I know this will be controversial, but let me be blunt. I don't think short kids (or kids who will likely end up short) should be encouraged to be goal keepers. How can you tell what height a kid will end up as an adult? Of course you can't tell 100% but you can get some idea by looking at the parents. Genes matter. Why do I feel this way? Because let's face it - you have to be tall to get far as a keeper. Sure there is the rare exception. But by and large you have to be above avg height. You have to be at least 6'0" and even that's on the short side. The avg GK height is 6'3" Sure, you can say as long as they are having fun who cares. But it's misleading to encourage them and lead them to believe they have a future in it. It's wrong to fuel any aspirations they may have of playing as a pro gk or even college because you will only lead to heartbreak and depression later in life when reality hits them smack in the face in the late teens. I've seen posts where kids were seniors in HS and hit with the realization they were too short to play GK in college and they felt they wasted many years and were mislead. From a development standpoint, if they are young and spending a lot of time as goalie then they are likely sacrificing footwork time, which is what they should be focusing on since they have no future as a goalie. There's almost always a tall kid or two for any team in a decent sized club. Take the tall kids and train them in goalie. Don't train the short kids because you're wasting their time. Unless of course the approach is "this is all just for fun" then sure it doesn't matter. But most kids and parents aren't spending thousands of dollars purely "just for fun"; they would likely just play rec and pickup and school soccer if that were the case. For long term development, I just find it a bad idea to train short kids and not tall kids in goalie. You're allocating time and energy to the wrong players in that case and robbing the goalie-potential kids of development. I also don't like that goalie training is often ignored until it seems around age 11/12/13. It's a vital part of the game. As long as the age level uses goalies they should be trained with some basic technique. It's not that complicated (the basics that is). The goalie position should not be an afterthought. The position is important and can have a big influence on the game.
Hard disagree with all of this aside from your last graph, the part about not training keepers until they're older (the lack of keeper training for even older kids with the teams my son has been part of has long frustrated me). You really can't tell how tall a kid will wind up being. One of my HS-senior son's friends who has parents of pretty average height suddenly became 6-2 or 6-3 about a year ago. There were some tall genes in there somewhere, I assume, but nothing visible on the soccer-parent sidelines. I'd also argue that, while it's usually a good thing to be taller in goal, there are good shorter keepers. The starting keeper at a college my son and I watched play a few weeks was listed at 5-6. He had good hops, good hands and was quick, so he covered the space well. But he also played well with his feet, which was a big part of the team's game. The roster listed two kids who were 6-2 or taller playing behind him.
I'd tack on one more (relatively minor) plus for having every kid play keeper in U-littles soccer: Coaching rec soccer at U9 and younger, one of the constants was a good number of the kids blaming whoever happened to be in goal when the ball went in for the goal. The parents I co-coached with and I made sure that every kid played in goal in part because it squelched a lot of that.
Love seeing NewDadaCoach’s enthusiastic, wrong-headed posts. Warms my heart to know I wasn’t as crazy a soccer parent to my young kids as I sometimes worry I was, relative to this Olympic standard.
I agree - when I coached younger ages (6 or 7), I would try to make sure everyone played at least a little bit in goal. And when they got a little older, I would tell them that the first one to complain about whomever is playing goalie is the next one to play in goal.
A college keeper at 5'6" sounds like an anomaly if there ever was one. I know for a fact that many college keeper coaches would rather select a tall guy with less experience and develop him over a short guy with experience. I'm not saying that a short guy can't be a good keeper, but I'm saying their is a bias against them, and there are plenty of field positions where they are more likely to thrive. Not dissimilar to basketball. Sure rarely you'll find a short point guard tearing it up in college, and even more rarely in pros (eg nate robinson) but you're talking about winning the lottery odds there.
I don't have a problem with U9 kids all playing goalie. I think that'd be great as long as they have all had some basic training. But usually they don't and all it leads to is kids getting frustrated (which is really the adults fault because they haven't trained them). If it were up to me I would yes rotate them all (if there wasn't a kid who really wanted the position) and I would spend 10-20 minutes doing some basic goalie technique. I actually think goalie training is a great overall regimen for general athleticism. It works the whole body. I play goalie myself. It's completely different than playing on the field. Requires a mental shift too.
