Junior football: Development or Competition?

Mr. MUJAC

Manchester United Youth Historian
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
6,345
Location
Walter Crickmer started it all...
I have firm views on this but though it might be interesting to quote Jose Mourinho from the latest edition of 'United We Stand'...the excellent Manchester United fanzine.


UWS: Why does your country, Portugal, a country of 10 million, produce so much football talent? It's not quite Uruguay with only three million people, but it's up there...

JM: Because the competition at youth level is very good. I'm not saying the formation of players is good everywhere. We don't have magic coaches. We don't have special powder which makes players. At the age of 13, 14, 15, the kids in Portugal play already 15 times Benfica against Porto, Porto against Sporting and Sporting against Benfica to decide the Champion of Portugal. Here (he points to the Carrington hinterland), until they are 16 they play for peanuts. They play friendlies.

UWS: So you have kids playing these really important competitions at 14?

JM: Of course. And it's even younger. They are 12, they are playing these games. They have the pressure, the competition. They have the desire to win. Here? They play in the FA Youth Cup and, if they are knocked out in the first round, then it's "goodbye, no more competition for you". Then, during the season, the kids of 14 or 15 here play friendlies...

UWS: But Portugal benefits in other ways, surely? The old Portuguese colonies. The cultural links and shared languages with South America.

JM: Of course, but it's the competition which makes them.



I recently read a a youth report from the USA stating that many countries are introducing competitiveness way to late into an Academy structure.

Here is what they do at Barcelona in terms of player Development:

Childhood (U/6-U/10) Pitch is 25x20 up to 80x50

Focus is on fundamental movement and coordination, technical repetitions, simple combinations, having fun, being positive, ball possession, experimentation, gaining insight, lot's of rest.

Puberty (U/11-U/15) Pitch is 100x55 up to 120x75

Focus is on aerobic based fitness, strength, attack and defence tactics, decision making, being positive, first experience of competitiveness, cooperation, fair play, lot's of feedback, managing pressure, winning and success v losing and failure, endurance, flexibility, mechanics, rhythm.

Adolescence (U/16-U/21) Pitch is normal adult

Focus is on performance first, positional play, intense fitness, group v team tactics, ball mastery, 100% competitive environment, use of space, width, depth and mobility, collectivism, patience, pressure, adapting to change, set-plays, accountability, drive, courage, off the field activities, running without the ball and the 4 S's (speed, strength, stamina, shape) in terms of emotional, physical and mental development.

I know at United we are pretty good with all of these things but am not sure on the psychological and emotional sides to playing football.

Historically, United junior teams played competitively at U/15 level and above.

Today it is only the U/18's that can be considered playing in a competitive league or environment.

I understand that U/8's or whatever need time to develop skills, have fun, mess about and learn creativeness etc...but at U/18 you can't just turn a competitiveness switch on and it's suddenly there.

I personally feel we need to be much more competitive at 14 and above. So if a Marcus Rashford or whoever is asked to play for the first team at 17 years old...they are emotionally ready for the competitive world of adults.

Interesting views by Jose Mourinho nonetheless.
 
Interesting.

Just one point, on players not playing in fixed positions in youth teams. I think it's great and the motive is clear. To me that's development. Youth team coaches don't always play players in their familiar positions because they want the players to learn different aspects of the game. This might mean that the team lose out a bit in the short run as players learn the new position but it will benefit the players in the long run.
 
Interesting. It really confirms what I felt so wrong about our youth set up (can't talk about other clubs since I am not too sure) in recent years (this includes SAF's latter years). Here is just about how much the gap between our academy graduate from real first team quality, not the whole set up from the root. I wrote in other threads that Wenger esque management SAF did in his latter years is very wrong. Too many occasion SAF threw the Reserve team (with few first team players) into a domestic game. Basically it's the Reserve team "plus", not true first team experience. The reserve team may have the raw talent to get some good performance, but they lack the consistent, the experience to deal with different scenario. We had become less successful in domestic cups as a result. People say it's good we give youth the chance. Now look back those players (arguably more talented or early developer) from SAF's latter years ain't as successful/ well developed, while some of our outcasts with real experience had caught up or even surpassed some of the former groups.

Real experience should be young players compete with other first team players. Even if the young players ain't afforded game time, they should still try their best to stay ready in case they final have their chance, and should work to take that chance with the right mentality: they are first team players. Same with going out on loan. They need to work to force the managers' hand. What happened in latter years are some young players seem to expect they would have a chance to wear our shirt just because they're one of the best of our Reserve than actually ready for first team. They know that SAF (& Wenger) would give the youth the chance in domestic cups.

