Original Document (PDF) - DocumentCloud
The U.S. Women’s Youth National Teams Program Finding the Next Mia Hamm and Alex Morgan Introduction: “If she can do it, why can’t I?” is a question author Daniel Coyle asks in his book The Talent Code: Greatness Isn’t Born. It’s Grown. Here’s How. In the book the author explores talent and the variables associated with developing and creating it. The above question serves as the opening to a section of the book titled “Ignition” that is devoted to what motivates or inspires an individual to commit to an activity and pursue it to achieve greatness. In regards to this ignition, Coyle (2009) stated that “it is not an innate talent or gene but rather a “small, ephemeral, yet powerful idea, a vision of their ideal future selves, a vision that orientated, energized and accelerated progress, and that originated in the outside world. Something in their family, their homes, their teachers, the set of images and people they encountered in their short lives that sparked an intense and nearly unconscious response that manifested itself in an idea (p. 106). This ignition leads to a commitment by the athlete to deep practice under a master coach and that mix of variables increases the chances for greatness to be achieved. This article is the first in a series that examines the characteristics, traits, experiences and developmental pathways of United States Women’s National Soccer Team players. In a sense we are trying to identify triggers of ignition for those who have reached the national team level. Of the hundreds of thousands of girls who play soccer, only a small percentage will achieve national April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 1
team status. Again, the question being, “If she can do it why can’t I?” As important as the research conducted is to the U.S. Soccer Federation it is as equally if not more important to those who are most involved in the development of future national team players: the parents of the players as well as the coaches in U.S. Soccer’s three zones of player development to understand the ignition process and their role in recognizing and developing it. The majority of data was collected through an email that was sent to 396 subjects who had participated in at least one U.S. Women’s National Team camp during 2011-2012. The subjects were participants in Under-14 to Under-23 National Team training camps and ranged in ages from thirteen to twenty-three. There was a 65% return rate for the survey. The focus of the survey questions can be found in trying to answer two questions, “Who should we be inviting to national camp? And what leads us to believe she can be a senior national team player one day?” In trying to answer these questions, the researchers developed a profile of those who have been invited to youth national team camps in an attempt to understand who they are and identify potential ignition points, their environment and people who may have influenced and supported them, their experiences both on the field and off that have been most beneficial in their soccer development, where they were developed; their psychological profile and physical capabilities and what their aspirations and hopes are for soccer and when did these aspirations begin. The decision to embark on this study was based on the need to be evidence-based when identifying players and creating future player pathways for the Youth National Team Programs. From Robinson’s interaction with national level coaches from multiple sports while leading an international coaching education program for the past five years and conducting a comparative analysis study of the top nine competitors to the United States in women’s soccer, along with
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 2
Heinrichs’ 25 years of experience in international soccer and from work with the United States Olympic Committee it was evident that some countries and sports were more systematic and scientific in their talent identification approach, and that talent in a given sport was not the lone variable being considered. On one occasion, a national team basketball coach from a country with a small population and limited financial resources who have had international success in men’s basketball noted that their sport has to be efficient, deliberate and scientific in identifying talent, for they cannot afford to waste time, energy and money on an athlete who may never contribute to the national team program. Thus there is a great deal of predictive testing done in the earlier ages to determine who has the potential to be national caliber and those players are brought together to train together and to have access to the best coaches on a regular basis. As he said, “The U.S. can afford to mess up. We can’t afford to do that, we have to be more targeted and specific in our approach.” For example, a country’s national team program had parents complete a survey that assessed parenting style. In their mind parenting style was an important variable that was predictive for an athlete in regards to such important variables such as the level of effort, the ability to be self-motivated and disciplined, to handle pressure, to be mentally strong and to deal with criticism in a competitive environment. Another example, several of America’s top competitors internationally encourages its females to play soccer against males into their late teenage years, and to discourage competition at an early age and focus on skill development. In one country when teams compete in league play, the seeding is established so that teams are always playing competitive games, or, rosters are scrambled mid-season to keep the focus on player development rather than anointing a team the winner. Can you imagine this in the U.S.? Why not? It would certainly help re-calibrate parents focus. It would be a remarkable leadership
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 3
decision and lead us to creating better environments for our players to learn, develop and enjoy the game. Finally, along with these international perspectives, there were and are the cautionary tales of the player who had all of the soccer and physical skills to be a national team player, but either chooses not to pursue that endeavor or never makes the commitment. This player may have had access to the best coaches, played and trained with the best players at best facilities in the best camps and tournaments and may have had the best off-the-field training, but in the end there was never an ignition to achieve greatness? Research studies have been conducted in the realm of sport as well as other areas such as academics and arts that have examined variables such as family status, birth order, birthday, parenting styles and socio-economic class in being predictors for either success or failure. All of these may be potential triggers for ignition and this study examined the degree to which they are with the female soccer players who have been identified as a youth national level player. In gathering the data, outside of physical testing conducted in the camp, Robinson never set foot on a field, attended a training session or met the participants in person, for his focus was on variables beyond the field that could be igniters or predicators of achieving elite level women’s soccer player status. What emerged were some trends worthy of note, discussion and sharing with the soccer community for talent identification and development is a shared responsibility across the U.S. Soccer community. As stated, this is one part of a series of articles on the profile of an elite level women’s soccer player in the United States. While this article focuses upon the influences on the national team player in terms of family and birth order; educational environment, involvement and influence of the parent and their participation in sport and soccer, and their soccer development
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 4
experience, the remaining articles will focus on understanding the significance of Relative Age Effect and Physical Characteristics in the payer evaluation process; the Geographic Profile of youth national team players and lastly recommendations by U.S. Soccer, to elite players, the club and the parent, as it is a shared responsibility for the U.S. to stay at the very top of the world in women’s soccer.
