My DD is in mediocre cardiovascular shape, compared to most of her soccer teammates….they all run XC or play basketball, whereas she does not. When they used to run laps after practice with her old club, she’d finish toward the last 1/3 of the pack, despite being the fastest girl on the team. She can play soccer all day however, in all kinds of conditions, because she has learned the flow of the game, and subsequently, how to pace herself. Soccer is not a marathon.
If she is on a realistic soccer schedule than she wlll be fine. These "tournaments" break down the best soccer players physically. 4 games in 2 days is unrealistic. Our best player is done after 1.5 games. That's when coaching and backups come in. Everything about youth soccer in America currently does nothing to promote the best soccer players. It does everything to promote the best athletes with a lot of money.
Cardio is one of the main storehouses for a complete workout. It works well for the heart, trains endurance, and explosive muscle strength, and helps burn calories. I do cardio daily. This is either running or simulators. I want to buy Elliptical 430 Schwimmer. Have read a review about this trainer here https://sportstopics.com/schwinn-430-elliptical-review/. I have a plan to lose 5 kg before the end of summer. So I do a lot of workouts now and cardio takes the biggest place in this process.
After about three weeks of XC and one very odd meet -- staggered starts for individual runners, only two schools, no parents or other "fans" who aren't race volunteers -- the differences between distance-runner fitness and soccer-player fitness (to the extent my son is fit again; he's getting there) are wide. Son and the other couple of soccer players who moved over to XC for the fall could, I'm sure, cut and stop-start-sprint the XC kids into the ground over 80 minutes. But 3 miles of straight-line running leaves the soccer kids waaay back of the fastest XC kids. The soccer kids also aren't sure how to run that 3 miles -- the pace to keep, when to kick, ..., even those who ran 2-mile XC races when they were younger. I'm thankful either way that this option is on the table and the XC coach at his high school welcomed the soccer kids to his team.
That's not really surprising. While soccer players can cover a lot of distance during a game, it's not really a constant running for 90 minutes.
I don't disagree. It was just really striking to me in a way that it wasn't a couple of years ago (my son's 15). Those differences seem to accelerate with age. After watching part of a club soccer practice last night, it also makes me wonder how much running XC is helping him for soccer. He has great (and I assume improving) stamina and has always been able to stay on the field for whole games without being subbed. But it doesn't do anything for the quick bursts he needs for soccer (the lack of which suddenly have him playing off the bench rather than starting). But that's another post for another day.
I think a soccer player should probably have some base level endurance in running... I would say something like running 2 miles in under 16 minutes at least. If they cannot do that then probably are not game fit. And then of course sprints. Variability is important since that mirrors games.
What are you talking about? Players go from jogging to standing still to running full-sprint constantly in soccer. It's VERY different from running a long distance at a steady pace.
I agree with you about the base level, although I think "game fit" is probably a next-level above that.
I thought of an easy way to make kids get more cardio naturally. Simply expand the field much more. Last week I thought to myself - my kid likes to run a lot, yet we play mostly on small size fields. Even when I set up puggs on a big open field, I'll set them up about 25 or 30 yards, or whatever feels right for 1v1. But I thought, maybe if I set them up really far apart he'll simply get way more running in. So I set them about 70 yards apart. For 1v1! It was kinda funny and crazy. But it I really think it works. I think I'm onto something. If you have say 6 kids; and you want them to get more running while also playing soccer, simply place the goals very far apart. For 3v3 I would even go 80 or 100 yards apart. It will seem silly at first. But you will see that it still lets the kids work on essentially the same as if the field is small, yet you get the extra running. I also like that it's gives more room to sprint (fast dribble) which is something players should be able to do as they advance. Please try it and let me know what you think!
