Most practices are once or twice a week for an hour. Most games at the youth level are 25 or 30 minute halves. We seem to be highly concerned about burning kids out or overloading them. But is that a fair concern? Perhaps kids can not only practice and play much more... perhaps it is good for them... and perhaps they would actually enjoy it. We seem to think they can't handle learning too many things too soon. "Don't teach them positions until they're 8" "Don't teach them xyz move until they're 10" "Don't teach set pieces until they're 12" But I had a revelation today. Over the past few months my kid (7) has gotten really good at... Minecraft. He plays it often and he watches other kids play it. A few months ago he was new to it (like me) and now, when I sit down to play it with him, he's the expert. He plays it with such speed and depth that I get lost and he gets frustrated with me because of all the questions I ask. This made me remember just how sponge-like kids brains are. I often am conflicted on how much soccer to teach him. Maybe I'm overloading him? Sure, their bodies have limitations in balance, coordination, speed, etc. But conceptually can they grasp more? Are we short-changing them because we think they're too young to improve their soccer IQ at the level they can improve their Minecraft IQ?
There is no direct line correlation from learning Minecraft to learning soccer. They have to learn things as they can, once they master something, they can tackle the next challenge. If your kid is particularly skilled, they may be working on mastering several skills at once. All that being said, you cannot force it, especially for a 7 year old. Let the game come to them. If the kid isn't in the yard every day with a ball for at least a few minutes, then their desire isn't there yet, and there is no forcing it, other than saying hey buddy, you want to go kick it around? As an experienced parent the only thing I can guarantee is that the kids whose parents were super intense before they were 10, have all quit before 16.
The biggest thing at that age is that it's got to be kid led. My child is the same age (7 and playing U9). He practices three times a week for 90 minutes, but his coaches are good at realizing some days the kids are able to focus and listen to coaching for 90 minutes. On the days they aren't, he stops talking at that point and just lets them free play. It's the same at home. If he wants to play soccer in the house we will, if he'd rather play video games, we'll do that. Burnout comes from the feeling something is an obligation instead of a passion. Even the best players don't need to feel that burning desire every day. Follow your child's lead.
Keep in mind that [practice] =/= [free play] Our kids can learn all sorts of things through unstructured free play without burning them out; but don't forget that practice & drills are still work, no matter how much your kid may love soccer.
I think it's all kid specific. If you toss a ton at a child and he/she loves doing it, then you shouldn't apologize for it and sit back and let them enjoy the activity. If the kid rolls his eyes as you lug him/her around to yet another personal training session and they get upset they are missing yet another party or just hanging around with their friends pull back. I think parents forget that just because your kid practices 4 hours more a week when they are 7-9 doesn't mean he/she will be better than the athletic kid who only touches a ball at practice but plays constantly outside with their friends and dabbles in a few different sports.
Yes we do... One of my favorite moments in coaching was the opening parent meetings where I discussed that only part of this soccer was actually about soccer. The majority was about visualizing, awareness, decision making and execution - things that would benefit their kids at school, home and in social situations as they grew. I witnessed this growth to the point that my daughter and I had a u8 rec team playing possession ball - moving the ball into the back field and switching sides - scoring often. That season we had 1 u8 team and we played the town next door who had about 7 u8 teams. We crushed them beautifully - playing great soccer. The next season, the organization one town over hired a travel coach to provide 1 day of technical training for all those teams - apparently parents were not happy and some accused us of being a travel team when we were not. So most definately - we are not teaching kids to use their noodle to the extent they can and we should!
I'd have to disagree. If I let my kid do what he wants he'll play video games all day and that's too much screen time. Maybe when he's older he can play more but I don't think a 7 yr old should spend 5 hours/day playing video games. Plus it's bad for their eyes. Nearsightedness is increasing in young kids because of too much screen time.
I think you are missing the point. The point I'm wondering about / trying to make is - kids can grasp complexity, more so than we think.