THE PROFILE OF A WOMEN’S YOUTH NATIONAL TEAM PLAYER The Family: Family Situation, Birth Order, Parents Education and Occupation The majority of the national team pool players come from the traditional two-parent family setting. Eighty-four percent of the respondents claim to live with both parents and that is significantly higher than the national average of 63%. Of the 16% not living with both parents, 72% of them live with their mother. This is slightly below the national average of 79%. From this, we can summarize that our elite players are well supported by their family structure, which is critical as players depend on their inner circle throughout their careers, and ironically the more elite a player becomes, the more dependent she is on the support around her to achieve her goals. We should also note that our soccer community could do a better job of being more inclusive and supportive of those players without a two-parent household.
Birth Order In terms of the family, 95% of national team pool players have a sibling. The 5% of only children in the program is well below the national average cited at being between 20% and 25%. Of those in the program with siblings, only 20% of them are the oldest child, while an astounding 74% of them have an older sibling.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 5
Table 1: Family Status Topic Only child Oldest Have Older
N 14 53 193
Percent 5 20 74
In examining the relationship to those older siblings, the average age difference between the national pool player and her next oldest sibling is 3.08 years. In other words, our elite players are ‘playing up’ at home, with their older sisters and brothers challenging them all along the way. It should be noted that despite antidotal evidence, there was no significant evidence in this survey to suggest that our elite players are being trained by their older brother more than an older sister. In fact, the gender of the older sibling was insignificant, while the age-gap and mutual interest in sport seems to be the predictor of success. Table 2: Age in Relation to Older and Young Siblings Sibling
N Percent Sibling 1 Sibling 1
Older Sibling Younger Sibling Average Age Difference for Older Sibling
164 81 3.08
67 33
N Sibling 2 38 36 6.22
Percent Sibling 2 51 49
N Sibling 3 25 17 8.27
Percent Sibling 3 60 40
Table 3: Sibling by Gender Gender Male Female % Female
Sibling 1 77 85 52%
Sibling 2 36 38 51%
Sibling 3 13 21 62%
Sibling 4 10 3 23%
Sibling 5 3 3 50%
Sibling 6 0 1 0
Total 139 151 52%
These findings are consistent with the analysis Coyle presented in The Talent Code. Soccer playing ability is not a gift, but rather “a confluence of factors that go beyond genes and that are directly related to intense, subconscious reactions to motivational signals that provide the April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 6
energy to practice deeply. Eisenstadt (1989) in his study of parent loss referred to primal cues as springboards of immense compensatory energy that can alter a child’s relationship to the world, redefine his or her identity and energize and orient the mind to address the dangers and possibilities of life. In the case of birth order, the desire to practice deeply by the younger sibling is responding to the primal cue of “you’re behind!” And, it appears 74% of our national team players were struggling, fighting, competing and enduring “fits of failure” on a consistent basis at home and that very training against their 3.08 years older sister or brother prepared them for success in our elite women’s soccer environment. This is perhaps the strongest argument ever made for the need to encourage our elite players to ‘play up.’ When so many parents are delaying the start of kindergarten for their children in an effort to better prepare them socially and academically, the opposite is necessary to prepare athletes for the challenges at the next elite level. Not coincidentally, both Mia Hamm and Alex Morgan were younger siblings playing with older siblings at home as well as playing up against much older players throughout their competitive careers. Additionally, years ago players reported playing up against their brothers, whereas today’s youth national team players are reporting playing up at home with sisters and brothers. The large majority of older siblings not only played sports but soccer specifically. Seventy-six percent of the closest oldest sibling played sports and 73% played soccer. Eighty-six percent of the second oldest sibling played sports and 69% played soccer and 79% of the third oldest siblings played sports and 76% played soccer. The subjects in many cases not only had role models within the family, but became more committed based on the response to that primal cue. April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 7
Table 4: Sibling By Sport Soccer
Sibling 1
Sibling 2
Soccer No % soccer
118 43 73%
51 23 69%
Sibling 3 26 8 76%
Sibling 4 12 1 92%
Sibling 5 6 0 100
Sibling 6 1 0 100
Total
Sibling 3 27 7 79%
Sibling 4 11 2 85%
Sibling 5 5 1 83%
Sibling 6 1 0 1
Total
214 75 74%
Table 5: Siblings By Other Sports Sports
Sibling 1
Sibling 2
Other Sports No % other
122 39 76%
62 10 86%
228 59 79%
