I guess that's good. other than being released by a good club without ever getting to play for them. that parts not so great. speaking of... what's the deal with Lederman (cripes- just googled him and dammmmn... the pictures that turn up... he's just a little kid)?Toronto signed old friend Herculez Gomez.
Another small signing that slipped by me was that SJ picked up US U23 player Marc Pelosi, who was released from Liverpool.
It would be just our luck if Miazga plays for Poland and the Old Man plays for England :(Interesting that the Cosmos are now getting quality youth players, after spending on the aging superstars.
Nice article about Miazga, btw, on ESPN. a bunch of points caught my eye- mostly that he's a dual citizen (Poland) and hasn't ruled out playing for them- didn't know that he played for their u18 side. (also makes it easier for him to jump to Europe when that time comes).
I'm in Charlotte and the majority of the u9 u10 club games have followed these rules for several years.The major change for the U9 and U10 age groups is that build out lines will be established fifteen yards from the end line, which opposition players cannot cross when the goalkeeper has a goal kick or has the ball during play.
The goalkeeper may not 'punt' the bull, but can only roll, throw or pass the ball out. Upon so doing, the build out line may be freely breached.
forcing kids to build out of the back is fantastic in theory.I'm in Charlotte and the majority of the u9 u10 club games have followed these rules for several years.The major change for the U9 and U10 age groups is that build out lines will be established fifteen yards from the end line, which opposition players cannot cross when the goalkeeper has a goal kick or has the ball during play.
The goalkeeper may not 'punt' the bull, but can only roll, throw or pass the ball out. Upon so doing, the build out line may be freely breached.
u13 seems a year or two late to play "real" rules, but I like the rest of it a lot.NewlyRetired said:US Soccer is implementing some changes across youth soccer. I love the "build out area and not allowing the keeper to punt".
Does anyone know if in other parts of the world, they use smaller balls for the real young kids?
Here are some details of the changes:
===================================================
USSF is implementing a new model for youth soccer with an emphasis on small-sided games. The objective is to develop "more confident, skillful and smarter players at an early age."
The premise for necessitating the change is that eleven-a-side is an adult game devised by and for adults, not necessarily appropriate for youth level. U.S. Youth Soccer sees small-sided games as a stair step for players to grow into the adult game.
The initiatives:
· The initiative's four-tier structure affects youth development up to U13.
· Up until U8 games will be four-aside, without a goalkeeper, using size 3 balls. The focus is on developing motor skills (walking, running and changing direction) whilst getting as many touches of the ball as possible.
· U9 and U10 games will be seven-aside, now adding the goalkeeper and the offside rule, using size 4 balls. Once again a focus is lain on physical ability, as the stated rational is that "players at this age are [sic] need to develop speed and agility." Therefore the pitch is extended, and the hope is that 1v1 situations will be created in different parts of the pitch.
The major change for the U9 and U10 age groups is that build out lines will be established fifteen yards from the end line, which opposition players cannot cross when the goalkeeper has a goal kick or has the ball during play.
The goalkeeper may not 'punt' the bull, but can only roll, throw or pass the ball out. Upon so doing, the build out line may be freely breached.
· At U11 and U12, the games go to 9v9 and the focus is on quickening decision making and improving vision and game intelligence.
· From U13 and upward games become 11v11 and size five balls are introduced.
These initiatives are stipulated best practice beginning in August 2016 and are mandatory by August 2017.
U.S. Youth Soccer theorize multiple benefits for the small-sided game model:
· More involvement in games as players have greater contact with the ball and greater instances of experiencing tactical problems (a theory that is backed not only by common sense but also by some experimental studies.)
