Academy Pool Groupings versus Placing on Teams by Ability
I have wondered about the best model to follow when it comes to this. The US Soccer guidelines recommend inclusion but focus on training that meets each child's needs. I am mainly looking at U9-U10 ages. I see two common approaches to whether to group players, whether 1) by ability, or 2) playground, academy pool play.
Ability based placement seems harsh at first but kids all develop at different rates as acknowledged by everyone. Place kids on A, B, and/or C sides.
PROS- train kids by ability/ experience. Easier to train at the level of your high end (do not have to dumb down training). Easier to achieve optimal training size (at this age, 7-10).
Able to have rosters for league play.
I have noticed many of the more advanced players will get bored with games involving too many basic skills, that less experienced players need desperately. However, less experienced players get quickly lost if you train at the upper level of your kids. This allows a coach to better train at the level of the players and provides for a better custom, player needs approach.
CONS- parents get upset if kids on B or C side. Mid level players may not get the opportunity to grow optimally by playing with better players (learn by seeing, iron sharpens iron concept).
Playground, Academy Pool Play- all kids are grouped together by age without regard to talent or experience. They train together and then are broken out in teams that change by the match. Different levels of talent are almost always huge.
PROS- everyone gets same training without regard to needs of kids. No social stigma of A, B, or C sides. Focus on playing not winning as teams are mix matched for every match.
CONS- Can not train to the higher levels of players experience. Almost always have to "dumb down" training to the lower level present as lesser experienced players are unable to participate confidently. Hard to identify with team.
Parents concerned with winning are not patient or receptive. Loss of numbers possible.
Coaches tend to be left with large numbers of kids which makes technical training difficult. Optimal number at younger ages in my experience is 7-10 so that you can focus on their technique and play SSG's with smaller numbers for more touches. Hard to achieve in reality as most directors look at resource allocation not the training needs of the kids.
Difficult to play in leagues as there are no set rosters.
Our club is exploring this concept and I am personally just curious as to the thinking on both. There are Pros and cons for both sides.
I tend to think a hybrid is the best option especially for the younger U9-U10 ages. Technical ability gaps are usually biggest at this age as most are coming from rec coaches which is always a technique crap shoot. I do like the idea of pool play, but in reality it seems to 1) not allow smaller training groups for better technical training, 2) hold the better players back. 3) loss the better players that want to play only with better players or the parents concerned with kid playing on the top side, or winning-est side. Hate it but it is reality.
I would think that being able to have enough kids to have a two pools, an upper and lower level, which be optimal. However, by doing so, you are in effect almost going back to ability based placement. I just can't get around needing to break up these younger kids by ability. The talent and technique gap is just so large.
Does the NSCAA have an approved solution for this issue? Thanks.