It can be argued that the 74% of the national team pool players responded to the primal cue that they were behind. These findings of our players reminds all of us that ‘playing up’ and the inherit struggles actually lead young players to challenge themselves, enjoy those challenges and face adversity. In fact, the players learn how to deal with small failures and rise again while competing with an older sibling. This is exactly what our elite players are confronted with as they ascend through our youth national team program. A player that can’t cope with failing on a daily basis will struggle to succeed at the youth national team level. Players that cope with failures, love the battle and thrive on the challenges not only survive but thrive in the youth national team program. The Parents: Identity, Style and Involvement The role of the parent in the nurturing of a future national team player is worthy of examination. We examine who they are in terms of education and career but also in terms of their past experiences in soccer and sport, and to what degree and how they are involved in their child’s soccer playing life.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 8
Overall the parents of national team players have attained a higher level of education. Eighty-nine percent of the mothers of those who completed the survey have a post-secondary education experience, which is 15% higher than the U.S. average of 74%. Ninety-four percent of the fathers have a post-secondary education experience, which is 31% greater than U.S. average of 62.8%. In terms of occupation, the mothers’ occupations in order of highest percentage were Business (30%), Education (15%), Health Care (15%) and Homemaker (8%). The most common categories for fathers’ occupations are Business (44%), Science (11%), and Health Care (7%). In summary, a national team player comes from the traditional family setting and is in a multiple-child family. Parents are educated and primarily have white collar/professional careers. This reported education level and career stability creates an avenue for the vast majority of our pool players to experience and enjoy extracurricular activities such as playing soccer. That stated, we should ask ourselves how we can better support players without traditional family support.
The Role of the Parent The word that best describes the involvement of both the mother and father of a national team players’ soccer development is “supportive.” That is a very broad term and it is not known how that support was provided and how the parents are in the other aspects of parenting, but it is clear that parents created the opportunity for their child to excel in this activity. For mothers, 72% never volunteered as a coach and 98% were never a paid coach for the club, but the majority of the mothers volunteered within the organization, 63%, and attended games and practices.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 9
Table 6: Mothers Involvement in Soccer Development Question Volunteer Coached my Youth Teams Trained Me Individually Was a Paid Coach of My Club Team Was an Officer in my Club Was a Volunteer in my Club Attended All My Games Attended Home Games Attended Practices Traveled to Tournaments Was Not Involved in my Soccer
Always 6% 1% 0% 4% 19% 53% 70% 14% 40% 3%
Most of the time 5% 3% 1% 2% 15% 36% 22% 17% 35% 3%
Sometimes 17% 17% 1% 5% 28% 8% 6% 42% 20% 7%
Never 72% 79% 98% 89% 37% 3% 2% 26% 6% 87%
Responses 277 277 276 276 278 274 279 275 278 265
The fathers were more active as volunteer coaches with 50% having coached at least some of the time and 56% who trained their daughter individually, but only 9% were ever a paid coach for the club on which their daughter played. Eleven percent of the fathers served as an officer or board member in the club and 52% of the fathers volunteered with the club at least some of the time. Table 7: Fathers Involvement in Soccer Development Question
Always
Volunteer Coached my Youth Teams Trained Me Individually Was a Paid Coach of My Club Team Was an Officer in my Club Was a Volunteer in my Club Attended All my Games Attended Home Games Attended Practices Traveled to Tournaments Was Not Involved in My Soccer
20% 17% 3% 2% 12% 47% 61% 15% 36% 3%
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Most of the time 11% 7% 3% 4% 8% 37% 28% 19% 34% 3%
Sometimes Never
Responses
19% 31% 3% 6% 31% 13% 9% 42% 22% 8%
274 275 275 274 274 272 275 274 275 265
50% 44% 91% 89% 48% 4% 3% 24% 8% 85%
Page 10
Although no direct questions were asked of either the players or the parents in regards to parenting styles, the findings were consistent with the research in parenting style. Baumrind (1971, 1989), and Maccoby and Martin (1983) both reported that parenting styles consist of two dimensions. The first is “demandingness,” which refers to the extent parents show control, maturity demands and supervision in their parenting. “Responsiveness” on the other hand refers to the extent to which parents show affective warmth, acceptance and involvement with their children. Based on these two dimensions, four classifications of parenting have been described by Maccoby and Martin (1983) and Baumrind, (1991). Authoritative parents are both demanding and responsive. This means that they are controlling but not restrictive. Authoritarian are controlling and not responsive, while Permissive parents are not controlling but are responsive and Neglectful are neither controlling nor responsive. Aunola , Stattin and Nurmi (2000) reported that parenting styles play an important role in the development of adolescents' achievement strategies. In particular, parenting emphasizing child disclosure, parental trust and engagement, on the one hand, and parental control and monitoring, on the other hand, seem to provide a basis for the development of adaptive achievement strategies. In contrast, family relations characterized by an overall un-involvement, a lack of parental trust, engagement and control, seem to lead the use of maladaptive achievement strategies. On the other hand a parenting style that is demanding and unresponsive, was found to be associated with the child deploying maladaptive strategies, particularly passive behavior and a lack of use of self-enhancing attributions (Diener and Dweck, 1978). Aunola et al (2000) reported that adolescents from authoritative families seemed to apply the most adaptive, task-oriented strategies in achievement situations. Typical of them were low
