The Issue With Bio-Banding Young Players

With the summer now over, life goes back to a sense of normality. Football season is in action, kids are back at school and it gets a bit darker and colder in England. As we enter September it also means the start of the football season for youth football, both at grassroots and in Academies. After a hectic summer of tournaments, working on recruitment and team-building in order to get the teams and clubs ready for the season, the debates around youth development arise once again. This article will address the biggest issue in youth sports and development; size. As well as touch on the important aspects which mentality, psychology and emotional maturity have on the development of footballers.

The world of Academy football is at times a ruthless and unforgiving environment. For a young person the pressures, expectations and challenges that lie within this environment are constant and the demand on them high. For many young players they constantly feel under pressure, judged and anxious. Psychologically it can be a tumultuous environment and experience. 

With the way the game is progressing these demands will only get higher and more intense. If we wish to produce players capable of playing and succeeding at the top level the young players who are in Academy football need to be able to deal with these pressures and demands. Unfortunately the majority cannot, which in points towards their own shortcomings necessary for an elite environment in which they can thrive. So what are these shortcomings?

The issue with size

The two biggest issues for many young players is mentality and size. Sometimes these elements go hand in hand, yet that's not always the case. Size however is a major problem. The issue of being a small player, whether due to being a late birth or a late developer, puts you at a major disadvantage straight away. It means you’re always playing catch-up with those older and bigger around you, making you at times look 'weaker', less effective and overall less ‘talented’ than those around you. Late developers suffer greatly in the world of Academy football, because for all the talk of ‘long term development’ the truth is that opinions are based and formed based on short term elements. 

These judgments makes the route of a ‘smaller’ player ever so much difficult as a player who is ‘talented’ player may not be scouted due to his size or apparent lack of ‘impact’ in games when a scout comes to watch them play. Straight away they are denied the opportunity to get on the ‘elite development pathway’. Take away the opportunity, and you will more than likely deny the potential of that individual from being developed fully.

It's not just from the grassroots. The same happens to those within an Academy. At 7, 8 and 9, the ages many players join Academies today, the players there are roughly speaking the same physically, some may be better technically yet there’s not that clear difference in birth effect or maturation differences in these primary school years. Therefore a talented youngster born later in the school year may well get on the ladder at a younger age, more so than when they reach maturation years. 

As they enter the teenage year the gap between the early developer and late becomes quite distinctive, leaving the late developers at a major disadvantage. For those within the Academy set-up coaches may judge that the smaller players are struggling to make the impact in games which they require or want, and often voice the need or want for bigger, more dominant players, to ‘help’ the team improve. Which by that they mean in games and get better results. It’s all short term thinking over long term. 

But they have a point don’t they? Bigger players are going to be more dominant in games, they are going to cover more ground and be more physically imposing on the opposition. Teams need balance, there’s no one size fits all approach in football, and players develop at different rates. But there lies the problem for the late developers, time is not on their side. 

The game today seems intent on having players ‘ready’ at 16/17 years of age. Some may well be, but the majority won’t be. So what happens to those deemed 'not ready' to a be a professional at 16/17? 

The early developers offer short term solutions for Academies to ‘prove’ their quality in producing/recruiting talented players. Look at pictures of Romelu Lukaku and even Ross Barkley as youth players and you see the benefit of being bigger earlier and younger. They're more imposing, dominant, able to impact games more effectively. From there they receive plaudits, praise, attention, their confidence rises, they believe they are 'talented' and get better from it. The cycle of feedback is positive and thus their development is positive. 

But while this may be the case for the examples above, just because you're an early developer doesn't always mean you're a good player. From what I’ve seen, and this is not true of every player of course, but the early developer may be ahead in the ‘physical’ box but they are often lacking in other areas. This won’t come as a surprise to many coaches who understand what I’m saying. Often the bigger players lack the finesse of technique and touch, lack the game intelligence and tactical knowledge and seem to struggle psychologically with the pressures and demands of the game. Why? Because they’ve been the beneficiaries of being early developers, and therefore the ‘flaws’ in their game haven’t been required to be worked on and developed. 

