Which large clubs do a good/bad job of developing players?

Obviously the coach has the most to do with it, it just seems some clubs have a lot more capable coaches than other clubs. There must be a reason why one club attracts quality coaches and another doesn't.

Okay,
Which club(s) do you think attract more good coaches than others?

Has nothing to with the club but more so with the coach. Big clubs have bad coaches along with good coaches. Small clubs and independents have good and bad. It more of which good coach can relate and communicate with your daughter. Don't buy into the name on the shirt, buy into who can develop your player

Academy or select?

I know that there will be some on here who will talk about "you can't look at records, my daughter played on a team that lost every year for 3 years (except those tournaments where we beat half the rec teams we played) and she developed just fine"

Yes - development doesn't equal winning, and winning doesn't equal development, but I would argue that there is some correlation

How can you say some clubs develop players "just fine" (even with a lack of "winning" academy teams), when their top select teams are built from purchasing / recruiting from other clubs?

That being said, large clubs with an apparent track record for producing results, defined by number / percentage of academy teams moving to select at the LHGCL level (Or those who do a better job identifying players and placing them on appropriate teams) -

Liverpool, Sting, Texans  

Solar?

However, there are many exceptions on both sides.

For smaller clubs / independents - I think those are more dependent on individual coaches for results - Andromeda, D'Feeters, Tx Spirit

I think this comes down to what your definition of "development" is. If you are referring to muscle memory skills such as how to push pass, dribble, trap, 2 touch, 1 touch, etc. then that is something that younger pre-academy skills coaches should be doing to develop. The fact is, that the best development for this is simply done at home by yourself performing repetition, repetition, repetition. Two practices a week and a game on Saturday is never enough to develop a good first touch. I would say that 90%+ has to be done at home.

If you define development as to how the kids are picked and used at the older ages (u13+), your daughter better have the first touch by then, because the coaches are there to simply develop "soccer IQ". They will stress the point that your daughter should be looking for the correct options BEFORE the ball even reaches her, not focusing on controlling it, lifting her head, and then picking someone out. I think ANY club is looking for the same thing and would rather just get into that as well as tactics. If your daughter doesn't have her first touch down by then, I think it will be very difficult to develop it as the level rises.

C&R, what about all the stories I hear about USWNT players who did not start playing soccer until later in youth....Mia Hamm, Alex Morgan, etc. They obviously did not put in their "10K hours" at home prior to age 14 developing that first touch.

I agree, what you state is probably the rule of thumb, but there are always those out there who buck the norm I think. And that's the beauty of sport...you just never know.

Based on her performance at WC so far, Morgan probably should have stuck to the rule of thumb.

RightWingDad wrote:C&R, what about all the stories I hear about USWNT players who did not start playing soccer until later in youth....Mia Hamm, Alex Morgan, etc. They obviously did not put in their "10K hours" at home prior to age 14 developing that first touch.

I agree, what you state is probably the rule of thumb, but there are always those out there who buck the norm I think. And that's the beauty of sport...you just never know.

Man, I totally agree with you. I know a guy who hadn't touched a soccer ball until the age of 13yo who was invited and went to Brazil to play; All expenses paid.

There are definitely people out there that exist. I think that they are in the minority and are just incredibly gifted.

SD69 wrote:Based on her performance at WC so far, Morgan probably should have stuck to the rule of thumb.

One tournament does not define a player....ie, Neymar's exit from Copa America. Besides she did get the goal that got the ball rolling in US favor last night.

Prob a little too tough on her with her lack of recent PT, touches, etc. Also too much to ask of her to run onto the numerous long balls defense/midfield throws her way. Frustrating to watch at that level.

Watch Copa America then. Better soccer than WWC and definitely better than MLS.

RightWingDad wrote:Watch Copa America then. Better soccer than WWC and definitely better than MLS.

There is also WCW and WWF but I was a bigger fan of the New World Order (NWA).

Barca wrote:

RightWingDad wrote:Watch Copa America then. Better soccer than WWC and definitely better than MLS.

There is also WCW and WWF but I was a bigger fan of the New World Order (NWA).

NWA was something else.

A = attitude i believe...

VultureVic wrote:Obviously the coach has the most to do with it, it just seems some clubs have a lot more capable coaches than other clubs. There must be a reason why one club attracts quality coaches and another doesn't.

We've been associated with Sting, FCD, and LP thru the years and none of them have a monopoly on quality coaches. We've seen the good, the bad and the ugly at them all. Good teaching coaches can also be found, depending on the age group, at the small independents. I can think of a handful at Dribble, Mutiny, Triumph, Gremio, Mustangs and others