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 11
levels of failure expectations, task-irrelevant behavior and passivity. Moreover, they reported a frequent use of self-enhancing attributions. In a nutshell, they hold themselves personally accountable for their success and their failures and rise to the occasion in competitive situations. Those from authoritarian tend to more task-irrelevant behavior, passivity and feel that they lack the competence to solve problems. On the other hand, Glaskow et al. (1997) reported that neglectful parenting was related to adolescents' internal attributions for failure and external attributions for success. Thus parents who do not provide encouragement, parental involvement or support, foster young people's doubts about their own competence and thus expose them to the use of task-avoidant strategies and negative causal attributions. Although a parenting survey was not administered, there were only 3% of the participants who parents were not involved at all in their soccer development. Professional player developers in the U.S. have long known that the most powerful and profound influencers in a player’s personal development are parents and family support. If parents provide the appropriate amount of support, encouragement, and resources, along with the appropriate triangulated support to the coach(s) in their player’s lives, then together they make a great team of experts in developing the player. The Parents’ Soccer and Sport Experience: Overall the parents of national team players were and are athletes. Participants were asked to mark all of the sports each of their parents played and the highest level at which they played. Seventy-nine percent of the mothers and 91% of the fathers played sports either at the youth, high school, college or professional level. Overall, the most popular sports for the mothers were track and field, basketball, and softball, but at the youth level gymnastics was a popular selection, and in college the sports listed for mothers were basketball, track and field, and
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 12
volleyball. The fathers’ most popular sports were American football, basketball, and baseball. These were also the most played in college respectively. Table 8: Mother’s Participation in Sport Sport Basketball Softball Swimming Track and Field Gymnastics Tennis Field Hockey Volleyball Lacrosse Other
Youth 44% 52% 58% 36% 59% 62% 19% 38% 11% 39%
High School 46% 43% 39% 56% 37% 30% 59% 49% 56% 40%
College 10% 6% 3% 8% 4% 8% 22% 13% 33% 20%
Professional 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%
Responses 133 122 72 156 68 60 27 93 9 95
Because the parents were athletes the players may have genetically inherited some of the athletic gifts and physical traits. It is interesting to note that many fathers played American football and basketball, and many mothers played basketball. To play those sports at a higher level such as high school and college, the athlete in most cases is taller and stronger. This is consistent with the size of the players within the national team pool as we will discuss in the article on Relative Age Effect and physical characteristics. Table 9: Father’s Participation in Sport Question
Youth
High School
College
Basketball Baseball Wrestling Swimming Track and Field American Football Tennis Ice Hockey Other
44% 50% 39% 66% 37% 38% 50% 44% 33%
46% 41% 51% 28% 53% 46% 41% 34% 35%
8% 8% 10% 7% 9% 14% 9% 22% 24%
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Profession al 2% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 7%
Response s 252 240 67 29 115 254 44 41 54 Page 13
The high levels of sport and soccer participation may also have contributed to a sport culture in a household. It may be the case that the family talked about sports around the dinner table, attended games together and children watched their parents play the games. The family can be one of the strongest influences on lifestyle choices of an individual. In terms of soccer, of the national team players surveyed, 16% of the mothers, and 29% of the fathers played the game. In terms of the highest level a mother played, the high school level was noted the most, 39%; followed by the youth level, 36%; and college level, 20%. For fathers the high school level also had the highest percentage 37%, but this was followed by college (27%), then youth (23%), and professional 10%. So fathers tended to play at a higher level than mothers. This may be attributed to opportunity for women’ soccer as a varsity sport at both high school and college levels was not a given until the late 1980’s and early 1990’s depending upon the part of the country. Unlike most American sports, soccer is still a relatively young sport in our culture. While the current generation of youth national team players is perhaps the first generation of players whose parents actually played the game, we can speculate that as future generations of players have children, their children will also be exposed to soccer within the family and we are well on our way to developing a truly American soccer culture in the U.S.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 14
The U.S. Women’s Youth National Teams Program Finding the Next Mia Hamm and Alex Morgan - Continued
The Identity of the Player This section of the article focuses upon the player away from the field and those experiences on the field that play a role in defining the player.
