Academy

[brownowl91]

He's baffled cos says that the only game they played v wednesday was a twelve lunch time ko last weds and they drew 2-2 then lost 7-1. His lad and few others didn't play cos they'd played 3 games in 3 days and we're mixing things up. Said he doesn't regret taking his lad to utd cos wednesdays u9's were very physical and very direct. Said they werent encouraged to play from the back. Might be sour grapes but he's not usually like that.

I'm with dinno on this one and also baffled? You sure he's talking about academies and not junior blades or development squads?

[brownowl91]

Not one coach at middlewood rd encourages players to be direct. As per majority of academies now they all work to the same philosophies and guidelines.

[IstillhateSteveBould]

United were far more direct at u13 level on Thursday. Literally every time their keeper had the ball, he kicked it long. Wednesday's keeper was the complete opposite. He was clearly under instructions to roll and pass it out.

[Semedo's ferret]

I'm with dinno on this one and also baffled? You sure he's talking about academies and not junior blades or development squads?

My lad played with 4 of the utd under 9s elite squad when they played for young owls at under 8s. I know the difference between academy, development and Sunday morning teams. I also know the difference in a player that plays at these levels. I very much doubt that the boys I'm talking about are bettered in terms of ability now and future potential. Been around this age group for three years now, at all the levels mentioned and I've not seen better individuals than two boys thats are in utds under 9s. Neither played in the game mentioned above because they'd had a tough game against cat 'A'Leicester. Who they won. So to answer your question, yep I'm sure.

[scram]

Tbh although Leicester have brilliant facilities - I believe they scored the most points of all clubs in the country when they were awarded Cat 1 status. Their academy teams aren't that impressive.

But I like the way they are trying to grow organically now rather than just bust the bank every year.

[brownowl91]

My lad played with 4 of the utd under 9s elite squad when they played for young owls at under 8s. I know the difference between academy, development and Sunday morning teams. I also know the difference in a player that plays at these levels. I very much doubt that the boys I'm talking about are bettered in terms of ability now and future potential. Been around this age group for three years now, at all the levels mentioned and I've not seen better individuals than two boys thats are in utds under 9s. Neither played in the game mentioned above because they'd had a tough game against cat 'A'Leicester. Who they won. So to answer your question, yep I'm sure.

Ok, well just don't understand how you/he doesn't know this weeks results. Also I don't know much about the U9s but the 8s only have 3 lads from sheffield so not sure how widespread your knowledge or database covers.

I'm not going to argue over 8 year old kids but the 2-2 score and direct coaching are not true facts hence why I queried your "friends" information

[Semedo's ferret]

Call it a truce. I've watched 2 under 9s games today and one yesterday. We (Sheffield) have some fantastic little players that deserve better facilities and coaches. Plus all local professional clubs don't do enough scouting. Think our team has been approached by a scout on one occasion in two years. We shouldn't need to be pulling in 70% of a u8s team from outside Sheffield. I'm just glad that we are having this debate. 2 years ago it wouldn't have been possible. Onwards and upwards.

[brownowl91]

Truce accepted, I'm not speaking blindly on the subject. My lad has played at utds 8 & 9s and now is with Wednesday 8s who are a outstanding little group.

12 months ago I would've agreed completely with your friend. As for casting the net a bit further our only recent successes Palmer (Worksop) Beevers(Barnsley) spurr (Leeds) show that you have too scout the surrounding areas aswell as sheffield

[Past Member]

My lad played with 4 of the utd under 9s elite squad when they played for young owls at under 8s. I know the difference between academy, development and Sunday morning teams. I also know the difference in a player that plays at these levels. I very much doubt that the boys I'm talking about are bettered in terms of ability now and future potential. Been around this age group for three years now, at all the levels mentioned and I've not seen better individuals than two boys thats are in utds under 9s. Neither played in the game mentioned above because they'd had a tough game against cat 'A'Leicester. Who they won. So to answer your question, yep I'm sure.

 

FFS United don't have a squad named the 'elite' squad. They have simply the Uwhatevers and run some developments sessions. Leeds academy has a naming structure, elite, shadow, I think.

 

Our two U9s did play each other & the results favoured us this time. Could be different next time. Some of their, or our players, could have been playing elsewhere (other academy/older age group), but its very unlikely that the coaches wouldn't have wanted to put out a strong side for this one.

 

I'm not sure publicising their alledged results on forums is particularly appropriate.

