Better Soccer Coaching / Better Soccer Coaching / The Dug-Out / It's Not About the Coach / Latest Posts

RE: It's Not About the Coach

swift1 — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 11:10:18 GMT

I agree Nick, it is not always practical to go over things that one individual needs to work on if everyone else is way past that stage, ok you may be helping that one person but then surely you are holding back the rest. If the player that is struggling was put into a group where they are at the same stage then the learning process would be more practical and effective all round.

I dont think Nick is and i certainly am not saying "ignore" the lesser players or push them out but if they have an opportunity to be worked on with players of similar standards then surely that is more beneficial all round??

RE: It's Not About the Coach

Nick — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:19:17 GMT

I am not talking about having a total split of good and average players, im talking more about the kids where they are obviously weaker players.

Of course kids will improve later on but that is exactly why they should be in a team of similar quality to ensure they are playing as much as everyone else and DO improve.

If i have someone in my team who is struggling to keep up with everyone else i would feel much happier sending him to a "weaker" team i.e a team in the B League where he will feel part of the team and have a chance to become a better player.

Of course you want to develop everyone but you cannot please everyone all the time and it is the coaches responsibility to find these kids a team where they can get the chance to progress when it is clear they are struggling to compete with your own players.

If you want to give these kids more attention and keep them then thats is just as good an idea but not every coach has time and the kids tend to get left on the sidelines and forgotten about.

I know i am not totally right about this point of view but it is another possibility and something that should also be considered.

RE: It's Not About the Coach

Sharks — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 21:28:45 GMT

[b]Is it really wrong for a coach to stop playing players who are clearly not at the same level as the rest of his team? In reality i dont think it is unfair.[/b]

At what age would you think this is unfair? All ages? When we are talking about kids we are talking about physical development and that occurs at different rates. Take a look at the "best" players. Usually on a kids team it is the biggest most athletic kids. So because a kid is a late bloomer he/she shouldn't be allowed to play? When in a year or two, they really might be the best?

As for the U12 club team, yeah, I would think you are selling your club short, by not keeping those players around. You are talking about kids that are entering puberty. They are going to go through huge changes in the next few years. The kids you think are the most worthy today may not be as good as the ones you let go when they are 18. And by not keeping them, and not developing them, well, guess who's club will lose out if that is the case.

Trying to identify who will be the "elite" at 12 and under is nothing but a shot in the dark.

RE: It's Not About the Coach

swift1 — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:47:23 GMT

Fairplay to you Nick,

Its completely a fair point to make. I think once kids reach teenage years then the differences in ability really start to show.

There has to be an age or a time when you decide whether you want to be succesful or just keep everyone happy which to be honest better players will want to be successful so if you dont try to achieve something you might lose your better players anyway.

Football is fun but like anything else winning and being succesful or atleast trying to brings more happiness and enjoyment. Its a natural human instinct and we all have our pride.

From my experience kids upto 11 or 12 do it mostly for fun but then as they get older they naturally become more competetive.

Again like so many things we discuss there is no right or wrong, it depends on the coach, the individuals in the team, the parents and all the other aspects that make up being involved in grassroots football.

RE: It's Not About the Coach

Nick — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 16:32:18 GMT

I am not sure on this one. I agree with the posts so far about everyone getting the same amount of game time etc.

However a part of me which i cant seem to ignore disagrees with this.

Assuming we are talking about a team in the top league.

Is it really wrong for a coach to stop playing players who are clearly not at the same level as the rest of his team? In reality i dont think it is unfair.

Maybe the real issue is that the player should be moved to a team who are similar level and playing in a league which is at his/her level.

Why should a coach play someone who is clearly going to struggle when he comes on. It should be as much the parents responsibility to recognise why the child is not playing as much as the rest of the team.

We would all love everyone to be at the same level and have players of all abilities in the same team but at what age do we start being competetive, when do we seperate the good players who could go on and become professional with the guys who are playing for fun. The longer we leave it the more damage we are doing to the players with potential by holding them back.

Yes i am maybe being harsh but its something that crosses my mind when this issue is raised.