Lj82 said:
Interesting.

Just one point, on players not playing in fixed positions in youth teams. I think it's great and the motive is clear. To me that's development. Youth team coaches don't always play players in their familiar positions because they want the players to learn different aspects of the game. This might mean that the team lose out a bit in the short run as players learn the new position but it will benefit the players in the long run.
Click to expand...
I had a discussion in Rashford thread few weeks ago that earned me a warning from mod, about how a poster couldn't understand how development works. Rather Rashford being given "dead minutes" (when the game was won) as central forward so Rashford can play how he prefers: running behind tired legs. I argued that for Rashford to develop, he needs to learn it the hard way in different roles. When he's to play central forward, it's him that forcing the manager hand than a free grant (healthy competitiveness). In which Rashford needs to show that he can hold the front line himself, not that we need to change the whole set up (of course good manager would tweak the system a bit to fit his ability). The point is it helps Rashford all around game than him ended up one dimensional.
 
Last edited:
Playing in different positions is definitely essential when playing as a kid but I would say age 15-16 onwards, for some players you'd want them to start specializing and learning to play a role inside out otherwise it leads to confusion and misguided development.

Another thing which I am a big fan of is loan moves rather than just letting kids rot on the bench or stagnate in the reserves/youth teams until aged 19/20. It is a waste of key ages in development. Post 17 if you are good enough, you should be in adult football at a lower level if need be but you need to be playing competitively and learning your trade in your best position.

For some players, it will be suitable to keep shifting them around till they find a best position but for others, they need to be given a certain position and given the chance to learn it.. on loan if need be.

Fosu-Mensah, Pereira.. the fact they still lack a fixed position on the pitch at times, I don't necessarily see that as a positive. No point having all the talent on the pitch, if you can't then translate that onto the pitch and wasted years shifting around in positions can knock a players confidence in those formative years. Gerrard for me wasted quite a few years never having a fixed position because no one knew how to use him. Now thankfully Pereira has finally gone on loan, is playing in just two positions (LW and CM) and seems to be thriving but under Van Gaal, he was in a rut stuck here just playing youth football.

For me Barca's approach there seems pretty bang on the money, after 11 there should be competitive football but with the focus being on development. Where we can do better is that 16-19 phase, which makes or breaks a player.. far too much wastage of talent.
 
GroteBergMan98 said:
The two/three problems England has in my opinion:

- Competition as Jose says

- The sheer focus on winning. Bergkamp said this recently as well, we don't do this luckily but City for example actually focus on winning rather than development. Needing competition and focusing on development can go hand in hand. We played City at U11 level, they played their strongest side almost the entire match while we rotated about 6 players in the first half or something. Focussing on tactics will not help you in your development, it makes you comfortable and you have an advantage over other teams that you will later not have. Playing players in different positions is a big one as well, barely any of our academy players have set positions. Angel for example plays on the wings, CM and AM because when you play in a different position, you have a different perspective on the game which can help you in your main position.

- The protection of kids. Go to any website of a football club outside England and you can find names of players, go to there matches and even watch them train. Sometimes parents aren't even allowed at underage tournaments and they have no sense of dealing with people watching until they're U18 and even then the numbers are low. Dealing with this pressure is a big thing to actually make it and the Premier League restricts players from getting experience with this.
Click to expand...

Not sure I agree with this. I don't see the massive benefits of 'people watching' and there are many negatives that come with parents watching especially.

Dealing with pressure is fine - let them grow up a bit first. I think their technical skills will be more important than anything else as they head towards u18 football and surely that is what really makes them stand out in the modern game (provided everything else is at least adequate).

I think sometimes people have to remember that these 'ideas' didn't come from thin air.
 
From what I have seen from academy football on mainland Europe, there is definitely an emphasis on competitive tournament football as appose to playing friendly matches each week. Does this help the kids? I'm not sure, granted it get's them used to playing under pressure, but there is still a win at all cost attitude that creeps into the game, usually from the coaches, In my opinion this stifles creativity and risk taking.

At Utd the kids are allowed to play with more freedom and mistakes are not punished, for me this approach pays dividends, it becomes really evident when playing against other academy teams, our kids are far better one on one and are much more comfortable in taking the ball in tight situations, I've seen it many times, an opposition player when pressured will just kick the ball out of touch for fear of being dispossessed. Our kids simply do not do that.