Edited November 2, 2014 by zzmdu

[dinno]

The even academy age groups played the day before eg 10's 12's etc

I'm sure United didn't need any extra players for the 10's game they had 20 odd players to play 2 six a side games

Wednesday had 14 players including 1 under 9

Edited November 3, 2014 by dinno

[2soon]

1, Don't agree that winning matches at u11 (whatever) is important. It just isn't. It's not about the mythical "creating a winning mentality" - it's about creating a conducive learning environment for talent to flourish.

Lots of kids at those ages don't even remember the score - their emphasis is on enjoyment and that fosters the urge to keep training and playing.

Kids may be in winning teams but if they don't enjoy it they won't stick at it - simple as that.

Also the focus needed to be taken away from "winning is everything" because it is really very simple to win games of youth football - the big, strong kids win

Also winning doesn't enhance skill acquisition - correct and engaged practice does.

2, Of course most adults who play at any level get their lifelong love for the game by playing at an early age. But that doesn't need to be in an u7 team whose focus is on winning rather than development

3, Hanging onto talent was much less a problem when clubs were getting paid £10m for a promising 17 year old. Now all a club has to to is offer (for them) some spare change out of the petty cash and they can take any of our players if the player agrees to the move. We cannot set the fee and make it either prohibitive and/or a great windfall if he moves on. It is really very simple for clubs to prey on the gifted products of other acadamies

4, It's the whole coaching culture in this country, Our coach and player development is utterly embarrassing. It's jobs-for-the-boys and we end up with wholly unsuited coaches parachuted into positions they have doen nothing to deserve.

Anyone can do the basic coaching courses but it doesn't really help people become better at helping kids to become better - because the system is crap.

A really good grass roots coach should have their ambition as getting as many kids as they can into professional clubs.

instead they want to win leagues and plastic baubles to stick in their livivng room then brag about what a great coach they are by getting their team of 6ft 11 year olds winning 35-0 every week

We are hopeless at producing player and have been pretty much such the outrageously rubbish academy system was dreamt up

We must be the only country in the world who could possibly completely revamp facilities, resources and amount of players while hugely increasing spening - yet get bloody worse!

I'm replying on a phone.

1/ you misunderstand what i said. Winning games give people esp, young lads confidence, which improves skill level. It's obv why.

[2soon]

1, Don't agree that winning matches at u11 (whatever) is important. It just isn't. It's not about the mythical "creating a winning mentality" - it's about creating a conducive learning environment for talent to flourish.

Lots of kids at those ages don't even remember the score - their emphasis is on enjoyment and that fosters the urge to keep training and playing.

Kids may be in winning teams but if they don't enjoy it they won't stick at it - simple as that.

Also the focus needed to be taken away from "winning is everything" because it is really very simple to win games of youth football - the big, strong kids win

Also winning doesn't enhance skill acquisition - correct and engaged practice does.

2, Of course most adults who play at any level get their lifelong love for the game by playing at an early age. But that doesn't need to be in an u7 team whose focus is on winning rather than development

3, Hanging onto talent was much less a problem when clubs were getting paid £10m for a promising 17 year old. Now all a club has to to is offer (for them) some spare change out of the petty cash and they can take any of our players if the player agrees to the move. We cannot set the fee and make it either prohibitive and/or a great windfall if he moves on. It is really very simple for clubs to prey on the gifted products of other acadamies

4, It's the whole coaching culture in this country, Our coach and player development is utterly embarrassing. It's jobs-for-the-boys and we end up with wholly unsuited coaches parachuted into positions they have doen nothing to deserve.

Anyone can do the basic coaching courses but it doesn't really help people become better at helping kids to become better - because the system is crap.

A really good grass roots coach should have their ambition as getting as many kids as they can into professional clubs.

instead they want to win leagues and plastic baubles to stick in their livivng room then brag about what a great coach they are by getting their team of 6ft 11 year olds winning 35-0 every week

We are hopeless at producing player and have been pretty much such the outrageously rubbish academy system was dreamt up

We must be the only country in the world who could possibly completely revamp facilities, resources and amount of players while hugely increasing spening - yet get bloody worse!

3/ your point is a complete oversight of what happened as far back as 2010.

4/ again you kinda miss the question I was asking. To answer you.

A really good under xxx should be looking to be promoted to a higher grade.

[Guest NOwl83]

FFS you lot are boring me now..........! Can we just be positive that our academy seems to be on the up and the EPPP categorisation system will put us on a par with what's thought to be one of the best local academy systems about? It's nearly as bad as watching the first team or listening to praise or grumble!!!

