The five attributes

1. Technical ability (40% weight)
Can they control the ball? Pass accurately? Dribble in space? This is foundational.

2. Athleticism (20% weight)
How fast are they? How much distance can they cover? Can they repeat high-intensity efforts?

3. Decision-making (25% weight)
Do they see the pass? When do they shoot vs. pass? Do they understand positioning and spacing?

4. Attitude (10% weight)
Are they coachable? Do they want to improve? Do they help teammates?

5. Physical maturity (5% weight)
Are they early or late developers? (This matters at U10–U13, nearly irrelevant by U16.)

Evaluation template (per player, per month)

Player: [Name]
Age/position: [Age, position]
Technical: (1–5) [comment]
Athletic: (1–5) [comment]
Decision-making: (1–5) [comment]
Attitude: (1–5) [comment]
Maturity: (1–5) [comment]
Overall score: (1–5)
Ceiling estimate: (grassroots / semi-pro / pro)
Development focus next month: [one thing]

Record this monthly. After 5–6 months, you have a data picture of who's improving and who's plateauing.

What this does

  • Removes bias ("I like this kid so they're great" vs. objective evaluation)
  • Identifies late bloomers (low technical at U11, high athleticism, growing rapidly)
  • Identifies plateaued players (high technical at U10, no improvement by U12 — might not develop further)
  • Guides development focus (instead of saying "get better," you're saying "improve decision-making")

The ceiling estimate

At U12, you should have a rough sense of who might play semi-pro football (district/county level) and who's playing grassroots for enjoyment. This isn't harsh — it's realistic. Being honest helps you guide development correctly.

Grassroots potential: Solid all-around, coachable, probably maxes out at local league level.

Semi-pro potential: One strong attribute (technical OR decision-making OR athleticism) + coachability. Likely to play at county/regional level by U16.

Pro potential: Two+ strong attributes + high athleticism + fast learner. Very rare at U12 (fewer than 1 per 100 kids).

Update your estimates every season. They'll change as players develop.

Sharing evaluations with parents

Ceiling estimates especially are worth keeping to yourself rather than sharing directly with parents — a label like "grassroots potential" heard by a parent can land far more harshly than intended, and these estimates are genuinely provisional at young ages. Sharing the attribute scores and development focus is useful; sharing speculative long-term ceiling predictions rarely helps and can do real damage to how a family experiences the sport.

The limits of any evaluation framework

A monthly scoring system captures a snapshot, not the whole picture — a player having a rough month for reasons entirely outside football (a difficult time at school, a family situation) can score lower without that reflecting their actual trajectory. Treat any single month's numbers as one data point among several, not a verdict, and weigh a consistent trend over several months more heavily than any one reading.

Evaluating goalkeepers within this framework

The five attributes above translate awkwardly to goalkeepers — shot-stopping and distribution don't map neatly onto "technical ability" as defined for outfield players, and a keeper's decision-making (when to come off the line, when to stay) is a distinct skill from an outfield player reading the game. Adapting the categories specifically for goalkeepers, rather than scoring them against outfield-oriented criteria, gives a fairer and more useful picture.

Why this framework is for you, not the player

This kind of structured evaluation is a coaching tool for tracking development and planning training focus — it was never designed to be shown to a child, shared as a report card, or used to justify team selection decisions out loud. Keeping it as private, working notes protects players from language ("ceiling estimate," numerical scores) that was built for adult coaching decisions, not for a child's sense of their own ability.