Educational Environment: Where They Go and What They Do In regards to the educational environment, between Kindergarten and eighth grade 75% attended a public school, 8% a private school, and 15% a private-religious school. During high school 62% attended public school, with 13% private school, and 16% private- religious school. The 12% decrease in the percentage who attended public school may be attributed to players receiving scholarships to private schools for their soccer abilities or parents enrolling them in a private institution with either a strong soccer and or educational reputation. National pool players are active in extra-curricular activities besides athletics. The most popular activities were National Honor Society (41%), Subject Specific Clubs (32%), and Student Government (18%). In summary, the national team player does well academically and is a well-rounded student with interests outside of soccer. Clearly, our elite youth players have the ability to balance their athletic, academic and social interests.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 15
Milestone Years Over the course of their development, national team players passed several milestones. National team players on average touched a soccer ball for the first time at 4.88 years of age; on average she began playing organized soccer at 5.40 years of age; and on average dreamed of being on the National Team at 9.70 years old. National players played for their first travel club at 9.12 years of age and realized they had a special talent for soccer at 10.1 years. Youth national caliber players began playing soccer year round but still did other sports up till 10.30 years of age and then specialized in soccer at 12.42 years of age. These milestone years are possibly eyeopening for many readers, or, perhaps not as we have so many players in America which allows for so much structure across even the most remote places. To be sure, it is exciting to see how early our players pick up the game, start to dream of being a national team player and how they feel “special” about anything at 10 years of age. This is absolutely fantastic. Research from around the world, tells us that soccer has become an ‘early specialization’ sport, and, that the key ‘skill acquisition’ years are from 8-12 years of age. As such, our future stars are playing earlier, informally goal-setting by setting their sights on the dream of becoming a national team player, and specializing at an early age in the way that a pianist or a golfer specializes in an effort to become an expert.
The National Team Player and U.S. Soccer’s Player Development Zones U.S. Soccer has established three zones in its player development platform. Zone I includes ages 6 to 12; Zone II, Ages 13 to 17 and Zone III Age 18 and above. These zones provide a framework to present data in regards to player development. For the Athlete
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 16
Development literature indicates that the training methods, training time and focus should vary by the defined stages of development. Zone I (Ages 6 to 12) Playing to Training Ratios On average national team players between the ages of 6 and 12 trained 2.94 days per week and played 1.66 games per week which leads to a ratio of 1.77 training sessions to games. In terms of tournaments at this age players on average played 5.53 tournaments per year which if they played six months out of the year that was approximately one tournament per month. If they played year round it was one every two months. In terms of taking a break from the game, the average break was 2.74 weeks and usually occurred during the winter or summer. This data is of particular concern to U.S. Soccer and player developers as the ratio of training to games should be closer to two-three training sessions to one game for Zone I players. What we learn from this data is that our players need to play fewer competitive games allowing for more directed training to master the fundamentals of the game.
Soccer Development Experiences Players felt that in regards to their experiences in Zone I their club playing and training experiences, individual supervised training and tournament play were the most beneficial experiences in terms of their development as a player. Interestingly, the experiences that were viewed least beneficial were free play and informal training.
This is not all together surprising
as we are unequivocally a nation of structured sports program, and, players are not playing in their own backyards and or engaging in pick up unstructured soccer in their neighborhoods as other countries with a rich soccer culture do.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 17
Table 10: Most Beneficial Experiences Zone I Environment Club Individual, Supervised Training Self Training Informal Training with Others Free Play Team Training League Games Tournament Play Olympic Development Program Overnight Camps
Very Beneficial Beneficial 76% 21% 71% 24%
Neutral Not Beneficial 3% 0% 4% 0%
Not at All Responses Mean Beneficial 0% 266 1.27 0% 246 1.35
54% 34%
37% 48%
8% 15%
0% 2%
0% 1%
264 252
1.55 1.87
37% 64% 50% 62% 52%
43% 29% 37% 31% 30%
19% 7% 12% 6% 13%
1% 0% 1% 0% 4%
1% 0% 0% 0% 0%
261 270 269 268 226
1.87 1.42 1.64 1.46 1.71
40%
35%
19%
4%
2%
232
1.92
Competing Against Boys Research in other countries indicated that training and competing against boys was common place. In the U.S. between the ages of 6 to 12, 82% of the national team players did so in some form. The most common was in informal pickup games and training. This was followed by team training arranged by a coach and supervised training sessions. The least common was co-ed teams and a full girls’ team in a boys’ league. This is of particular interest as we have identified ‘playing with boys’ as a development experience for female players which clearly expedites their level of play. In most of the top and emerging nations, girls play with and against boys from initial levels through sixteen to eighteen years of age. This creates a competitive environment where their girls are ‘playing up’ by playing against equal or better athletes as opposed to ‘playing down’ to the level of play in a small town or against opponents that are easy to beat for our elite national team players. Here is a potential and accessible environment where April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 18
we could have girls playing against boys creating the ‘playing up’ experience to enhance female development in the game across the country. Table 11: Competing Against Boys Zone I Form
Always
Sometimes
Never
Responses
19% 16% 18%
Most of the Time 22% 20% 18%
Pickup Games/Training Supervised Training Session Team Training arranged by a Coach Formal co-‐ed team Formal full Girls team in a boy’s league
49% 49% 45%
9% 15% 19%
267 266 265
9% 7%
8% 9%
21% 20%
62% 64%
255 256
Zone II (Ages 13 to 17) Playing to Training Ratios On average national team players between the ages of 13 and 17 train 4.1 times per week and play 2.02 games per week leading to a ratio of 2 training sessions to 1 game, when the recommended training to game ratio should be 3-4 trainings to every game for these ages. In terms of tournaments, on average they play in 6.84 tournaments per year. This means that if they are playing six months, they play in approximately one tournament per month and approximately one every two months if they play year round. At this age the average break is 2.43 weeks and is mainly taken over the winter. The two training sessions to one game ratio is alarming on a number of levels. The more advanced our player’s become, the less they are training? Quite simply, that is backwards. We need our best 13-17 year olds training three to four times per week and playing just one game per week, as this is when they are essentially learning ‘how to train,’ how to self-evaluate, how to improve. As a country, we are tossing aside the value of training to schedule more games/competitions. While we appreciate the value of learning how to
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 19
win, our weaknesses are in the technical and tactical aspects of the game, which require deep/deliberate technical training at the youth level.
