What is good coaching?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At U12 DC1 had a top team coach who was focused a lot on competition, technical skills, conditioning and strategy. Little down time, little emphasis on teamwork. Some players sat on the bench the whole season.

At U12 DC2 had a coach really focused on development of core technical skills and softer skills like sportsmanship and was just a really nice coach and a good person to be around with. Everyone played although some much more than others but no one sat out whole games.

Which one is "good"? I think you'd get a lot of different answers from different people.

Both of them sound like crap to me.

I would look for a coach who focuses on tactics and decision-making + knows what those things actually are.

As for the rest - all players need to play, but nothing else really matters all that much.
- a coach who focuses on technical skills is largely wasting his time - kids need to learn that on their own - especially if they're already on a top team where they need to spend way more time on it than can be carved out of team practices to really improve
- competitiveness and sportsmanship are both good things to encourage
- being nice is better than being nasty

At U12 no. You're wrong IMO.
At U12 most kids are not at the level of tactics and decision making. They need the basics first. Even the top teams are not focusing on that. I would agree for U15 and up.

Strongly disagree with this. That doesn’t make sense. At that age, the most competitive kids have been playing soccer a long time and frankly that tactical and decision making is what can make them stand out (esp. in the long run), assuming peers and/or teammates have similar technical skills and athleticism.

DP No just because you have played soccer for years in the US travel system does not mean you have the technical or decision skill under pressure. If players do not have a good first touch and technical skills they are limited in their decision making because they do not have the skills needed to make the plays.

U9-u13 is about developing technical skills. This does not happen on your own or by playing wall ball. It is done with a coach correcting your technique and having an opponent pressing you. Compared to Europe the players here are not very technical and do not practice/develop skills under pressure. If it takes a player 4-6 touches to make a decision it is too slow and the tactical situation has changed. If the player can not play 1-2 touch soccer under pressure they are deficient technically no matter how many years they have played.

The older the age the less long runs lead to scores because the defense are better, defensive are designed to stop it and size of field. Players who can play in tight spaces, play 1-2 touch soccer, make a bad pass good will make the correct decision. Anyone can play outside with a lot of space and little pressure. The player who can play in tight spaces standout. These players are technical. Defensive are broken down by these type of players. Specially when teams pack it in or play very defensive.

A lot of the problems with US soccer is with the mentality you express. At the younger age you can kick it long, chase the ball and the defender will make a mistake or more the case a bad first touch will turn in to a goal. This is true from u9-u17 because the speed of play is slow in the US. We do not practice under pressure so why should we play well under pressure?

This is a pretty good explanation of the differences in the US.
https://siqacademy.com/europe-vs-usa

tactically kids in Barcelona at age 10 know more than top-level players in the USA at age 16. And I'm not talking about theoretical knowledge but about concepts that are executed on the field. For example, my partner is 15 yards away from me and he has the ball. The defender who guards me is 1 yard away from me to my right hand. Should my partner pass me the ball? Most players in the USA will not pass that ball as I'm covered by the defender, while in Barcelona 1 yard is a lot of space if the pass is at proper pace AND TO MY LEFT FOOT (further from the defender). How many coaches understand that and actually teach it? And if we don't teach it how we can teach the team to play through the middle of the field where all players have very little space?

So some coaches teach this but do they practice it in practice under pressure? The receiving player also has to have a good first touch. I have seen a lot of practices on “high level” teams. They do not do this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At U12 DC1 had a top team coach who was focused a lot on competition, technical skills, conditioning and strategy. Little down time, little emphasis on teamwork. Some players sat on the bench the whole season.

At U12 DC2 had a coach really focused on development of core technical skills and softer skills like sportsmanship and was just a really nice coach and a good person to be around with. Everyone played although some much more than others but no one sat out whole games.

Which one is "good"? I think you'd get a lot of different answers from different people.

Both of them sound like crap to me.

I would look for a coach who focuses on tactics and decision-making + knows what those things actually are.

As for the rest - all players need to play, but nothing else really matters all that much.
- a coach who focuses on technical skills is largely wasting his time - kids need to learn that on their own - especially if they're already on a top team where they need to spend way more time on it than can be carved out of team practices to really improve
- competitiveness and sportsmanship are both good things to encourage
- being nice is better than being nasty

At U12 no. You're wrong IMO.
At U12 most kids are not at the level of tactics and decision making. They need the basics first. Even the top teams are not focusing on that. I would agree for U15 and up.

Strongly disagree with this. That doesn’t make sense. At that age, the most competitive kids have been playing soccer a long time and frankly that tactical and decision making is what can make them stand out (esp. in the long run), assuming peers and/or teammates have similar technical skills and athleticism.

DP No just because you have played soccer for years in the US travel system does not mean you have the technical or decision skill under pressure. If players do not have a good first touch and technical skills they are limited in their decision making because they do not have the skills needed to make the plays.

U9-u13 is about developing technical skills. This does not happen on your own or by playing wall ball. It is done with a coach correcting your technique and having an opponent pressing you. Compared to Europe the players here are not very technical and do not practice/develop skills under pressure. If it takes a player 4-6 touches to make a decision it is too slow and the tactical situation has changed. If the player can not play 1-2 touch soccer under pressure they are deficient technically no matter how many years they have played.

The older the age the less long runs lead to scores because the defense are better, defensive are designed to stop it and size of field. Players who can play in tight spaces, play 1-2 touch soccer, make a bad pass good will make the correct decision. Anyone can play outside with a lot of space and little pressure. The player who can play in tight spaces standout. These players are technical. Defensive are broken down by these type of players. Specially when teams pack it in or play very defensive.