· Players cannot hide, as they are forced to attack and defend to succeed
· Less bunching on the pitch entails that the game is less complicated and easier to understand
· Avoidance of the situation where players are prematurely given a formalized position before generating an understanding of large group tactics
· More fun and enjoyment
On goal kicks the other team had to back up to midfield so it did encourage building out of the back. It helped the kids gain confidence and encouraged passing the ball and helped to level the playing field. Unfortunately some of that disappeared when the goal kicks can be pressured at u11 and it was often kick the ball as far as you can and fight for possession. I think that was also do to the coaches wanting to win and not risk giving up a goal when building out of the back..NewlyRetired said:forcing kids to build out of the back is fantastic in theory.berndog said:I'm in Charlotte and the majority of the u9 u10 club games have followed these rules for several years.NewlyRetired said:The major change for the U9 and U10 age groups is that build out lines will be established fifteen yards from the end line, which opposition players cannot cross when the goalkeeper has a goal kick or has the ball during play.
The goalkeeper may not 'punt' the bull, but can only roll, throw or pass the ball out. Upon so doing, the build out line may be freely breached.
How does it work in reality? Is it a giveaway fest or do the kids adapt to learn how to pass their way out of the back?
I do too. My oldest is moving up to U9 this fall. I'm anxious to see how the game changes when they jump to 7-7 with keepers.I kinda like the idea of young GKs not being able to punt the ball.
Can you do both?My oldest is going to u9s too.
I'm debating keeping him out of the rec leagues this fall and just going with a soccer "class".
Rec leagues that I've found here in NYC play 1x week with a collective seminar practice before hand for about 15 minutes; teams don't practice as teams.
He's got some decent natural ability, but Floppinho isn't Mr Aggressive about getting the ball- actually looks guilty trying to take the ball or keeping the ball when somebody else tries to take it from him. These leagues give him the minimum opportunity to get his feet on the ball and develop skills. What I've seen, it's one or two kids who are the aggressive types (and usually better athletes too) who are on the ball for 90% of the time with the rest of the kids trying to take it from them- whether they're teammates or opponents. I'd like him to develop the idea of teamwork with a consistent group of kids, and I'd like to instill some aggressiveness in him, but so far I'm not seeing either of those things happening in these type of leagues.
I'm torn.
Its familiar territory if they play indoor or futsal in the winter.I kinda like the idea of young GKs not being able to punt the ball.
maybe- it's only extra money to do both. and schedule.Can you do both?My oldest is going to u9s too.
I'm debating keeping him out of the rec leagues this fall and just going with a soccer "class".
Rec leagues that I've found here in NYC play 1x week with a collective seminar practice before hand for about 15 minutes; teams don't practice as teams.
He's got some decent natural ability, but Floppinho isn't Mr Aggressive about getting the ball- actually looks guilty trying to take the ball or keeping the ball when somebody else tries to take it from him. These leagues give him the minimum opportunity to get his feet on the ball and develop skills. What I've seen, it's one or two kids who are the aggressive types (and usually better athletes too) who are on the ball for 90% of the time with the rest of the kids trying to take it from them- whether they're teammates or opponents. I'd like him to develop the idea of teamwork with a consistent group of kids, and I'd like to instill some aggressiveness in him, but so far I'm not seeing either of those things happening in these type of leagues.
I'm torn.
Those together are what we get out of our Academy. Per week we have 1 pool training (U8-U10), 1 team training and usually 1 game. We probably end up playing 14-16 games with friendlies, league and tournament.
Probably have to add Corona into that group too (not because he belongs but more because JK seems to keep giving him some chances)In terms of current setup (the US playing a 4-1-3-2), the players that I would consider Benny in competition with are Bradley, Jones, Bedoya, Mix, and Moreno.
There really isn't a 10 in that formation. Jones has played in the type of positions that Bedoya and Mix often play in that formation. As a narrow right-sided midfielder who is a shuttler (Bedoya normally does it from the left). Bradley plays as a central box to box 8 that is the closest thing to a 10 when Dempsey isn't dropping deep to receive the ball (which is often). If Benny can't put in at least as much effort as Mix, there's not a spot for him unless Jurgen insists on having a tip of the diamond (which I just don't see right now). But if he's willing to work at it, he obviously brings a big advantage in calmness and passing.Probably have to add Corona into that group too (not because he belongs but more because JK seems to keep giving him some chances)In terms of current setup (the US playing a 4-1-3-2), the players that I would consider Benny in competition with are Bradley, Jones, Bedoya, Mix, and Moreno.
