# Physical Functional Characteristics of Elite Adolescent and Collegiate Male Soccer Athletes: A Comparative Study Using Medical Check-Ups

## TL;DR

This study compares physical abilities of adolescent and collegiate male soccer players, finding differences in flexibility, balance, and trunk function.

## Contribution

The study identifies distinct physical functional profiles between adolescent and collegiate soccer athletes using medical check-ups.

## Key findings

- Adolescents had greater joint laxity and hip range of motion compared to collegiate athletes.
- Collegiate athletes showed better dynamic balance but lower trunk functional capacity.
- Both groups exhibited limb asymmetry, but in different directions and joints.

## Abstract

Background: Physical functional capacity plays a critical role in sports performance and changes markedly from adolescence to adulthood. This study aimed to compare the physical functional characteristics between adolescent and collegiate soccer athletes. Methods: Fifty elite male soccer athletes (30 adolescents, 20 college students) were assessed for joint range of motion, muscle flexibility, dynamic balance, and trunk functional capacity. Results: Adolescent athletes achieved significantly greater general joint laxity score than collegiate athletes (p = 0.01), with significantly greater hip range of motion across all planes (abduction, internal rotation, and external rotation; all p < 0.01). College athletes had significantly lower SLR degree (left: p < 0.01, right: p < 0.05) but significantly greater degrees on passive Ely’s test (p < 0.01) than adolescent athletes. Collegiate athletes delivered significantly superior dynamic balance performance in the Y-balance test, particularly in the posterolateral and posteromedial directions (all p < 0.05). Unexpectedly, trunk functional capacity was significantly lower in collegiate athletes compared with adolescents (p < 0.01). Limb asymmetry was observed in both groups: collegiate athletes showed asymmetry only in the anterior reach direction of the Y-balance test (p = 0.018), whereas adolescents exhibited asymmetry across multiple joints (ankle, hip, hamstrings, and quadriceps; all p < 0.05) and in the posterolateral direction of the Y-balance test (p < 0.01). Conclusions: Adolescent athletes demonstrated significantly superior joint range of motion and lower limb flexibility, whereas collegiate players exhibited better balance performance, indicating distinct functional profiles between the two cohorts, which may be associated with differences in training experience and developmental stages.