RE: It's Not About the Coach

danrhysjake — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 23:31:07 GMT

Interesting to read how different things are in other countries. I too coach in Canada (Victoria - just across the watetr from a previous poster) and have 2 boys teams - U8 and U11

Up to and including U10 each club is responsible for providing a "house-league" for their yoputh program. This emans that they get as many kids as they can from their appointed geographic area, split them into teams (hopefully with equal mix of players skiklls) and play each other. No leagues, no cuops, just playing for teh fun - whilst learning to play soccer, work as a team, buid, fitness, committment etc

At U11 they start playing aginst teams from other clubs - still everyone mixed into the pot. At U12 and above the teams get tiered in separate leagues based on skill level - Gold, Silver and Bronze. So, for instance, my club has 3 teams at U14 - one of each colour, and all 3 play in a separate leagues with teams of similar skill.

A kid is NEVER turned away from a club - they will always find a spot for him/her somewhere. At U11 and younger it will be on a team where they know someone, at U12 and above it will be on a team with simliar skill levels.

Another difference is our use of subs - we have rotating subs at all levels of play. Players can come and go as necessary (during stoppages in play) which means we don't have bench warmers. All the kids get to have equal time on the field - we have kids playing soccer.

Wanting to win is natural at any age - when I started coaching (U5's) they all wanted to know what the score was but it was quickly forgotten. At U13 and above they are playing in a competition with league winners, cups, progression to the Provincial Championships etc at stake.

Maybe our way is a reason why we still struggle as a competive nation at the international level - but Owen Hargreaves seemed to do Ok with that system. Soccer is now the biggest sport in Canada in terms of the number of kids playing. More than Ice Hockey!

My point is that we should be gearing the system to suit all kids - not just the elite who can run rings around people. Instill a love of the game into the kids - not just for the growth of soccer but as a way of showing them that exercise and participating in a team can be fun!! A good lesson for anyone to learn.

RE: It's Not About the Coach

belfast.coach — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 22:08:33 GMT

Hi, Im a new poster here. I coach an U12 team and I agree that it is not about the coach BUT I have slightly different views on this topic. The club I coach for are semi-pro which means they rely on youth players progressing through the youth tem ranks and eventually through to the senior team. We do not have money to go out and buy players at senior level therefor having as strong a youth structure as possible is vital for us. My team are currently 2nd in the league, 3 points behind but with a game in hand. The hunger and desire of my players is what keeps me interested as they go out and try their best to win every match they play. We have had some players with us from the start of the season that are not advanced or good enough to gain a regular spot in the team and therefor have left for other teams. My point is this, whilst having such a nucleus of a strong squad, players that are at a high level and want to keep winning, should we play one or two players with lesser ability just to keep them involved? If it effects the teams winning edge then I dont think this should be the case, we then will have a team full of unhappy players as everything they have worked so hard for throughout the season could go to waste...also, I have a structure in place that if they train both nights each week they are considered for the squad on saturday, if they then play well they will stay in the side...I dont want the better players in the team leaving because they are being rested or dropped to give someone else a game who is quite lcearly not good enough for the team at this time.

Its a touchy subject but as a parent, my boy who is currently 3, my dream is for him to play for the club I am with but if he isnt as good as the other boys then I will move him to a smaller club where he can get regular games.

RE: It's Not About the Coach

hokiebliss — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 18:09:55 GMT

I coach my daughters U8 team. She's only played a season, going on 2. I'm extremely competetive and sometimes it's difficult to seperate my own competiveness and wanting to win over the teach the skills of the game and letting all of the kids play. If practice and games are fun, kids will naturely want to play and practice more. Each building on the other to make an overall stronger player. Since I coach rec soccer, the parents attitude is a bit different toward the coaches and how much kids do and don't play.