Out of that list I don't see Jones and Benny in competition. Jones has never played the advanced central attacking role for either club or country if memory serves and that is the one spot Benny might have an impact on.
agreed.There really isn't a 10 in that formation. Jones has played in the type of positions that Bedoya and Mix often play in that formation. As a narrow right-sided midfielder who is a shuttler (Bedoya normally does it from the left). Bradley plays as a central box to box 8 that is the closest thing to a 10 when Dempsey isn't dropping deep to receive the ball (which is often). If Benny can't put in at least as much effort as Mix, there's not a spot for him unless Jurgen insists on having a tip of the diamond (which I just don't see right now). But if he's willing to work at it, he obviously brings a big advantage in calmness and passing.Probably have to add Corona into that group too (not because he belongs but more because JK seems to keep giving him some chances)In terms of current setup (the US playing a 4-1-3-2), the players that I would consider Benny in competition with are Bradley, Jones, Bedoya, Mix, and Moreno.
Out of that list I don't see Jones and Benny in competition. Jones has never played the advanced central attacking role for either club or country if memory serves and that is the one spot Benny might have an impact on.
Just curious; do you think it would help or hinder Zardes development if he went abroad? It seems to me that the LA Galaxy have done a good job of bringing him along.@philsupportrsca: @MLSTransfers Belgian newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws reports that KRC Genk are in talks with Zardes (LA Galaxy) http://t.co/Xf4DUwaXl7
And German media is reporting that Zardes is also in discussions with 1860 Munich:
http://www.tz.de/sport/1860-muenchen/tsv-1860-muenchen-us-import-gyasi-zardes-neuer-loewen-stuermer-meta-5318420.html
Like anyone else it comes down to playing time. Plus Zardes isn't that young (turns 24 in a few weeks), so if we wants to test himself in Europe, he probably needs to do it soon.Just curious; do you think it would help or hinder Zardes development if he went abroad? It seems to me that the LA Galaxy have done a good job of bringing him along.@philsupportrsca: @MLSTransfers Belgian newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws reports that KRC Genk are in talks with Zardes (LA Galaxy) http://t.co/Xf4DUwaXl7
And German media is reporting that Zardes is also in discussions with 1860 Munich:
http://www.tz.de/sport/1860-muenchen/tsv-1860-muenchen-us-import-gyasi-zardes-neuer-loewen-stuermer-meta-5318420.html
I don't know how LA is affording everybody right now under the current rules to be honest. They had to have blown their entire TAM wad to get Gonzo reclassified as a non DP and there are rumors that they had to let their starting keeper Jamie Penedo go this summer due to cap issue.Like anyone else it comes down to playing time. Plus Zardes isn't that young (turns 24 in a few weeks), so if we wants to test himself in Europe, he probably needs to do it soon.Just curious; do you think it would help or hinder Zardes development if he went abroad? It seems to me that the LA Galaxy have done a good job of bringing him along.@philsupportrsca: @MLSTransfers Belgian newspaper Het Laatste Nieuws reports that KRC Genk are in talks with Zardes (LA Galaxy) http://t.co/Xf4DUwaXl7
And German media is reporting that Zardes is also in discussions with 1860 Munich:
http://www.tz.de/sport/1860-muenchen/tsv-1860-muenchen-us-import-gyasi-zardes-neuer-loewen-stuermer-meta-5318420.html
That said, I'm also not sure about LA's cap/DP situation. Can they afford Zardes much longer with Gerrard, Gio and Keane on the books among others? I'll defer to Andy on that.
oof :(Fab tore his calf muscle yesterday. At least there's not an important game coming up for the Nats in the next few months.![]()
I think I saw 6 weeks.oof :(Fab tore his calf muscle yesterday. At least there's not an important game coming up for the Nats in the next few months.![]()
Any speculation for how long he will be out?
Videos are hard to come by for this kid.Also, Bild is reporting that JK has invited Andrew Wooten (5 goals in 3 games for Sandhausen in the BL2) into the next camp.
That is a very cool site. Thanks for the link!