Coaches may well say, “we can work on those things” but don’t worry as much as they should because these players are dominating games with their sheer size, strength and speed. Don’t get me wrong, these are essential elements for the development of an elite footballer, and players wbo lack especially speed will struggle to make the step up. However, if you’re a small player it will be much harder to stay on the ladder as they progress through their teenage years. 

Help for the smaller player

Truth is, many will judge them and say quite simply “he’s too small”. To counter this issue of late developers and relative age effect there have been Academies who have sought to introduce specific trials and sessions for late births. This is a great idea as it allows Academies to view late births in a fairer way. This has led to the rise in ‘bio-banding’ in which players are grouped based on their physiological development rather than age. It is an idea with good merit without question. Spain and Belgium are too nations who already have this as part of their elite Academies, having two groups, one for late developers and one for early developers, therefore offering the same quality coaching and education, and catering for their maturation differences. 

The problem I see in England however is that whether it’s at 14, 16 or 18 years of age, players will still be judged on their size, over whether they can play. It's in our culture. In a world where the best player in the game is 5’7”, it does make you laugh that people can judge players on their height. Yet they consistently do, all the way through a young players development. It’s the short termism effect clouding the judgement of potential. And it’s a shame. But it’s understandable. 

Club managers and chief executives, particularly in English football, are dazzled by a big lad with good size, sometimes almost irrelevant to what they can actually do with the ball. Whereas a small player is instantly judged as a problem or concern, regardless of how good he is. In fact small players have to work so hard on their game to warrant the opportunity to be even looked at, whereas a big lad can make an instant positive impression simply by standing there. Of course this all leads to self fulfilling prophecies and the door of opportunity being opened or closed. The bigger player gets greater chances of progression based simply on the fact he's a progressed physically earlier. When it comes to decision time who gets the 1 or 2 limited spots available? 

The bias towards a certain type of player can work for smaller players too, but the problem is, and this is where bio-banding issue comes up, at some point a young player will be judged on the ability of being a professional and not as part of a ‘nice idea’ to keep him in the system. Not many clubs genuinely back the smaller player when it comes to decisions  Worries and anxieties over a players capability to 'deal with the demands of the game' are constantly heard. 

Whether or not you've put a program on based on bio-banding or simply take smaller/late births as a way to find talent, it's mainly the case that if the player hasn’t grown sufficiently at that U16 age group they’ll be deemed too small. This is where that scholar decision time will be where many smaller players suffer the most. Now I understand that when you only have 9 places a year for scholars, you may see the need to fill your group with lads who ‘have a chance’ rather than those who 'lack', in the eyes of the man making the decisions, the necessary skills to make it. But does having a chance simply mean being 'big'?

It’s a tough world for the smaller, or even a slighter, player. Deemed not capable of ‘competing’ in the league, that constant sense of worry and anxiety about what a player can’t do, rather than what he can. It’s a shame. Because I bet there’s a lot of players out there who were denied their chance because of their size, who then were denied the opportunity to develop at an elite level. And this is why culture and philosophy are so important. 

Yes Barcelona can have the pick of any young player in Catalonia, Spain and probably the world, and they seek technical excellence and game intelligence, more so than sheer size and physicality. Correct me if I’m wrong but Barcelona and Spanish football have dominated world football for the past decade have they not? And don’t talk to me about culture and "it’s different in England"; the Premier League’s best players are majority ‘small’; Aguero, Silva, Hazard, Alexis, Coutinho, to name a few. 

But youth developers don’t seem to realise, or if they do, feel under pressure to deliver quickly, rather than place time and value in the genuinely talented player, who from what I've seen is most often times the smaller one. Why? Because as I said earlier, when all you’ve got to work with is your footballing talent, then you need to make sure your exceptional. The early developers get caught out and their flaws exposed as they get older, because they neglected their shortcomings, their ability to read the game, their touch etc. But they were able to stay in the system and perhaps stay in long enough to get the chance to improve. 