On the subject of competitive football, I think that genuinely comes from the kids themselves, some kids naturally want to win every game they play, regardless of it being in a tournament or just a training game, and I know for a fact the coaches pick up on this and over time the kids who aren't bothered and don't have that natural winner's mentality fall by the wayside.

I think the reason our academy has been so successful over the years, is that there is a definite focus on taking a talented kid and individually tailoring his development, giving him experiences and specific challenges that will enable him to step up when the times comes, I think having a successful academy teams is just a by-product of this approach and not a prerequisite.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Akshay
I think it's very relevant. Competition is what improves who we are. Look at the best in various sports, rivalries have brought out the best in individuals.
Mental toughness is an important aspect in any life situation. Nobody gets better at facing difficulties without facing them more. As Jose said or somebody pointed out about La liga, relevant competition improves the youngsters ability to cope with first team football.
Under 12/13 football, start of teenage seems to be the best time to introduce competition. Normal people (not footballers) start facing real life problems around then, then why not footballers too. FA seriously should consider options like letting clubs play their reserve team in second or third division and work downwards as ensuring a way to let upcoming professionals face competion, not only trophies but a place in their respective teams too.

@GroteBergMan98 I disagree on your point about winning. IMO that is what has set united apart from others. Maybe not winning at all costs, but there should be very good focus on winning. It was that winning instinct/ or habit of winning that has helped united win the title last time under SAF. The city youth culture, if their focus is on winning, will pay dividends in the future. I'm not saying it should be at the cost of development. But how else would these individuals learn to win by not focusing on winning. Attitudes on the football field like preserving a lead, parking the bus, hoofballing to the box (if there is a tree in there somewhere) are very important in football these days.(I felt like adding play acting, pressuring referee, and diving, but maybe not). All IMO ofc
 
Beaucoup said:
From what I have seen from academy football on mainland Europe, there is definitely an emphasis on competitive tournament football as appose to playing friendly matches each week. Does this help the kids? I'm not sure, granted it get's them used to playing under pressure, but there is still a win at all cost attitude that creeps into the game, usually from the coaches, In my opinion this stifles creativity and risk taking.

At Utd the kids are allowed to play with more freedom and mistakes are not punished, for me this approach pays dividends, it becomes really evident when playing against other academy teams, our kids are far better one on one and are much more comfortable in taking the ball in tight situations, I've seen it many times, an opposition player when pressured will just kick the ball out of touch for fear of being dispossessed. Our kids simply do not do that.

On the subject of competitive football, I think that genuinely comes from the kids themselves, some kids naturally want to win every game they play, regardless of it being in a tournament or just a training game, and I know for a fact the coaches pick up on this and over time the kids who aren't bothered and don't have that natural winner's mentality fall by the wayside.

I think the reason our academy has been so successful over the years, is that there is a definite focus on taking a talented kid and individually tailoring his development, giving him experiences and specific challenges that will enable him to step up when the times comes, I think having a successful academy teams is just a by-product of this approach and not a prerequisite.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Also think people are ignoring the fact that there's always a competitive side to it since these lads have basically been competing all of their lives in order to make it to the level required to be at United's academy and then once they get there competing in training and matches to show they deserve to stay there since there will always be plenty of talented lads in their own age group and younger age groups looking to take their place. Just because games are technically friendlies doesn't mean that young players see them the same way that the senior team would view a friendly. I've seen plenty of young lads coming off the pitch after these games a lot more upset and disappointed than senior players coming off after a loss in a competitive match.
 
mariner85 said:
@GroteBergMan98 I disagree on your point about winning. IMO that is what has set united apart from others. Maybe not winning at all costs, but there should be very good focus on winning. It was that winning instinct/ or habit of winning that has helped united win the title last time under SAF. The city youth culture, if their focus is on winning, will pay dividends in the future. I'm not saying it should be at the cost of development. But how else would these individuals learn to win by not focusing on winning. Attitudes on the football field like preserving a lead, parking the bus, hoofballing to the box (if there is a tree in there somewhere) are very important in football these days.(I felt like adding play acting, pressuring referee, and diving, but maybe not). All IMO ofc
Click to expand...

There's a difference in the players focussing on winning and the coaches focussing on winning. The players should always try their hardest to win but that shouldn't be the coaches' focus.
 
Playing regular competitive matches at a decent level is the key to development. I am not sure I can say exactly when players need it but it is tempting to say throughout.
 
