Longitudinal motor performance development in early adolescence and its relationship to adult success: An 8-year prospective study of highly talented soccer players

Abstract

Several talent identification and development (TID) programs in soccer have implemented diagnostics to measure players’ motor performance. Yet, there is a lack of research investigating the relationship between motor development in adolescence and future, adult performance. This longitudinal study analyzed the three-year development of highly talented young soccer players’ speed abilities and technical skills and examined the relevance of this development to their adult success. The current research sample consisted of N = 1,134 players born between 1993 and 1995 who were selected for the German Soccer Association’s TID program and participated in nationwide motor diagnostics (sprinting, agility, dribbling, ball control, shooting) four times between the Under 12 (U12) and Under 15 (U15) age class. Relative age (RA) was assessed for all players, and a total motor score was calculated based on performances in the individual tests. In order to investigate players’ future success, participants were divided into two groups according to their adult performance level (APL) in the 2014/2015 season: Elite (1st-5th German division; N = 145, 12.8%) and non-elite players (lower divisions; N = 989, 87.2%). Using multilevel regression analyses each motor performance was predicted by Time, Time2 (level-1 predictors), APL, and RA (level-2 covariates) with simultaneous consideration for interaction effects between the respective variables. Time and Time2 were significant predictors for each test performance. A predictive value for RA was confirmed for sprinting and the total motor score. A significant relationship between APL and the motor score as well as between APL and agility, dribbling, ball control, and shooting emerged. Interaction effects distinctly failed to reach significance. The study found a non-linear improvement in players’ performance for all considered motor performance factors over a three-year period from early to middle adolescence. While their predictive value for future success was confirmed by a significant relationship between APL and most of the considered factors, there was no significant interaction between APL and Time. These findings indicate that future elite players had already been better at the beginning of the TID program and maintained this high level throughout their promotion from U12 to U15.

Talent selection in youth football: Technical skills rather than general motor performance predict future player status of football talents

“…This study of an immediate comparison of the prognostic validity of GMP (40m sprint, agility, counter movement jump, YoYo intermittent recovery test) versus SMP (dribbling, passing, juggling, shooting) for talent selection in youth football seems to provide certain evidence that the latter is more useful for predicting future player status. This is in line with theoretical considerations and earlier research on the topic Höner & Votteler, 2016;Leyhr et al, 2018;Lidor et al, 2009). SMP showed promising results with significant BLR models, especially for long-term predictions from early adolescence (U13/U14), whereas the prognostic validity of GMP over this longer time span of six to seven years seems to be unclear (for instance, descriptive statistics indicate better values for nonprofessional players in certain tests within early adolescence).…”

“…As this decile difference is the case between GMP and SMP in the U13 (AUC = .68/.77) and U14 (AUC = .65/.79) age groups, these differences may express a relevant but not significant difference within discrimination between professional and nonprofessional players. For this reason, the current findings of a slightly higher discriminative power for SMP over GMP seems to be in line with earlier research from the German football talent identification and talent development program Höner & Votteler, 2016;Leyhr et al, 2018). For the discrimination between performance levels of players at late adolescence or early adulthood, they also found higher effect sizes within SMP compared to GMP in U12 to U15 data.…”

“…A second study, also within U12 data, reports a higher prognostic validity for SMP (η 2 mean = .010) compared to speed abilities (η 2 mean = .006) in predicting adult performance levels (n = 14,187; Höner et al, 2017). In a third study, the working group was able to show that the 20m sprint was the only variable that did not significantly separate adult performance levels within U12 to U15 data (n = 1,134; Leyhr, Kelava, Raabe, & Höner, 2018). In summary, research on the predictive values of GMP versus SMP for talent selection in youth football has produced some empirical results and certain theoretical considerations.…”

Establishing consensus of position-specific predictors for elite youth soccer in England

“…youth players can replicate features of peak adult performance appears to be flawed (Baker,57 Schorer & Wattie, 2018; Vaeyens, et al, 2008). This predictive, early selection approach is 58 problematic for a number of reasons: (i) talent identification and development is reported to be 59 complex, multifaceted and non-linear with confounding elements such as growth and 60 maturation which are difficult to control (Leyhr et al, 2018;Malina, 2008) and (ii) current 61 performance does not always translate into future potential (Vaeyens et al, 2008;Unnithan et 62 al., 2012). 63…”

Innate talent in sport: from theoretical concept to complex reality – comment on Baker & Wattie

“…Consequently, talents in gymnastics need to be identified earlier than in endurance sports. Many characteristics sought after in the identification and detection of potentially talented athletes, such as motor performance, will only significantly develop during adolescence (Leyhr, Kelava, Raabe, & Honer, 2018), and are biased by (relative) age, biological development, training level, and experience as well as training age at the moment of assessment (Leyhr et al, 2018;Lovell et al, 2015;Rommers et al, 2018;Vaeyens et al, 2006). Therefore, characteristics focused on in talent identification should be specific for a certain (biological) age in the first place.…”