The influence of birth quartile, maturation, anthropometry and physical performances on player retention: Observations from an elite football academy

Abstract

Understanding the factors that influence player retention within elite youth football can be used to enhance current practices. This study investigated an English Category 1 academy to determine if birth quartile, somatic maturity, anthropometric and physical performance characteristics are associated with player retention across the developmental pathway. Birth dates of 355 elite players from U11 to U21 groups were categorised into birth quartiles and logistic regression (odds ratio) analysis was used to determine differences in retention. Multilevel modelling compared somatic maturity, anthropometry, countermovement jump, sprint time (10 and 30 m), agility T-test, Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Level 1 or 2 performance between retained and dropout players. Logistic regression (odds ratio) analysis revealed no significant differences between birth quartiles for the likelihood of being retained across age groups. Multilevel modelling revealed that retained players were typically older, advanced in maturity, and superior in body size and physical performances compared to dropouts, with small to medium effect sizes typically observed. This study indicates that within a highly selective cohort of young football players, somatic maturity, anthropometric and physical performance characteristics, but not birth quartile, distinguish individuals that are subsequently retained or dropout in an age group dependent manner. Youth football organisations should seek to implement multidisciplinary and dynamic talent selection and retention strategies in order to prevent the inappropriate discrimination and loss of talented young players.

Longitudinal Physical Development of Future Professional Male Soccer Players: Implications for Talent Identification and Development?

“…This is consistent with previous work which followed 443 English academy football players aged U12-U18 into adulthood and showed no differences in stature and body mass between players who turned, vs. those who did not turn, professional, from any of the age groups examined (Emmonds et al, 2016 ). Interestingly, in a study more relevant to junior rather than senior accomplishments, with a much shorter prognostic period (1 y), players ( n = 353), from across several age groups (U9-U21), retained by an English academy at the end of the season were generally taller and heavier than those released (Patel et al, 2020 ). Thus, it is possible that in England, in the short-term, stature, and body mass might perhaps influence who is released or retained in an academy, and perhaps encourage the development of a playing population which is selected on this basis.…”

“…A major focus of talent identification and development research in football has been on establishing whether, and if so which, physical characteristics may be associated with success, possibly due to the importance of physical attributes to excellence in match-play (Stolen et al, 2005 ; Faude et al, 2012 ). Based on a range of physical characteristics (such as stature, body mass, body composition, speed, agility, vertical jumping, power, repeated sprint ability, and endurance), researchers have differentiated more successful elite youth football players from those who were less successful (e.g., retained vs. released from an academy) at multiple age groups from U9-U21 (Visscher et al, 2006 ; Gil et al, 2007 , 2014 ; Gravina et al, 2008 ; Lago-Penas et al, 2011 , 2014 ; Huijgen et al, 2014 ; Deprez et al, 2015 ; Honer and Votteler, 2016 ; Bennett et al, 2019 ; Castillo et al, 2019 ; Patel et al, 2020 ). However, such studies are typically cross-sectional, and can only provide information on current, rather than future, accomplishments (Abbott and Collins, 2002 ; le Gall et al, 2010 ).…”

Effects of Chronological Age, Relative Age, and Maturation Status on Accumulated Training Load and Perceived Exertion in Young Sub-Elite Football Players

“…According to the maturation-matching assumptions reported by Malina et al (2019), maturation status, timing, and tempo are distinct concepts: 1) maturation status is the specific maturation stage at the observation time, expressed for instance as skeletal age and stage of pubic hair development; 2) maturation timing is the age at the specific maturational event occurrence, expressed as age at peak height velocity (PHV); and 3) maturation tempo reports the maturation progress in a specific system. Otherwise, relative age refers to a player's chronological age regarding the competitive cohort and is determined by quartile birth and the competition age-group cohort (Patel et al, 2019(Patel et al, , 2020Hill et al, 2020). Previous studies have demonstrated the influence of relative age, maturation, and anthropometry on physical performance characteristics in elite youth football (Patel et al, 2019(Patel et al, , 2020.…”

“…Otherwise, relative age refers to a player's chronological age regarding the competitive cohort and is determined by quartile birth and the competition age-group cohort (Patel et al, 2019(Patel et al, , 2020Hill et al, 2020). Previous studies have demonstrated the influence of relative age, maturation, and anthropometry on physical performance characteristics in elite youth football (Patel et al, 2019(Patel et al, , 2020. This evidence seems to be particularly relevant for high-intensity variables, such as sprinting or acceleration (Edwards et al, 2021;Kelly et al, 2021), as well as perceived exertion (Cumming et al, 2018;Hill et al, 2021).…”

Physical characteristics of elite youth male football players aged 13–15 are based upon biological maturity

“…Research on the physical performance characteristics of youth football players has made significant progress in recent years. Studies have revealed that elite youth football players are superior in anthropometrics (height, body mass, and body composition) ( Bidaurrazaga-Letona et al, 2016 ; Deprez et al, 2015a ; Nughes et al, 2020 ; Bongiovanni et al, 2020 ) and physical characteristics (speed, agility, anaerobic endurance, strength, and power) ( Emmonds et al, 2016 ; Aquino et al, 2017 ; Grendstad et al, 2020 ; Deprez et al, 2015b ), which are important factors influencing selection by coaches ( Patel et al, 2020 ; Bidaurrazaga-Letona et al, 2019 ; Nughes et al, 2020 ). As such, football players’ physical characteristics significantly influence the selection of elite vs non-elite players while they are still youths ( Itoh & Hirose, 2020 ).…”