Your premise here, though, was that this guy shouldn't have been encouraged to be a keeper. I'd say starting on a college team is thriving. Was it worth encouraging him? I've played a lot of keeper, too. Height is great and no doubt helps a lot (I'm 5-11, fwiw, and no one was confusing me with a college-level or above player), but mentality and the desire to be back there matter a lot. Most people don't want to play the position, especially after they try it. Having watched this play out on one of my son's recent teams, I'd much rather have the 5-8/5-9 kid who badly wants to be a keeper and is willing fly around and do the job over the 6-2 (or so) kid who's back there because a coach said he's the right height but the player didn't really want any part of it. I also don't like that idea of trying to predict where a kid will end up in height or any other physical attribute. I've seen way too many short kids get tall, tall kids get caught by everybody else, fast/athletic kids lose much of their speed and agility because their bodies changed, ... If we were training every team and developing every player as if they were all high-level pro prospects, maybe. But we're not.
I mean, it's like encouraging people to play the lottery. Sure, someone will win. But I wouldn't put many eggs in that basket. Again, I'm not saying a short guy can't play keeper. I'm saying there's a bias against it. And in reality a lot of shorter teens come up against a brick wall eventually when they find out the bias against them. Same with short guys who pursue basketball rigorously. Yes, it's possible, but so unlikely that's it's near impossible. Add in the height disadvantage, it's basically one in a billion chances. Biologically, sure there are anomalies, but for the most part the kid will end up somewhere near the parents' heights. Sure, we shouldn't worry about pro. But let's focus on college. I think even then it's very rare to find a short keeper. It's going to be a disadvantage. I just don't see the point when you have taller guys and the short guy can play on the field and likely thrive there.
OK, let's stop right there. Once again, you're talking decades down the line. The percentage of HS athletes that play in college is 7. 7%. That means on a soccer roster of 22 (I believe that's the NFHS limit), less than two will play in college. (source). Only 1.4% of COLLEGE athletes go on to play professionally. (source) Simply based on those numbers, you shouldn't be encouraging ANY child in ANY sport because the odds are against them "getting far". Now, you want to STOP training someone at 10, 11, 12 years old for GK because "they have no future" at the position? Presumably someone who is at least WILLING (if not eager) to put on the different shirt and gloves, go stand in goal, and get blamed for every goal they allow? Simply because you THINK they won't get tall enough? Not only that, but you want to FORCE someone to be GK simply because they hit their growth spurt before everyone else? And what do you do if they say "no"? You've said some outlandish, unrealistic stuff on this board before, but this really takes the cake. Let me guess, the goalie on your son's team is small and is getting scored on, right? How about you work on the field players supporting their GK? After all, the scorers need to get through all the other players before the GK has a chance. Now, as far as starting GK training early, THAT I agree with. There should be at least bi-weekly dedicated trainings for GK starting at whatever age GK are on the field.
An average height (5' 9" to 6 foot) player with proper technique and athletic ability should be able to cover all parts of a regulation sized goal, even the upper 90. To contrast this, I reffed a game this weekend at the U-14 age group and one of the teams had a goalie who was, I kid you not, at least 6' 2" or more and had to weigh 175 pounds. The opposing coach joked with me (I was AR1) that he wondered if the kid had to shave before the game. That being said, he was awkward and couldn't cover the lower parts of the goal because he couldn't get down fast enough. There's pros and cons to size like that.