It's a little bit off topic but a friend of mine who has been a Primary School teacher for over a decade now was telling me last year how around 4/5 years ago the School scrapped competitive sport in favour of games that reward "compassion for your peers" and "team building". Apparently it was following Government guidelines although I'm sure a teacher on here can clear that up.

He said the main effect it has had has been a negative one on the kids who were naturally athletic and not naturally academic. You get them in every year group and their competitive edge and sporting ability gives them confidence and respect amongst their class mates and he thinks there's been a noticeable drop in their all round confidence as unlike the academic kids they never get their chance to really show where they shine.

It's incredibly sad that someone has sat in an office somewhere and insisted something like this happen.
 
Pexbo said:
It's a little bit off topic but a friend of mine who has been a Primary School teacher for over a decade now was telling me last year how around 4/5 years ago the School scrapped competitive sport in favour of games that reward "compassion for your peers" and "team building". Apparently it was following Government guidelines although I'm sure a teacher on here can clear that up.

He said the main effect it has had has been a negative one on the kids who were naturally athletic and not naturally academic. You get them in every year group and their competitive edge and sporting ability gives them confidence and respect amongst their class mates and he thinks there's been a noticeable drop in their all round confidence as unlike the academic kids they never get their chance to really show where they shine.

It's incredibly sad that someone has sat in an office somewhere and insisted something like this happen.
Click to expand...

A school has freedom to make their own choices on this. But many have gone down that road and it is a mistake for sure.
 
King Kendrick said:
Out of curiosity as a foreigner, do UK privacy laws come into play? If not, why so?
Click to expand...

No...there is no law that applies to everyone per se...it is at the discretion of each football club.

United are pretty secretive and reluctant to give any information out below U/18.

They are very specific and have even asked me personally not to give out team news about the U/16's when I watch them. I obviously don't share that info unless it's in the open domain.

It's very different at other clubs here in England who do give out information about younger groups. England do at U/15 level for the old Victory Shield and friendly matches they play in at that level.
 
I may be wrong, but I think the lack of popularity of futsal in England probably play a part in producing lack of technical player

Futsal in countries such as Spain and Brazil is immensely popular that kids can developed their technical abilities through futsal, iirc Neymar said that futsal helped him greatly
 
GroteBergMan98 said:
There's a difference in the players focussing on winning and the coaches focussing on winning. The players should always try their hardest to win but that shouldn't be the coaches' focus.
Click to expand...
If the coaches don't focus on winning then I don't know how the players will get that attitude. What else do you mean by competitive games. Competitions are there to be won. Why else would you take part in them.
Consider the current situation our reserves face. No proper striker in team to lead the line. If there was focus on winning competitions as a team, we would be recruiting/grooming players to different roles. It's not only one player who suffers from having to play in an illsuited role, but players who around then also suffer. I understand that our coaches/academy management know better than me, but just feel something is missing at the moment.
 
lawliet354 said:
I may be wrong, but I think the lack of popularity of futsal in England probably play a part in producing lack of technical player

Futsal in countries such as Spain and Brazil is immensely popular that kids can developed their technical abilities through futsal, iirc Neymar said that futsal helped him greatly
Click to expand...

I don't see a massive difference in technical ability between non-British players and British players.

In most good Academies there is a massive focus on technical development.

Whether you call it Futsal or five-a-side, we have been playing it for decades over here and clubs have smaller synthetic surfaces where they do play five-a-side games. During the week you see scores of youngsters playing in power-leagues and so on.

In fact, United went over to Germany to play in a tournament over Christmas and won the competition.
 
lawliet354 said:
I may be wrong, but I think the lack of popularity of futsal in England probably play a part in producing lack of technical player

Futsal in countries such as Spain and Brazil is immensely popular that kids can developed their technical abilities through futsal, iirc Neymar said that futsal helped him greatly
Click to expand...
All of United's underage sides do a fair bit of small sided and futsal work and there are cages at Carrington where players from different age groups play against each other, Paul McGuinness talks about it here
http://www.skysports.com/football/n...17s-manchester-united-stay-helped-him-develop The under 11s actually won a Premier League futsal tournament at the weekend while the u12s played 2 5/6 a side tournaments in Germany in the past week where they got to the final in 1 and the semi final in the other as well as the u15s playing in the Hallencup every year and the u19s winning the Sparkasse & VGH cup a few weeks ago as well as a few other age groups playing in similar tournaments with United's players often winning player of the tournament.
 
Lack of technical ability is such an outdated criticism imo. The biggest problem in England is the transition from youth football to senior football. Not their techical ability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.