high school. The teams that had 6-7 travel players won the state championship in most states. This might still be the case in some states, but by-and-large we all know those days are gone. I live in a decent soccer town, and the starters on virtually every high school team in my area all played high level soccer at some point I their youth. Sometimes it's also a bit of laziness and/or refusal to accept reality by the parents. They don't want to drive their kids to practices after work, and they want to have nice relaxing Saturday and Sunday mornings, lounging around the house reading the newspaper and drinking coffee while their kids play legos in their pajamas. Yeah, those mornings are pretty great, and I'd like to have more of those, but if you're not willing to drive to the practices and games that come along with signing your kids up for the competitive youth leagues where they can get good coaching, then your kid is almost surely going to be left out in the cold when it comes time for high school sports tryouts. I hear these parents complaining all the time about their kids getting cut from the high school team. Well, the kids who made the team put in a lot of sweat equity to make that team. They spent their after-school hours driving to soccer practices instead of blowing bubbles in the back yard, and they spent their Saturdays and Sundays driving 45 miles each way to games or giving up entire weekends to play in tournaments. Maybe this is all of the worse, but it is what it is. Play the game or recognize that not playing it is going to leave you high and dry when high school sports roll around.
Well, HS soccer for us has finally started…my son didn’t make Varsity, but I think he has a shot later in the season (still 2 jerseys remain)…but either way, son’s fine with how it’s worked out…he’d rather be starting JV then ridding the bench on Varsity… First game was last night…0-0 draw…son played well…mixed bag as far as action on the field… Several calls I would expect to be called, didn’t…arm extensions on tackles, hip checking, even half a dozen bad throw ins…nothing unsafe, per say, just a slightly more physical game, in a different way, than I am used to…a blatant shove on the back (against us) was called and carded (only Yellow of the game). Both teams played decent possession type soccer…no kick and chase….we were playing a bigger, out of conference, school twice our size, and they were definitely more talented across the board….Varsity ended up losing 3-0. The individual skill level definitely varied…Overall, our “club” Freshmen are slightly, yet noticeably, better than the “Rec” Sophomores (obviously I might be a tad biased)…but I wouldn’t say they were terrible by any means either….however, most the club Sophomores are already on Varsity…. But overall, I was impressed and pleased with what I saw, as of one game….it wasn’t nearly as terrible of soccer as I was fearing….
I completely agree except the part about reading newspapers...;-) I encounter plenty of parents who just don't want the "aggravation" of travel sports because it would inhibit their agenda. Those mocha latte's aren't going to drink themselves you know.
I just recently discovered this forum, and this thread. I haven't taken the time to read through all of it yet. Just replying to the original poster. I know you said "almost always", and not "always", so I'm not debating your point at all. In fact, I mostly agree with it. But I'd like to take this opportunity to give you evidence of a high school team playing beautiful possession soccer. And just my two cents on reasoning for the lack of "good" soccer in high school: obviously there are probably many, many reasons - most of which I'm sure have been addressed in this thread. One I'd like to add, which maybe hasn't been discussed here (or maybe it has - again I haven't read it all), is field size. Many high schools play on the schools' football fields, where it's only about 53 yards wide. Compare that to 68-78 (or so) yards wide, like the game was meant to be played. Unless a quality team is playing against a very poor team, it is incredibly difficult to play a clean possession game on a narrow field, even with a coach who knows how to coach this style of play. There are two football fields in this video I'm posting, but the opposing teams in those games aren't very good.