Running and technical skills is very important at a young age because they predict the success of the player in future. Check this out How Speed and Technical skills of young players affect their chances to become a Pro
In looking at a few clubs lately, it seems there is quite a divergence in terms of fitness. Some do a lot of fitness (without the ball - eg ladder work) and some do very little fitness-sans-ball. Not to sound judgemental, but it seems to me (and I say seems in italics because I have only a few data points so I don't know for sure) that the higher level clubs do less fitness-sans-ball and more ball work compared to the, let's say, less expensive (which usually means less licenses and such) clubs. But again I don't know for sure. This is from looking at just 4 clubs (3 more rec-level and 1 that is more of the typical comp club). There was another poster on this website that said his kid was on a nationally ranked club (I think mid-teens age) and they weren't doing much possession and a lot of booting it forward type ball... so maybe there are more fitness minded/direct-physical-style expensive clubs.
We have found that each coach (even in the same club) has different beliefs in fitness vs skills. Don't take what you see from one coach and equate it across the club. Less expensive may mean less licenses, but it may also mean fewer teams. Does having three teams at each age group mean one club is better than another that has two teams at younger age groups and a single at older? Any club you join should have your child with a different coach every 3rd year (every fourth at the outside). Don't stress over the club decision at your son's age. Find a club that is reasonable to get to (time and distance) and a team that has the amount of trainings & games you want. And make sure you can afford it. That's it. That's all you should be worrying about right now.
Thanks for the info. But the main thing I want to avoid is coaches yelling "pass!" From age 4-8 there should be no passing. All getting the ball, dribbling, try to score. Stop telling kids to pass it. That is so bush league, it drives me crazy. Kids must develop comfort and competency with the ball first. That is the most foundational element of soccer. Fitness I don't mind as much since kids must run. But you must let kids dribble and shoot. And you must teach them good dribbling. Passing should start at age 9. It is harming the kid's development if you make them pass it. I don't think I can tolerate that environment.
Fitness without a ball is BS. To paraphrase Jose Mourino "when I see a pianist warm up, they don't run around the piano. They touch the keys. Players need to do things with balls"
Dude-- you couldn't be more wrong. Passing is a fundamental skill. Even at these ages. If a kid is in a 1v3 space, he should know how to pass.
No, one must first learn to dribble and shoot. Actually those skills build a great foundation for passing. My kid has mostly dribbled and shot (I would say it's 95% of his experience) and he is a far better passer than the other kids who started passing too early. Simply, if you know how to handle the ball, then you can pass better (better aim and accuracy), and you'll have better vision since you'll don't have to stare at the ball as much (can look up with more composure). Plus passing doesn't start with the pass, it starts with off ball movement. You cannot pass if no one is open. So, first teach off ball, then teach passing. And I didn't say it wasn't a fundamental skill. It is a fundamental skill that should be taught later.
@jmnva There are only 2 kids on our team who can pass, my kid who's 6 and another kid who's 8 (they also score 90% of the goals). All the other kids just boot it; they lack control and composure, so makes it hard to actually pass with intent and accuracy. Build the foundation first.
Your kid is 6. How early did these other kids "start passing"? 3? Learning WHEN to pass is as important as HOW to pass. Is the reason your son and the other child pass well (and score goals) simply because they are better soccer players than the other kids? The only way you're going to find out whether a coach emphasizes passing is to go to one of their games. Or, you be the coach. I mean really, "passing should start at age 9"? I'm glad you, after being involved in the sport what, 3 years?, have such expert knowledge.
Yelling pass or shoot in a game is not really coaching. More reaction than anything else. And it definitely does not help the player. And I think it's a good tell in finding coaches to avoid. As for ladders, I think there is a place for it, though probably dont need too much of it. Same with doing sprinting once in a while. Doesnt take up that much time.
Most clubs my boys have been involved with do not focus a lot on fitness and conditioning, at least not during their regular training sessions. They would do some running, but it wasn't a priority. One club would sponsor a free fitness course once or twice a week, usually in the off season (e.g. summer), but they were certainly not a requirement. High school teams have done more with fitness workouts, but they also had a lot more time to work with the boys, as opposed to the 2-3 days a week, 1 1/2 hours a session that the clubs have. My son has done a pretty good job of taking on the responsibility of fitness on his own. We do have a personal trainer that we work with that helps a lot as well. His strength has improved so much over the past 2 years or so. As a center back, that's been really helpful.