DS is now playing U16. He's been playing travel since U8. 95% of that time he has been CB. This has been through two different clubs, two school teams (middle school and HS), a European tournament, two seasons of ODP, and nine(?) coaches. I agree the ideal would be having kids play multiple positions. But I would make sure the CHILD wants to play elsewhere, not because the parent wants them to score goals. Assuming that's the case, IMO, both you and your child should meet with the coach. Let the coach know the child (it would be best if the child explains this, but at 9yo, that might be too much) would like to play other positions and then ASK what he needs to work on in order to get PT in those positions. If he enjoys himself at CB, I wouldn't make a big deal out of it. The backline can be a stressful position (for the players as well as the parents). The European tournament DS played in was a hodge podge of players who had attended camps (all across the eastern US) one summer. DS was the only "natural" defender. The other CB normally played forward on his club team. That players mom told us how stressful it was for her to watch him play CB. According to her: "If you mess up as a forward, the worst that can happen is you turn the ball over. If you mess up as CB, the other team scores a goal."
As the parent of a player who these days plays almost entirely as a defender, yes indeed. Also stressful for him (though I think he mostly tunes it out) and us to hear other parents on the sideline who don't know much about defending or the degree to which defenders rely on each other and -- for fullbacks in particular -- the midfielders in front of them, yell instructions at your defender about what and who they should be handling (particularly if their player is that midfielder who should be helping but instead tends to stand at the midfield stripe and catch his breath watching the attacking horde bear down on the back line -- no, this didn't strike a nerve at all ).
This is where our opinions differ slightly. A few posts above mention the risk-averse behavior from u-little players when they are typecasted too early and too often as defenders. I saw exactly the same pattern from my son in U9 and U10. Once in a casual chat after our game, I asked him, if all start from scratch from a new team, and the coach asked him what kind of player he is, what would he say? I am expecting Lamos or Cante. But he simply said "central mid". He elaborated further that if the coach never saw him play before and wouldnt know his 'strength' in defense, he'd probably play him in mid field because he had 'good vision' and could 'often see play develop ahead of time'. That's when I re-evaluated the setup and actively intervened to help him move closer to his goal. My point is for children under 13, their preference and interest are so largely influenced by trainers and coaches that you really need to put yourself in his situation and think hard. My son never said to me he wanted to play MF. He simply said if starting from a new team, he wanted the coach to play him in MF for a start, just a try. We went down the youth soccer journey together. We are in this together. If I see something ahead of us and not that obvious to him, I need to help him visualize that. Won't you do the same in my shoes?
Of course I would. But I think you're misunderstanding me. One, your son told you he'd like to play MF just to try it. I'm all for that. What I'm against is, if a child "is" a defender, the parent shouldn't push him or the coach to play at MF or F. Just like if a child says they don't want to play soccer, a parent shouldn't sign them up for the team "because it's good for them".
Yes I think there is slight difference in our approaches. You see if I havent had that conversation with him, both he and I would have thought he liked to play defense and he didnt need a change. In fact he actually was subconsciously looking for some change but just didnt know how to start it because the trainer was already familiar with his game and gave him a lot of encouragement for his defense play. It is indeed very subtle and actually debatable. I am open to further thought on my approach. Thank you for your input!
My observation is that rotating players through different positions is highly underutilized on development teams. Not just talking rotating between fullback to wing, etc, but to other positions like CB, MF, striker. Heck, if they're good enough to be on a select team, they're good enough to be challenged by playing different positions. Young players need opportunities. As many as possible!
I have never seen or heard a team running full positional rotations. Sometimes I wonder if not fixating in a team serves the children better as they can simply join a pick up game every time and get assigned random positions.
Since were talking about a CB and MF... Just curious - do CB's make good defending mids? What qualities do DM's need to have?
I would say they are generally better ball handlers and distributors. They need to accept the ball in the middle of the field and have a 360 degree idea of what they are going to do with it. DMs will also move forward and be a pivot point for the attack. They will also have to cover for a lot of other positions when players get pulled by the opposing offense.
I think it would depend on the coach. DS's club coach has the wing backs moving way up as part of the offense. His HS coach has them not going far beyond midfield.