Soccer Development Experiences In Zone II, players viewed their national team experience, individual supervised training, personal training sessions, and team training as the most beneficial experiences. While viewing high school soccer, overnight camps and informal training with others as less beneficial. It appears that in this stage, the player begins to appreciate the importance of training to become an elite player. Our interpretation is that players in Zone II do enjoy training and yet they are doing it less? Additionally, from this data we can infer that high school soccer adds little value to their playing career. No doubt there are social benefits and support networks that encourage and offer a comfortable setting in high school soccer, but for the elite national team players they do not see high school soccer as contributing to the development of their playing career. Table 12: Most Beneficial Experience Zone II Environment National Team Program Olympic Development Program Individual, Supervised Training Self-‐Training Informal Training with Others Team Training League Games Tournament Play Overnight Camps Personal Training
Very Beneficial Beneficial 89% 7%
Neutral Not Beneficial 3% 0%
Not at all Responses Mean Beneficial 0% 248 1.15
59%
29%
7%
4%
1%
237
1.59
72%
24%
4%
1%
0%
250
1.34
65% 35%
29% 50%
6% 12%
1% 2%
0% 0%
265 262
1.42 1.81
67% 49% 63% 42% 68%
28% 37% 31% 37% 26%
4% 12% 5% 17% 5%
1% 1% 1% 2% 0%
0% 0% 0% 2% 0%
266 267 267 241 246
1.39 1.66 1.44 1.85 1.37
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 20
Sessions High School 14% Soccer Experience Free Play 31%
24%
31%
17%
14%
219
2.93
41%
25%
2%
0%
252
2
Playing Against Boys In Zone II, 80% of the players had competed against boys. The most common environment was in training and pickup games while the least common was in a structured team environment. Elite national team players are self-selecting to compete against boys, informally. Outstanding! Our best female players are creating their own player development environment. Administrators and coaches alike should support this initiative and bring this idea to players that don’t have the knowledge or confidence to create this environment for themselves. Table 13: Competing Against Boys Zone II Form
Always
Sometimes
Never
Responses
23% 22% 17% 20%
Most of the time 21% 23% 24% 24%
Pickup games Training Supervised team training Team training arranged by club or college coach Formal Co-‐ed Team Formal team, only girl on boy's team One of a few girls on a boy's team Formal team, full girl's team in boy's league
45% 46% 44% 43%
11% 9% 15% 13%
209 210 209 209
4% 9%
4% 8%
17% 17%
76% 67%
196 200
3% 5%
6% 3%
17% 19%
74% 74%
197 199
Parental Support in Zone II Along with the cost of developing the player, parents of national team players were willing to financially support other services that would contribute to success. Fifty-seven percent of parents paid for Strength and Conditioning training; 8% of parents paid for a Sport Nutritionist.; 56% of parents paid for Sport Psychology services and 56% of parents paid for April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 21
Injury Rehabilitation. The reported average age for a player to begin receiving the individual trainings was 11.69 years of age.
Zone III (Ages 18 and Above) Playing to Training Ratios Players 18 years of age and older on average train 4.57 times per week and play 1.96 games per week for a ratio of 2.33 trainings sessions to each game. In terms of tournaments at this age they play in 5.53 Tournaments per year and take a 2.14 week break. Once again, we see an alarmingly low number of 2.3 trainings for every game, when we recommend 4-5 trainings for every game at these ages. As player developers around the country, we must emphasize the importance of quality trainings and push back against temptations to play so many games. If not, we run the risk of developing competitors without the requisite skill set for the next level, and put players will be at risk for overuse injuries and burnout due to over playing. In many countries, elite 18+ year old players are training 6-8 times per week while playing just one game per week. Yes, that’s 6-8 trainings (inclusive of individual or physical development sessions) and just one game every weekend. Soccer Development Experiences Players in Zone III viewed their national team experience, individual supervised training, self-training, team tournament play and their college soccer experience as being most beneficial. While viewing high school soccer, overnight camps, and free play as being the least beneficial. To be clear, this is our nation’s best players reporting what experiences they have had to date that have most assisted them in advancing their playing career.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 22
