Playing up- team levels

"For the fall, my U10 Division 1 (Premier U9 team) DD has been offered a spot on a U11 Division 4 team with a different town. How much of a difference do you think there is in skill between these two groups at these levels?? How much do you think the change from small to full side would help/hurt her in this move?

She playing at the best division for her age group. That also means she is playing aginst the best kids at her age group.

Playing up but in division 4 how's that going to help her. She iwill be playing with and against less talented older girls.

To me that makes no scents. Plus the coaching over all in division 1 is probably a lot better then the coach over all then in division 4.

She should stay in diviision 1 and when they move to 11 on a side it won't be a big deal.

 

Travelmom, you shouldn't worry about fitness at her age. You should be more concerned that she learn ball control and she is more likely to learn that playing small sided soccer than full field where the number of touches on the ball will be reduced by the size of the field, the increased number of players and the capabilities of those players. At U10 my daughter was dual rostered on 2 teams, one playing small sided the other a year older playing full field. She was always engaged in the action on the smaller field and there were times when she never even touched the ball on the full field. IMO the small field has the additional benefits of keeping kids mentally engaged as well as physically engaged.

My state has prepared a document, the 21st Century Player Development Manual, http://www.mayouthsoccer.org/download/129_21st_century_player_development_manual.pdf. It's definitely worth reading the entire manual. For your particular issue, refer to pages 57, 58 and 59. There is very good advice included in there and you might want to pay particular attention to this sentence: "If the older team is playing at a lower tier division, it might be better for the player to stay with his own age group where the playing level is higher."

 

Bird said "She was always engaged in the action on the smaller field and there were times when she never even touched the ball on the full field"

That's because she does not have the experience and most likely the coaching to know how to play so she doesn't disappear for long periods of time.

The advice to say at the highest division in her age group is the right one in my view.

 

Or that her teammates just didn't have the physical ability to get the ball to the other players. One thing I noticed is the teams on the full field would tend to collapse into the space they were actually able to connect passes and all too often there could be 20 players playing in a quarter of the field. A wing midfielder was unlikely to ever see the ball if she actually stayed out on the wing. But in the small sided games, the team was able to change fields most often through short passing and sometimes I even saw long diagnol passing that bypassed the midfield. It seemed to me that tactical awareness was actually more advanced in the small sided game then it was in the full field game because the players could see the options and actually succeed utilizing those options.

 

The worse the team, the less fun it is to play on the wing.

I've seen coaches who permit their central players to play 10 balls straight up the congested middle, while the wingers stand unmarked out wide. Quite often.

See that enough, you realize why the dad coaches so often put their own kids at center mid.

I agree with you assessment that the small-sided game encourages better tactics, and involvement of all players on the squad. As I get older, I become less fond of the big-field game as the standard version of the youth sport. Has nothing to do with age, good U9s can play on the big field. Has to do with the level of sophistication of the players and coaches -- unless they are pretty decent, the big-field game blows.

 

Standing out is fun at U10. What happens later when she doesn't stand out because she
didn't have to push as hard?

My son has always done better developmentally when there was someone ahead of him on the team. It would get better if that person taunted him.

Look at the coach, the opposition, and the team mates. Remember that she will be spending more time competing in against them in practice than against the opposition.

 

The best coaches have told us that the more touches at the younger ages the better. Having your daughter on a full field with 11v11 will mean less touches. I say stick with the younger side.

 

BigGuy is correct. He makes 2 very important points about her current team. The players are likely better; and the coaching is likely better. Those two points are compelling.

As to the quote above, the limited effective passing ranges of her team mates are not an excuse for a player being out of supporting distance. Rather their effective passing ranges defines the area in which a player can offer support to her team mates. BigGuy's post correctly attributes getting lost (out of supporting range) on the larger field to a lack of coaching, not blaming the player.

Your criticism of a youth team's compact shape on a large field indicates to me that you have never played on a comparative adult field (i.e., 130 x 100) where large areas (mostly on the weak side) may be beyond supporting distance during the course of play. Compactness is not bad. Proper compactness on defense becomes critical on a large field as opposed to playing on a narrow, short field which is more forgiving to a team's poor defensive shape.

 

Play small sided like 4 v 4 with a dominate player or two on the little team. See how few touches the other two get playing small side even 4 v 4.

It is about small sided training in a small space that helps their game not actually playing in the game.