My son is playing his first year of high school soccer, and at least where we live every field has two sets of permanent lines for turf, one for football and one for soccer (sometimes even a third for lacrosse), and the one grass field they played on had its lines redrawn for a soccer sized field, so that definitely hasn't been an issue. Anyway, they've mostly played preseason games so everything hasn't gelled yet for any of the teams, but it is definitely a MASSIVE step down from his club team (which currently plays in the NPL and was previously in the DA at the U14 level). And the degree to which the high school teams play solid possession based soccer correlates pretty precisely to the number of high level club players on that team, particularly if they happen to play for the same club/team, which gives them much better chemistry. And the coaching quality varies as widely as the teams. I've seen some that are obviously decent club coaches moonlighting as a high school coach. Then there's my son's coach, who's this grouchy middle school math teacher who's been coaching varsity soccer for years, and reminds me of coaches I had back in my AYSO days, cynical and tactically inept. And the team this year is very young but with some highly skilled players, so between their small size and the fact that they're used to at least trying to play possession based soccer, his highly defensive longball tactics just haven't been working. But to his credit he's starting to back off and allow them to actually play a little, and they're showing improvement. So in general it's a fun thing for my kid to be able to play with his classmates, and to actually be one of the studs on a team rather than just a role player in a team full of studs, but he does get frustrated at playing with some guys with no touch or tactical sense of the game. And as a spectator this shit just generally makes my eyes bleed compared to what I've grown used to.
I didn't watch all of it, but the bit I did was pretty fun. They're good at pinging the ball around and moving for each other, to be sure. The opposition teams in the portion I watched looked lost trying to keep up. Do most of those players come from a particular club? Are they actually learning to play that way within the HS team?
I believe most of these players play club. I'd say the better ones play at FC Alliance, which is the premier club in East Tennessee. But I know for sure that they don't all play there. I also know that they've learned to play this way within their high school team - but just within this past year. A new coach was hired in 2017. His previous high school program played the same way. He replaced an old school guy who retired, who I believe had been the head coach since the 80's. Until this year they were known as the most kickball team around.
Kicking this horse one more time before I let rest quietly. Watching my now-HS freshman son's winter indoor team (made up of the JV and varsity freshmen from his school team) play a couple of times recently against an all-Hispanic team (which includes some HS teammates and one of his club teammates, as well as some older HS-age players) has been interesting. And fun, though my son's team has no wins to show for it. My son's team, with one exception, is made up of players with club experience. Some are pretty skilled, and several play club ball for a coach who stresses possession, calm, working the ball to stretch out defenses, ... But coming out of their HS season, most of the team plays really fast -- every possession is a sprint up the field and a fast attack (my son's complained about it after games, but he isn't immune to it either; another parents observed that they seemed incapable of making more than three passes before someone had to unload a shot, whether it was a good look or not). The other team plays with more calm. more possession, more effort to make passes to try to create openings in the defense. There isn't much all-out sprinting going on -- just the odd counterattack when they have a numbers advantage or undefended space to attack into. And the games follow the same pattern. My son's team is leading or at least in the game for about the first two-thirds. Then all that patient possession starts to wear them down. And in the end my son's team loses a close game. Granted, it's indoor soccer, 6v6. Different animal than the outdoor games. But, with fairly even talent levels, that commitment to calm, possession, ..., has paid off every time.
At this age the ability to create space and control the tempo by holding possession can give your team an incredible advantage. Most teams will not play back to hold possession and open space. Midfielders often do not trust defenders and will not pass back to them.
Reviving this old thread one(?) last time after watching a high school team that was committed to playing possession soccer, playing out of the back, ... It was a team from a nearby town. The core of the team is composed of kids who played on one club team together for several years. They're pretty skilled and the coach has made an obvious commitment to this style, which I admire. But I think it hurt them against my son's team, which isn't strictly a long-ball team and has some high-skill players who've played a lot of club soccer. But the keeper will always punt long or, when he has a goal kick, send it long up the field -- my eyes bleed watching it, but it isn't changing. I assume the coach doesn't think he has enough defenders capable of playing out of the back consistently. He may be right. When the teams played this week, the other team really struggled to get past the middle of the field. My son's team's high pressure and speed pinned them in for long periods and the game ended in a draw (and could easily have been a 1- or 2-goal win for my son's team). You could tell the other team was pretty frustrated, expected to win, ... The core of the team team is made up of (I think) juniors, so my guess is the coach is playing for one strong push next year with seniors who've played out of the back together for a while. I'll be curious to see how it plays out.
A good team should be able to recognize a need from time to time to go long. Going long against a team that presses constantly can open up space to return to playing out of the back. You need to be willing to also play back from the half line to the keeper and keep the opposing forwards/attacking mids sprinting to tire them out.