I think it depends heavily on the kid, and for physical reasons as much as anything else. Coaching U-littles, I remember lots of kids who couldn't physically handle some of the more advanced things (and that's relative, none of it was super complex) that the parents who I sort of shared a team with for a few seasons would throw at them. They just weren't coordinated enough yet to do X, Y or Z with a ball. Similarly, some weren't yet able to do the off-the-ball stuff we tried to teach (mainly just variations on "don't bunch up around the ball"). Others could do all of the above and more at 6 and 7. Which comes back to the points above from BlueChicago and others: It really needs to be kid driven. Let them steer it. And, as others said above, they'll benefit as much and probably more from just trying things on their own and with friends, especially at younger ages, than from drills and things that feel like homework.
Personally, I dont think it necessarily needs to be kid driven. But I do think the trainer needs to look at it from the point of view of the kids and the way the game is played by kids accounting for field size and athletic abilities and much of what others have said. Avoid looking for kids to play or think like adults. And coach to individuals becasue two 7 year olds can be very different. Teach techniques and teach objectives. Run a lot of fun drills and have a lot of patience.
"We seem to think they can't handle learning too many things too soon. "Don't teach them positions until they're 8" "Don't teach them xyz move until they're 10" "Don't teach set pieces until they're 12" So in the coaching world where curriculum are based on child development. Certainly there are outliers in every category and super teams at U8 that can do amazing things and the show an advanced ability of the game. For the most part kids don't start understanding abstract concepts until they are about 10 years old. Positions and movement are abstract, there are a lot of moving variables. You will certainly find coaches that tell a kid stand here and only move here and there and they think the kids understand "positions". For set pieces I have never spent training time teaching them to young players because it all comes down to the quality of service and the receivers ability to do something with it. If we are only successful with the service a small percentage of the time we need to put more work in technical acumen before we spend large group time on a set piece.
Can some kids learn positioning at an early age? Sure. Can some kids learn xyz move at an early age? Yup. Can some kids learn set pieces at an early age? Of course. However, I think it's going to be rare that you find an entire team at a young age that can learn these concepts. There are multiple reasons why training sessions are limited to 90 minutes twice a week. Let's talk field availability. Let's talk coach availability, Let's talk player/parent availability. Let's talk money to pay the coach and pay for the field time. THEN let's talk about attention span/athletic ability of the players. THEN let's talk about "recovery" time (yea, the younger ones don't need as much, but it's still a good thing). EVERY sport shortens their playing time and extends it as kids get older. And let's be honest, to learn a skill, you need repetition. To learn a theory, you need time to think about it. It's not like "here do this", you do it, then it sticks with you for life. Let me ask you this, in your ideal world, how long would training sessions be and how many days a week? Should 8yos be playing full 45 minute halves (since 25-30 minutes isn't long enough)? What's your ideal amount of time that you think should be implemented?
Training - depends on the type of training. I wouldn't do high intensity stuff for more than a few times per week for say an hour each session. But there's lots of lower intensity things to work on that can really improve feel of the ball, footwork, etc. And those things can be done for hours upon hours without over-taxing the body (not saying that should be done at U8, would probably get too boring, but just in terms of stress on the body). As for how long games should be, it depends on how many are on the roster. If it's 6v6 and your team has 6 subs, and each kid gets equal minutes, then each kid will get only 10 minutes per half, or 20 mins total. At one game per week that's 20 measly minutes of real game time per week. I mean that is a mere pittance. No one can materially improve with only 20 mins of game time per week. It makes no sense. No wonder we are behind as a nation. And a U8 rec season is what, 10 games... so most kids at rec U6/8/10 get say 200 minutes of game play per YEAR. Anywho, you mentioned attention span. My point was that, a lot of parents let their kids play minecraft for 3 hours, so yeah I think they can play soccer for 3 hours (assuming it's not at 100% intensity). That's how much the kids in Brazil play
Again, you complain about how things are, but you're not giving what you'd like to see as a solution. Do you want 45 minute halves at U6? Around here, I think most rec teams get at least two games during the week (one Saturday, one Sunday). If it's a travel/select team, there are some weekends they might get four games in (two Saturday & two Sunday-- assuming three pool games and a championship game). The difference in kids playing minecraft for three hours vs soccer for three hours is the kids WANT to play minecraft for that long. I'm not convinced there are enough kids who want to play soccer for three hours a day, every day. Yes, there are definitely some. My son would be one. My daughter on the other hand not so much. AND, nothing is stopping the kids/parents from practicing/playing as many hours as they want. As in the past, I feel you are overthinking things.