J
http://www.the-soccer-tutor.com

RE: It's Not About the Coach

Ted — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 16:56:43 GMT

The more of your posts I read, the more I like your style. Your attitude towards long term development and learning to work towards winning will take your kids further than securing wins now. Too often lately, I have found coaches and parents are so concerned about their "star" player, his playing time, and compromising the team by playing weak players, they don't see the future. A U-10 player who can take the ball from his own keeper, beat 4 opponents and get the shot away, while looking like a star now, will get eaten up on a big field, playing a team that plays proper positions and passes. Stick to your ethics, your kids, and more importantly, the game, will be better off in the long run.

RE: It's Not About the Coach

James — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 17:43:10 GMT

I run an u10s in England and we play in a mini-soccer league - 7 a side. We are allowed under the league rules to take up to 14 players, BUT all subs must play. My squad is 13 strong and I take 10 players, rotating so the 3 that don't play, are first on the team sheet the following week.

This season has been our first in the league, even though we've been together for 4 seasons now. We won our first 4 games and our 5th was against one of the league's strongest, favorites to win the league. The game was evenly contested and we were doing really well and were 1-1 at half time and could have been 3 or 4 up in front.

Just after half time, I made some changes to get my 3 subs on, even though I knew I was weakening the team - and guess what, we lost 4-1. Their coach couldn't believe they won and felt the score wasn't reflected of us. My own lad played in goals and as you can imagine, wasn't too happy with "Dad" after we lost.

However, what this did for me was invaluable.

Firstly, it taught my players that they can't win all games and it's unrealistic, (but it's not unrealistic to want to win and to try to win !)

Secondly, they realize that it's a team game and we are only as good as our weakest link, so we ALL need to help each other and protect and help the weakest player.

My parents give me full support and understand and know what I'm trying to do, in developing for the long term and give all a chance.

It was clear that had I not changed the team, we'd have probably won - but then again, it's no guarantee we would. Had I not changed the team, I'd have ran the risk of upsetting 3 players, probably humiliated them or made them feel humiliated. I would have also alienated their parents.

And had I done this, what would I have got - a 5th victoy - so what ! We may have won a game but ultimately, turned off 3 players.

Next year, we move into 11 a side - can I afford to do this with a squad of 13?

Also, can I afford to not play weak players - otherwise, how can they ever learn/develop?

My "strong" players, weren't that strong 3 years ago - but have got stronger, as they have had 3 years experience of playing, so my long term aim, is to develop 13 players so all can contribute to the game - so hopefully we win more than we lose, but also leaving each with a good experience and hopefully develop some skills to enable them to keep playing, like me, well into middle age.

I'm realistic to know that of the 13, I have maybe, just maybe 1 who has the natural ability to "make it" - but it's a long long path to travel and there is no guarantee - but what I can say with confidence, is that I think I'll have 6/7 who will still be playing football when I'm a pensioner, watching park football in 20 years time.

My philosphy is that we aim to win, but winning isn't everything- what is important, is that all give their best, try hard, enjoy it and seek to learn/develop for future years - afterall it's an U10's league - not Champions League - and before anyone thinks I'm not a winner - come watch me play in my 11 a side Saturday afternoon and 5 a side league match midweek - I was brought up pre-PC (no, not personal computer !) and learnt my football the old fashioned way - but don't need to repeat this style with my kids.

I'm nearly 40 yrs old and having played competitive football since I was 8 - I've come to learn and understand the difference about winning and playing.. As Adults we understand "it's only a game" - as a child, it can be confusing if they take a lasse faire attitude to a game then don't understand why the coach/players are annoyed that they lost.

After playing for some 32 yrs, I think I know the difference - however my 9/10 yrs don't yet - so it's important that ALL play and get to play, otherwise they won't develop, improve.

At the end of the day, its simple - we the coaches, aren't playing, the kids are, so see it from their perspective...if you have any angst that you want to get rid of, do what I do - play twice weekly !

RE: It's Not About the Coach

swift1 — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 17:00:45 GMT

The only reason my team exists is for this exact reason.

My village is located near to Birmingham and close to to two large towns, the villages local junior teams were full of players from the above mentioned places so we had a number of lads who werent deemed good enough for either any of the teams from our local team or any clubs from the surrounding towns.