[scram]

I'm replying on a phone.

1/ you misunderstand what i said. Winning games give people esp, young lads confidence, which improves skill level. It's obv why.

 

Winning doesn't give young kids confidence - the right learning environment does

 

Conversely where academy coaches try to instill winning as important then kids can feel like failures if they don't win

 

If the emphasis is always on the outcome rather than the process then it narrows down a hugely complex and fragile area such as skill acquisition and neuromuscular development to the result of a match - rather than the hours of nurtured practice and training

[2soon]

Winning doesn't give young kids confidence - the right learning environment does

 

Conversely where academy coaches try to instill winning as important then kids can feel like failures if they don't win

 

If the emphasis is always on the outcome rather than the process then it narrows down a hugely complex and fragile area such as skill acquisition and neuromuscular development to the result of a match - rather than the hours of nurtured practice and training

 

 

Winning games does give kids confidence, its laughable you could suggest otherwise. 

 

Given the correct environment, losing doesnt being an issue. 

 

A simple thought for you. A coach who is improving the childrens skills, will have success. They will move up the ladder and the children they are coaching will have a better chance of doing so as well. A coach who is winning and improving the childrens skills will move up the ladder and the children will go with him. A coach who is winning but not improving skills will move up and the children will disappear. The coach will as well.

[2soon]

i dunno if your interested to find it, but there's a thread i made in this subforum of an interview with Townsend and his story, compared to that of the barca academy.

 

In a few lines, townsend said he used to jump out at night to play football and it was applauded. if you did the same at barca, you got kicked out.The kids at barca were taught the discipline to work hard and win, The kids at spurs never got this chance, 

[jonesy87shef]

Winning doesn't give young kids confidence - the right learning environment does

Conversely where academy coaches try to instill winning as important then kids can feel like failures if they don't win

If the emphasis is always on the outcome rather than the process then it narrows down a hugely complex and fragile area such as skill acquisition and neuromuscular development to the result of a match - rather than the hours of nurtured practice and training

No winning does give kids confidence. It's not the be all and end all but it's a helpful aid in development. A couple of reasons being when I was a kid (goalkeeper), if we actually lost a game I was gutted. I hated conceding a goal at any time. No matter what team I was at the mood of kids would always be better and people tried harder when they were getting results. It's not essential to keep score and the winning mentality at such a young age isn't really important. The fact of the matter is kids play because they enjoy the game. The majority of people don't like losing. The training is where all the hard work is/was obviously put in, but I've know kids not want to show up because they are losing. The fact is if you're winning you will have happier children constantly wanting to learn more and improve. Losing on a regular basis is detrimental to learning, not to mention the ones who stop playing all together.

[AsioOtus]

It's called The Talent Code

And it's wrong

I think the basic premise is that if anybody puts in 10,000 of hours of practice into any discipline then they will become experts

No academy player will clock up 10,000 hours of coaching - and then it depends hugely on the input - ie the quality of the coaching

The proof is that despite players joining clubs ever younger - and they have way, way more coaching than they ever did - we still don't produce better players than we did a generation ago

I'd missed this before - sorry to go back to an earlier post, but is a really interesting area. The 10,000 hours comes from a guy called Anders Ericsson. It is often quoted as 10,000 hours but it actually about purposeful practice, pushing boundaries and continual learning rather than just raking up time - which is also the point you are making.

There are loads of books in this area, one of the most interesting and accessible is by Matthew Syed - the journalist and former table tennis player. It covers this and talks alot about the myth of talent, using himself as an example. Highly recommend it to anyone.

 

Link to amazon review http://goo.gl/5uBVdi

Edited December 2, 2014 by sccowl

[eugene]

My lads best mate at school, and former teammate, is at Man City's U9 Elite Academy. Apparently they are playing our U9's on Sunday morning so might go along to watch.

 

George's Saturday team lost Dan plus one other lad to City this season, one more to Man Utd and a fourth to Burnley. Between them last year they scored about 180 goals ..... we haven't quite replaced them yet !

[adelphi1867]

Youth football is about development, just like your child going to school.

When he/she moves up to the Comp, you wouldn't expect them tom pass their 'O' levels in the first term would you, they have to be brought up to the standard slowly, well it's the same with any Jnr athlete.

I wish I had a £ for every 10-12 year old who was going to be the next big thing in football.