Again, I'm not saying a shorter person can't be an effective goalie. There's what I personally believe and then there is reality, which is that a lot of college goalie coaches prefer height and won't even look at a kid who is under 6'. I completely agree that an athletic kid who also has good vision and IQ can be more effective than a taller kid without those things. I'm a decent keeper at 5'11" because as you said other factors matter. But I'm not gonna think my kid will ever be a keeper. Though I do like him and all kids to practice the position for general athletic development. It's a full body workout. And this way any kid you put in there won't be like a deer in headlights.
ok let's see... fair point. Yes, it's a waste of their time to play goalie in games as the default keeper because then they are not getting field time which I think is more valuable for a short kid since they have no future in goalie. When they are a senior in HS they will get depressed that college coaches are ignoring them. Then they will think why did I spend all the time in goal when I should have been on the field where I belong? And they will resent their coaches and parents and the whole club system. I would take the top tallest say 4 players and have them all do goalie training. Not hardcore just 10-20 minutes a couple times a month. Or have the entire team train. But not just put the shortest kid in their a lot. Not fair to him. We're getting scored on but not due to size of keeper, but due to lack of goalie training.
There are exceptions and I think the bias towards height is increasing over time. Just as it is in other sports like tennis where the avg height has trended upward. There are exceptions, I'm just looking at averages. Varies by sport and by position. https://bleacherreport.com/articles...weights-of-pro-athletes-by-sport-and-position
Granted, we're all entitled to our own opinion, but what YOU think really doesn't matter (unless you're the coach or the parent of the kid in question). Now you're assuming what a teenager will be thinking in the future. First, many (most?) kids have no interest in playing in college. Want proof? Look at my stat above... 7% of HS athletes play in college. Second, if someone REALLY wants to play in college, there's a place for them. They'll find somewhere that will accept them, as GK, regardless of their height. But it's "fair" to FORCE the tallest 4 players to play a position they don't want to play? And it's "fair" to the kid who wants to play GK but is forced to play a position THEY don't want to play? Now, having the entire team rotate through GK (not just train, but actually play), feel free. Guessing there's other reasons too, but I do agree GK training is good to have, the earlier the better.
From my experience, just as many taller than average kids quit soccer early because they were stuck in goal before they had committed to the position as shorter kids quit soccer because they are too short to play GK as they get older. The way to hedge your bets, though, at all heights, is to make sure your kid is getting to participate in field player drills and small-sided (no GK) games at practice (I said "practice," because too many people focus on getting playing time in games when practice - with the team and on your own - is far more important to developing foot skills). That usually means the kid has to come to double the practice sessions (GK and field player) and they may need to get private GK training if their club doesn't offer it. Virtually every quality GK in college nowadays comes in with the ability to play well with their feet. Often, when you see a shorter GK starting over the taller ones, it's because the team likes to play with their feet and the backups are liabilities.
I do agree that some college coaches are biased against shorter GKs. It's kind of easy to figure that out by looking at rosters. If you are under 6', you may need to look at DIII. Most D1 Gks are at least 6' (and, frankly, when they are listed at 6', chances are they are 5'11") and I see more who are 6'1" to 6'4" (the shorter GKs at the bottom of the numerical roster are usually training players, especially if they aren't freshman). Just as important, though, is weight and body type. If you see a 6'0" D1 GK, chances are he's also between 185 and 205, with broad shoulders (which generally correlates with a better standing reach), massive quads and really strong hands. A thin shorter GK with narrow shoulders is really rare.
I would only train keepers with laser like reflexes, 6’4 growth potential, and top 1% IQ. Prefer child to to be an offspring of a Premier League GK or NBA forward.
Good point about size. Hugo Lloris is an exception, he's kinda skinny. Listed at 172 lbs. But I'm a Tottenham fan. But yeah I think Manuel Neuer is about the perfect body shape and height for goalkeeper.
But I've seen kids post about it in other forums. They are not getting looks from colleges and they are having to decide whether to quite goalkeeping or not. I feel bad for them. You see it in basketball too to some degree but the height thing is more obvious. I think yes you force the tall kids, but if they resist then you force all the kids. Teach them a few basic things like athletic stance, hand position, how to get a ball coming at you from various angles, when to step forward towards attacker, etc Mainly it's just getting kids used to using their hands as they have been told that's a big no-no, so if you throw them in goal with no training they hesitate to use their hands and favor the feet and then all the parents are yelling "pick up the ball!!!!"