Table 14: Most Beneficial Experiences Zone III Question National Team Program Individual Supervised Training Self Training Informal Training with Others Team Training League Games Tournament Play Olympic Development Program Overnight Camps High School Soccer Experience College Soccer Experience Free Play
Very Beneficial Beneficial 84% 9%
Neutral Not Beneficial 6% 0%
Negative Responses Mean 1%
132
1.24
72%
18%
6%
2%
2%
130
1.45
71% 43%
22% 43%
7% 12%
0% 2%
1% 1%
130 129
1.38 1.75
70% 63% 63% 39%
25% 27% 29% 25%
5% 8% 8% 21%
0% 2% 1% 9%
0% 0% 0% 6%
129 127 128 127
1.36 1.5 1.47 2.16
30% 14%
30% 24%
23% 30%
5% 19%
12% 13%
128 129
2.38 2.93
70%
11%
11%
0%
8%
100
1.65
38%
43%
18%
1%
0%
122
1.82
Playing Against Boys In Zone III, the percentage of players who competed with boys drops to 73%. Again the informal environments of playing against boys were reported as the most common, while structured team and competition environments were not common. April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 23
Table 15: Competing Against Boys Zone III Form
Always
Sometimes
Never
Responses
29% 30% 22% 20%
Most of the time 22% 18% 19% 22%
Pickup games Training Supervised team training Team training arranged by club or college coach Formal Co-‐ed Team Formal team, only girl on boy's team One of a few girls on a boy's team Formal team, full girl's team in boy's league
43% 45% 39% 39%
6% 8% 20% 19%
90 91 88 90
9% 10%
9% 3%
16% 16%
67% 70%
90 87
5% 2%
5% 3%
14% 7%
77% 87%
88 87
Parental Financial Support in Zone III Thirty-six percent of parents paid for Individual skills trainings; while 53% of parents paid for Strength and conditioning. Only4% of parents paid for a Sport Nutritionist and or Sport Psychology services. Fifty-six percent of the parents paid for Sport Medicine treatments in the case of injuries. Where they Play on the Field National Team players primarily play in the center of the field as a defender, midfielder or forward on their club, high school, college, state and regional teams. The number of central midfielders is higher than what would be statistically expected; meaning that of the 11 position on the field at one time, 43% of them play central midfield for their high school teams and 38% on their state teams as well 33% for their club team; 31% for their regional team; 29% for their college team and 26% for the national team. It appears that we have a plethora of youth players that fancy themselves as ‘the center midfielder’ on their team. Might the perception amongst youth coaches, players and parents alike be that only the center midfielder will garner attention and reach the next level, much like an American football quarterback is given so much of the April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 24
credit for a team’s win? This is where our lack of soccer culture and understanding of the nuances of the game hurt us in our early player development and selection process. There is a near epidemic within our youth national team player pools at every age-group where we are lacking flank players, defenders that can build the attack out of the back with deft skill, and left footed players playing on the left flank. We are constantly converting 2nd tier forwards into wing midfielders and wing backs late in their career (as late as her mid 20’s). And, of course we are converting former center midfielders into flank midfielders and or central defenders. If we could identify a player’s best position earlier in her career, the positive effects would be profound for the individual players, our youth national teams and of course the ultimate goal of funneling players up to our senior Women’s National Team. We all know as a nation we need to improve technically and tactically, and if we could have more players understand their position-specific roles (technically and tactically) at an earlier point in their playing days, then our teams would in fact be more tactical, and we’d have players thriving in a position they were built for and we would have a senior Women’s National Team full of special players, as we did in the 1990’s. Table 16: Position Played by Environment Environment Goal Keeper Club 10% High School 10% College 17% State Team 10% Regional 10% Team National 11% Team
Central Defender 11% 5% 18% 13% 15%
Flank Defender 7% 4% 10% 5% 13%
Center Midfield 33% 43% 29% 38% 31%
Flank Midfield 6% 7% 7% 6% 4%
Center Forward 19% 21% 9% 16% 14%
Flank Forward 14% 10% 10% 11% 13%
Responses
19%
17%
26%
3%
9%
15%
239
268 224 89 231 227
This begs the question of ‘how to identify the best position for your player?’ Without a long dissertation, we can summarize these national coaching thoughts: goal scorers should play closer
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 25
to the goal, fast players on the flank, creative players centrally, second tier goal scorers make great flank midfielders and flank defenders, tireless workers in the midfield, slow players centrally, tall players centrally, and technically efficient gifted athletes that are smart soccer players with a courageous and competitive spirit can play anywhere!