A lot of the problems with US soccer is with the mentality you express. At the younger age you can kick it long, chase the ball and the defender will make a mistake or more the case a bad first touch will turn in to a goal. This is true from u9-u17 because the speed of play is slow in the US. We do not practice under pressure so why should we play well under pressure?

This is a pretty good explanation of the differences in the US.
https://siqacademy.com/europe-vs-usa

tactically kids in Barcelona at age 10 know more than top-level players in the USA at age 16. And I'm not talking about theoretical knowledge but about concepts that are executed on the field. For example, my partner is 15 yards away from me and he has the ball. The defender who guards me is 1 yard away from me to my right hand. Should my partner pass me the ball? Most players in the USA will not pass that ball as I'm covered by the defender, while in Barcelona 1 yard is a lot of space if the pass is at proper pace AND TO MY LEFT FOOT (further from the defender). How many coaches understand that and actually teach it? And if we don't teach it how we can teach the team to play through the middle of the field where all players have very little space?

So some coaches teach this but do they practice it in practice under pressure? The receiving player also has to have a good first touch. I have seen a lot of practices on “high level” teams. They do not do this.

I don’t think I disagree with you. I think my point was that a U12, assuming, as you point out, has the technical skill/know how to play under pressure (good first touch, confident passing, can play 1-2 touch), they can be learning tactics, decision making already.

I would add that there is no patience to teach these technical fundamentals and develop the confidence to play 1-2 touch in the US bc at the younger ages, they will lose to kickball bc just one mistake can be capitalized on for a goal. I think a good coach hopefully motivate players to persist by focusing on the long term goals of the players.

[Anonymous]

Rondos

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At U12 DC1 had a top team coach who was focused a lot on competition, technical skills, conditioning and strategy. Little down time, little emphasis on teamwork. Some players sat on the bench the whole season.

At U12 DC2 had a coach really focused on development of core technical skills and softer skills like sportsmanship and was just a really nice coach and a good person to be around with. Everyone played although some much more than others but no one sat out whole games.

Which one is "good"? I think you'd get a lot of different answers from different people.

Both of them sound like crap to me.

I would look for a coach who focuses on tactics and decision-making + knows what those things actually are.

As for the rest - all players need to play, but nothing else really matters all that much.
- a coach who focuses on technical skills is largely wasting his time - kids need to learn that on their own - especially if they're already on a top team where they need to spend way more time on it than can be carved out of team practices to really improve
- competitiveness and sportsmanship are both good things to encourage
- being nice is better than being nasty

Can you name some coaches in the area that does the above?

I don't think providing names is necessarily appropriate. I agree that there are not many - but there are at least a few in this area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At U12 DC1 had a top team coach who was focused a lot on competition, technical skills, conditioning and strategy. Little down time, little emphasis on teamwork. Some players sat on the bench the whole season.

At U12 DC2 had a coach really focused on development of core technical skills and softer skills like sportsmanship and was just a really nice coach and a good person to be around with. Everyone played although some much more than others but no one sat out whole games.

Which one is "good"? I think you'd get a lot of different answers from different people.

Both of them sound like crap to me.

I would look for a coach who focuses on tactics and decision-making + knows what those things actually are.

As for the rest - all players need to play, but nothing else really matters all that much.
- a coach who focuses on technical skills is largely wasting his time - kids need to learn that on their own - especially if they're already on a top team where they need to spend way more time on it than can be carved out of team practices to really improve
- competitiveness and sportsmanship are both good things to encourage
- being nice is better than being nasty

Can you name some coaches in the area that does the above?

Considering that this forum was inactive for year due to coaches beinging named, namkng them now is a dangerous game.

Maybe just identify club and teams? I actually agree with the above although mostly for very competitive players.

Individual/technical and fitness can be developed on their own. Sportsmanship and integrity should be guided by parents as they are rooted in your own personal values but encouragement is good too.

A coach’s value lies in their ability to develop effective decision-making, individually, as a team, and basically to continue to grow a players soccer IQ.

SYC's (they keep coming up latley apologies for this) top teams tend to function this way. On the lower teams some do also but if the players cannot handle the ball, focusing on IQ and decision-making may not do much for them or the team.

I'm the guy whio made the first comment. I disagree entirely. I would say that SYC is a shining example of a club which completely fails teach soccer IQ. This is why their teams signifcantly underperform as they get older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At U12 DC1 had a top team coach who was focused a lot on competition, technical skills, conditioning and strategy. Little down time, little emphasis on teamwork. Some players sat on the bench the whole season.

At U12 DC2 had a coach really focused on development of core technical skills and softer skills like sportsmanship and was just a really nice coach and a good person to be around with. Everyone played although some much more than others but no one sat out whole games.

Which one is "good"? I think you'd get a lot of different answers from different people.

Both of them sound like crap to me.

I would look for a coach who focuses on tactics and decision-making + knows what those things actually are.

As for the rest - all players need to play, but nothing else really matters all that much.
- a coach who focuses on technical skills is largely wasting his time - kids need to learn that on their own - especially if they're already on a top team where they need to spend way more time on it than can be carved out of team practices to really improve
- competitiveness and sportsmanship are both good things to encourage
- being nice is better than being nasty

That kind of thinking is why US youth soccer sucks. Players certainly need to spend a ton of time on their own, but they also need a lot of guidance and correction on technical details and defects. Watch an “elite” US youth game and you’ll see players with glaring technical defects.

Guidance and correction is fine. But the skill is only learned through repetition. The problem is not the coaching - it's the fact that kids here spend 1/3 at most of the time that kids elsewhere spend playing soccer. In a "soccer country" kids will often spend 30 or more hours a week playing soccer.