To think the majority of kids can get into "invite only" football development programmes

Where we live there are academies linked to clubs which do scout & the players scouted start training around year 2. They are definitely much better players & can stay at grassroots until they get properly signed from age 9 onwards.

There are also some paid academies. Obviously they are less selective & you would sign up rather than get invited.

So yes it's possible some are pretty good players. Obviously that doesn't mean they will still be amazing in 5 years time.

It's a bit bad taste to show off. We told DS to not really talk about it in school when he was with a couple of academies. They can get dropped just like that so it's not worth showing off.

I’m involved in running a grassroots football club and we see players (and probably more so their parents) enticed by academies. Sadly the fact is that only a small percentage of players will make it into professional football.

we’ve always had a club ethos that football should be fun and inclusive for all but academies run completely differently and unfortunately some clubs even though they aren’t academies have adopted this “invite only” approach.

I live in Manchester and there are always a few (1 maybe 2 kids) invited to play for man u or city junior teams. They dump you real quick and the time commitment is significant. I knew a couple doing both city and united for a time. The mums I know try and keep a sensible head on and not get their hopes up, but they are naturally proud and I'm happy for the kids. One boy got his secondary education paid for on the city team as there's a nearby private school where city send their junior players.

You have to be a very good and dedicated player to make these kind of named teams. Everyone else just plays for local leagues so I haven't heard of invite only academies.

I agree, OP. Our nearest big club (League one) runs an academy, and quite a few of my DS's friends were scouted to join it (including my DS, but we didn't send him). It cost a lot of money, they had a development squad AND a shadow development squad, and for the majority who went there, it all seemed like a massive waste of time and money, when they could have been having fun with their friends.

I think on the whole, I'd say that the kids they scouted were on the better side of average, but nothing more than that. If kids were really good, why would a football club make them pay to join? Surely they'd want to invest in them, not the other way round?

Yes, at y2 academy is generally about taking money off gullible parents. It means something and is competitive when they are older but not at that age.

If its saying it's an academy or elite then it's not a very high level unless it is free and part of a recognised performance pathway for that sport.

Yep this. I know some families whose kids played at premier league team academies and they were all genuinely pretty good
and definitely better than average at their school. Is that what you mean though OP?

I only know of two kids at an academy. One is 17 and the other is 10 so I don't recognise this as being common.

This.

There is so much that is so wrong with taking dc away from their mates before the age of about 15.

My year 2 son plays football and there is a sad kind of desperation to have their little boys be the next Rooney among some parents. When in reality they play a match and are mostly shit, but at the age of 6 it’s about having fun and it’s the parents who take it way too seriously

It depends. At DS's school, in juniors, a couple of the boys went to Manchester United Academy. It didn't last for them, but they were considerably better at football than most at primary school.