So we decided to form a team for these players. We joined a league at under 13 level so we were playing catch up as most of the teams had been together since under 8. The first few seasons were a struggle but we have developed well.

I think the problem is kids get disheartened with losing so its not only about coaches being selfish although i know some can be but there is a certain pressure off parents and players to try and achieve results. It isnt about results but human nature means losing frequently causes heads to drop and certain players to lose interest. The difficult one is keeping good players happy by making the team a certain standard and lesser players happy by giving them the chance.

With how kids develop differently i think everyone upto 14 / 15 years of age should be kept equal because so called lesser players at 9 / 10 could have developed excellently by their mid teens.

I think there should be more weekend football schools for youngsters without teams. As you have said before about teams who just run sessions and have odd friendlies now and again. Its something i am looking to go back into once my team finishes at the end of this season at under 18's.

RE: It's Not About the Coach

Ted — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 16:56:47 GMT

I must admit, I enjoyed reading your article the other day, but more so, found it somewhat amusing how football is played in England. I coach U 12 in Canada (Vancouver), my wife, both sons 11 and 8 and myself all play the game. In Canada, the game is a gradual progression of development and skills within the game. The micro minis start at 3 v3 move up to 5v5 and 6v6 on small fields. U-11 and U-12 are 8 aside on 3/4 size fields and goals. By the end of U-12 the field starts to become small, but more importantly, every player is involved in the game. No standings are kept as this is the final stage of development for the players. As a coach, I can experiment with formations and positions for my players, without worrying about losing. ( Yes we all want to win, and the kids know the scores of all the games played on the weekend, but because there is no league standings, these are quickly forgotten ). Next year, we are out to make playoffs and some kids will spend more time on the bench than the field, so it is nice to know, at least for now, they enjoy the game, and develop at their own pace without having teammates blaming them for a bad play.

It's Not About the Coach

Dwyer — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 15:04:18 GMT

I wrote an article in this week's Better Soccer Coaching newsletter (see below) about my son and how he is prevented playing for his local U10 side because he's not good enough. I have managed to find him another team, but that's beside the point.

I've had a great response to the article. It turns out, unsurprisingly, that there are a great many parents out there in the same boat. In England, the rule for many clubs seems to be that if you're good enough, you get to play in the coach's team, but if you're not good enough you don't get to play at all. This is because coaches have league teams and they want to do well in their league. In many cases that priority is given more weight than the desire to help improve the skills of the player who doesn't quite make the squad.

So how is that going to help get our kids away from the games console or the TV? How does that help the average kid who knows he's never going to be Steven Gerrard but REALLY WANTS TO PLAY? How is that going to help us develop our national game?

I'm really interested to hear about the following:

anyone else have shared experiences or views on this?

how are these issues handled in other countries?

what can we do about it?

That article:

"Dear Coach,

My son was recently informed that he was surplus to requirements in our local Under 10s team. The league only allows for the registration of 14 players and the coach isn't prepared to have other boys train with them. He's concerned that this has a negative impact on the performance of the team and his stated priority is to do well in the league. This means that my son can't play in his local side with his friends (at least half of the team come from other villages).

He's realistic about his soccer abilities and knows that he doesn't quite cut the mustard - yet. I've explained to him that he's only nine years old and that one day he may well leapfrog his peers. I've also explained that he might not, and he understands that. He knows that he might never be a particularly good soccer player and he doesn't really care. He loves the game and he just wants to play. Isn't that what's great about soccer? Anyone can play.

Luckily, I was able to get him a place with another village team, about a 20 minute drive from home. This team embodies all that can be really good about youth coaching. They are entirely inclusive. Anyone who comes to training gets to play in the matches. They have opted out of their local competitive league to focus on training with the occasional friendly match. Their coaching sessions are of an extremely high standard. The players (and coaches and parents) clearly have a great time every Saturday morning. My son is happy. He's making a new set of friends and he is improving rapidly as a player.

The coaches who run this team are an example to us all. Their priority is to give the players who come to them an education in soccer. They want their players to have fun and improve. They are not interested in how well they do in the league. For these guys, it's about the players - not the coach."