The bias towards the bigger player at young ages may well be an inevitability of youth development yet it’s sad to see in some respects, because I do believe there’s some real talent being denied the chance to progress simply because their judged on size and not on their talent. It’s all about opinions and your own subjective bias of course, your desired style of play may well influence your thoughts on a player too, but is judging a player on their size the best determinant of producing players? No.

Seeking out intelligence and character

When evaluating technical or physical qualities, we must always remember the critical role that the mind has to play not only for football but across all elite level sport. Dr Richard Bailey, an expert in long term development and talent identification, believes that  “The importance of technical proficiency is massively overrated.” In his opinion an athlete’s personality is the key for talent identification.

Research suggests he is correct. MacNamara et al. (2010) reported in The Sport Psychologist how a range of psychological factors underpin an athlete’s ability to translate ‘potential’ into top- class performance. They found that determination and persistence, motivation and autonomy are all necessary for “the attainment of excellence by facilitating the acquisition of skills and enabling athletes to invest the requisite time to practice and stay committed to the development process.”

The researchers stressed that these psychological factors are ignored by the present talent identification models which leave behind individuals who possess the necessary ‘personality’ for elite performance.

MacNamara’s research has found that the difference in individuals who attain excellence is their ‘desire’ and ‘willingness’ to persevere and work hard. Based on these findings - are English academies and scouts putting enough value on a player’s personality and character? Are we seeing the failings of English academies because of their focus on the physicality and skill of players over the intelligence and personality of others?

Belgium’s talent ID model seeks out youth players who possess intelligence and decision making strengths. They want to find players who can read the game. The Belgian FA put together six factors which they believe a top player requires. 

They are as follows:

A winner’s mentality 


Emotional stability 


Personality 


Explosiveness 


Insight in the game 


Ball and body control 


Scouts in Belgium are instructed to use this as their framework for identifying talent. And it’s a player’s intelligence which is thought to be the difference between an average and good individual.

In turn, the Belgian FA seeks to educate coaches to ‘see’ the players who understand the game. When they find those with intelligence, they move them into the appropriate schools and development programs in order to give them the quality coaching required to take them to the top of the game. 
When you look at Belgium’s national team you see a mix of ethnicities, characters and sizes. There is clearly no one size fits all in their thinking, yet what they do want are intelligent and mentally strong individuals.

Football intelligence is about the work a player does both in and out of possession. When in possession the best players are able to see the game and make quick and successful judgements on the best options available. Decision making is a key component of football intelligence. Off the ball the best players are able to find and exploit space in order to penetrate the opposition. Awareness of the opposition, teammates and space is a key component for effective football performance. Possessing game intelligence as well as the psychological skills to perservere in a tough world like football is therefore key for the development of young players.

While this may sound like I’m here fighting the corner of the smaller player, it’s interesting to consider that these players are almost forced into having good intelligence as a way to evade strong physical battles, forced to be excellent with their positioning, spatial recognition, awareness and anticipation as well as being excellent with the ball. And above that, if a small player has had to fight and fight to keep their place in a world of often ‘giants’, then they must have one hell of a mental resolve and strength of character to continue to compete and come through and back from difficulties and hardships.

In truth the idea of bio-banding is a good idea. Attempting to keep young players in your elite environment, with all the benefits that brings for their development, is key for their development. And for some players it will be a huge benefit for them. 

But while bio-banding is a good idea, it may lead to taking away the development of the character and resolve of the smaller late developer. This is a player who was being constantly stretched and challenged against bigger players. He was being pushed and asked more of than the bigger players, who in turn may not be being challenged sufficiently themselves, leading to a stunt of their development and the development of bad habits, things I’ve seen many times with the more talented/or bigger player. We need to cater not just for the one struggling, but for the high achiever/superior player also. They need to pushed as well, even more so.

Ultimately there is still the issue regarding how smaller players are judged, when does their size go from ‘manageable; to a ‘problem’? It's important this mentality is changed at higher levels within Academies to give the talented late developers a genuine chance in the game.

Judging a players future based on their size seems wrong, does it not? Perhaps players should be judged more on their character and personality, on their mindset, resilience and resolve more? But then that may not win the game on the weekend, and that’s what matters most eh?

The Whitehouse Address @The_W_Address