The US Soccer PDI aim for 4v4 at u8, 40 minute games, 6 players per team, %50 playing time for everyone so 20 minutes of games per week. Add in the play/practice/play methodology they suggest and you get another 30-40 minutes of "game minutes". 6v6 w keepers at u8 is a big part of the problem. When one hears "the kids game shouldn't look like the adult game" this is what they mean - the rush to get into formal teams, with schedules, standings, keepers, positions at younger ages. Kid's don't play coached videogames for 3 hours. Get them to love the game and they'll play self-regulated all day, like older generations did with skateboarding/bmx/street hockey/basketball/swimming/football/baseball.
You highlight another point - if a player is only touching the ball at formal club related activities - practice Nx/week and games - they're recreational, regardless of what 4 letter acronym is on their team sheet. It's not enough if you want to be a "soccer player" vs "a kid who plays soccer". Select clubs have addressed this over the past 5-7 years with the addition of futsal and "optional skills session" or the "here's this fun app that will show your scores next to the other kids in your club that the adults in your life can browbeat you with but we'll pretend you're intrinsically motivated"
I would say 35-40 min halves at U-little. They'd be completely fine. And two games per week. They should be playing more games at youth, and less practice. Practice is boring. Games are fun. My kid got a lot of play at home, but wish he had gotten more in the leagues. When I coach kids ask me "can I go in, can I go in?"... and I have to say there's a lot of subs and we have to give everyone some minutes. Hate that. We manufacturing this scarcity of minutes, in actuality nearly everyone (including the parents watching on the sidelines) are craving more minutes and we could easily provide it.
There is a venue here that has drop-ins. I take my kid there. It's 2 hours. 6-8 yr olds playing for two hours. It's great. Agree that it doesn't need to look like the adult game. I would be fine with no keeper.
That's a horrendously bad idea at that age. 35 minute halves is not until they're playing 11v11. 40-45 minute halves isn't until high school. And for good reason. No, they should be having more fun at practice. If 8 year olds are bored at practice, the coach sucks.
You're using this "lack of playing time at younger ages" for the reason the US is "behind" other countries, right? But how do you explain every other sport, especially those the US dominates (basketball and football)? EVERY other sport has reduced time frames, and often reduced field/court sizes. But that doesn't stop our dominance. Why do you think that is?
What's the reason? They have subs. So it's not like any kid is playing for 35 mins straight. They would play for 8 mins, get subbed out for, come back in and play for another 8 or 9 mins. I think it's fine
It's hard for me to believe US Soccer has the best approach. We didn't make the World Cup or Olympics. For a country of 300+ millions with lots of resources thrown at soccer, that's just crazy. I look at other countries and just see how those kids come up and try to follow that - Brazil, Netherlands, France, etc. Besides, even US colleges and USL/MLS recruit internationally, so it's good to look wider; it's a global sport.
This might sound kinda crazy but I believe that soccer requires far more time to master than other sports. I think soccer is the easiest sport to start (since the ball rests on the ground) but the hardest to master since you have to manage a ball with your feet, which is inherently difficult. Feet did not evolve to manage a ball. But our hands are built to manage objects, so to catch/throw a ball with hands is far more intuitive. This is why a kid can start playing football in high school and end up pro, but that's impossible in soccer. Jerry Rice didn't start football until HS, and he's one of the best ever. That's unheard of in soccer.
Assuming you have all of the subs. I've seen plenty of U-little games where there's one sub (if any). Then what? Bottom line... no one is stopping ANY kid/parent from getting more touches on the ball. Want more? Find a couple of kids and do some pickup games in backyards. I remember playing whiffle ball against a friend when I was less than 10. It was just the two of us. 1v1. We had "ghost runners" and possibly "ghost fielders". We played for hours. There's no reason kids require hours and hours and hours of STRUCTURED training and games. You think that's why Messi is so good? He got a lot of training/played a lot of organized games?