The Multiple Sport Experience As mentioned earlier in the article some of America’s top competitors promote the multiple sport experience for its players. Eight of the ten countries studied encourage multisport participation up to age 12 and even beyond. Canada and England put emphasis on developing the athlete first and the soccer player later which is consistent with the Long Term Athlete Development model that they follow. As mentioned earlier the U.S. national team player began playing soccer year-round on average at the age of 10 and soccer only at the age of 12. Ninety percent of the national team players, played basketball through their youth up until high school age; and 77% percent had run track and field. These sports were also the sports that were most played at the high school level, 24% basketball, and track and field 37%. Sports that were participated in at the youth levels but not followed in their athlete development were gymnastics and swimming.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 26
Table 17: Sports Played Other Than Soccer Sport
Basketball Softball Lacrosse Track and Field Gymnastics Field Hockey Swimming Martial Arts Tennis Other
Did not Play 10% 42% 78% 23%
Youth
Junior High School 38% 12% 4% 25%
High School
Club
College Regional Team
National Responses Team
24% 1% 6% 37%
15% 4% 4% 3%
1% 1% 0% 0%
0% 0% 0% 1%
1% 0% 0% 0%
192 140 126 168
51% 46% 99% 0%
1% 0%
0% 1%
1% 0%
0% 0%
0% 0%
0% 0%
136 119
56% 33% 86% 11%
4% 2%
3% 0%
4% 1%
0% 0%
1% 0%
0% 0%
138 124
71% 21% 22% 20%
4% 23%
2% 24%
2% 10%
0% 0%
0% 0%
0% 0%
133 86
12% 39% 9% 11%
Fifty-four percent of the national pool players viewed basketball as the most complimentary sport and 46% percent said it would be the sport they would most like to play if they could not play soccer. Track and Field was second both as complimentary, 23% and the one in which they would compete, 18%. In terms of basketball, this is an astute observation on the part of the subjects for basketball has the same objective in moving the ball towards a central area on an end-line and is structured with offense with the ball and defense defends. There is transition in the game; teams can employ both marking and zonal principles and players are encouraged to take players on individually while also working in combination in moving the ball. Finally individuals have opportunity to attack with the ball and are responsible for individual defending. Multi-sport athletes make the best soccer players, and, the best soccer players specialize at some point early in their careers. As seen from our statistics above, our youth national team players specialized at or near 11 years of age. Gone are the days of athletes playing two or three April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 27
sports through high school and into college. Today’s athletes specialize earlier, and, if the present helps predict the future, specialization might be coming earlier and earlier. That said, athletes should not be forced or pressured to or away from any sport. Let them play! They should play for as long as they can and as long as they are enjoying themselves. If a player is facing a decision to quit a sport, listen to what she enjoys and dislikes, and assist her in making her own decision on whether to continue playing. A player-centered decision to specialize on one sport or not will reap the best results on and off the field.
Role Models The most popular role models in soccer for the participants were classified as female domestic players. This group included the likes of Mia Hamm, Julie Foudy, Alex Morgan and Abby Wambach. The domestic female players were followed by international males that included Lionel Messi, Wayne Rooney and Cristiano Ronaldo. This is powerful stuff coaches, parents and players! Women are role-models for our young girls so let’s recruit, retain and reward more women to coach our girls! The specific soccer our national players watch entailed 95% of the subjects watching the FIFA Women’s World Cup in 2011; 95% watching men’s international soccer, 85% women’s college soccer, 70% women’s professional soccer, and finally 64% men’s college soccer and the MLS. Seventy-five percent of the responses answering who their role model in life was were family members. This reaffirms the traditional family and parents who are involved not only in soccer but also in life itself.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 28
CONCLUSIONS We have begun to create a profile of the athletes that make our youth national teams. This article has touched upon potential “primal cues” or as Coyle stated (those distinct signals from something in their family, their homes, their teachers, the set of images, and people they encountered in their short lives) that ignited the individual to make the commitment to be one of the premier female soccer players in the world. It can be argued that these are some of the reasons why a player is able to achieve her full potential, while others even though they may have the natural ability and physical traits, have had access to the best coaches and facilities, and, have trained and competed for the required 10 years and 10,000 hours that Gladwell speaks of in Outliers do not. The information provided in this article is moving towards trying to eliminate the inefficient “guess” associated with identifying and selecting national team players. To say that there is a full-proof method for identifying and selecting future great soccer players would be unrealistic as there are many other variables that influence development not discussed in this article. How a player responds to the tactical speed of play, technical challenges, psychological hurdles, and the physical demands at training camps also gives us a glimpse into her ability to matriculate up to our senior Women’s National Team. We do, however, know more today about the profile of our youth national team soccer players than ever before. We know their most beneficial playing environments, how much they train, how many games they play, what position they most identify with, that they are the younger or youngest in their family ‘playing up’ against a sibling roughly three years older, and, we know the education, occupation and influence of their parents.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 29
References Aunola, K., Stattin, H., & Nurmi, J. E. (2000). Parenting styles and adolescents’ achievement strategies. Journal of Adolescence, 23, 205-222. Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority. Developmental Psychology Monographs, 4 (1, Pt.2). Baumrind, D. (1989). Rearing competent children. In W. Damon (Ed.), Child development today and tomorrow (pp. 349-378). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Baumrind, D. (1991). The influence of parenting style on adolescent competence and substance use. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11(1), 56-95. Coyle, D. (2009). The talent code. Bantom, New York, New York. Diener, C. I. and Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy, and achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 451±462. Eisenstadt, M. (1989). Parental loss and achievement. International Universities Press, Madison, Ct. Glasgow, K. L., Dornbusch, S. M., Troyer, L., Steinberg, L., & Ritter, P. L. (1997). Parenting styles, adolescents’ attributions, and educational outcomes in nine heterogeneous high schools. Child Development, 68, 507-529. Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child interaction. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.) & E. M. Hetherington (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 1-101). New York: Wiley. Mlodinow, L. (2009). The drunkard’s walk: How randomness rules our lives.Vintage, New York. New York.
April Heinrichs & Dr. Matt Robinson
Page 30
