Best coaching style?

[Anonymous]

My DD's 2008 team has a new coach - the new coach's style is very little direction/instruction during the game. As a parent it is hard to watch the kids doing something incorrectly and not being reminded by the coach to, e.g., move the defensive line up, rather than hanging back by the goal. But I guess the coaching view is to the let the kids strategize/work things out on their own during the game? What are folks opinion on the best level of coaching during a game? FWIW this coach is very pedigreed and has years of coaching experience - although most of it is much older age groups (high school/college).

[Anonymous]

As a parent it is hard to watch the kids doing something incorrectly

Coaches coach parents watch. parents are usually in the world of youth soccer for 5 to 10 years while a coach is doing it 20 to 30. I let the coach coach and enjoy watching them play and don't question the coach's style.

[Anonymous]

Smart Coach.

This is how it is supposed to be done.

Kids make decisions on the field. Coach can address when they are subbed out, at half time and end of game talk. Practice is for learning and game is where what they learn is implemented.

The best coaches we have had, coach this style.

They may give very limited direction----such as push up, etc. But, they will not make player's decisions for them.

The worst is when the parents start doing that. By the time somebody screams---the kid has already had to commit in his brain so what you are screaming is worthless.

I saw my U15 yesterday have a million different people on and off the field screaming at him to pass in one direction,,,,calm, cool and collected he tuned them out---cut the other way and put in a deadly through ball that our striker merely had to tap for the goal. People ate crow after that. Ironically---HIS COACH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO WAS SILENT. Smart guy that played professionally in Europe.

[Anonymous]

^^ I had many Dutch coaches growing up. They always told me that they do not give direction during the game because the player may just come up with something much better than what they tell them. They are very big on player creativity and development.

[Anonymous]

I watched a DA game recently where one coach was micro managing his players movements. Total joystick coaching. The other barely spoke - and when he did was something along the lines of "hey, where should you be", rather than directing his players as to where they should be. The ones getting less coaching during the game played much better. They made some bad decisions, of course, but the joystick kids seemed nervous the whole time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Smart Coach.

This is how it is supposed to be done.

Kids make decisions on the field. Coach can address when they are subbed out, at half time and end of game talk. Practice is for learning and game is where what they learn is implemented.

The best coaches we have had, coach this style.

They may give very limited direction----such as push up, etc. But, they will not make player's decisions for them.

The worst is when the parents start doing that. By the time somebody screams---the kid has already had to commit in his brain so what you are screaming is worthless.

I saw my U15 yesterday have a million different people on and off the field screaming at him to pass in one direction,,,,calm, cool and collected he tuned them out---cut the other way and put in a deadly through ball that our striker merely had to tap for the goal. People ate crow after that. Ironically---HIS COACH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO WAS SILENT. Smart guy that played professionally in Europe.

I think games are for learning as well and games provide TONS of situations that aren't produced in practices. I think coaches should use these opportunities to provide guidance and coaching points while the kids are on the field. It's not joysticking, it's teaching. I don't want my kid on a team where the coach says nothing. But that's just me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Smart Coach.

This is how it is supposed to be done.

Kids make decisions on the field. Coach can address when they are subbed out, at half time and end of game talk. Practice is for learning and game is where what they learn is implemented.

The best coaches we have had, coach this style.

They may give very limited direction----such as push up, etc. But, they will not make player's decisions for them.

The worst is when the parents start doing that. By the time somebody screams---the kid has already had to commit in his brain so what you are screaming is worthless.

I saw my U15 yesterday have a million different people on and off the field screaming at him to pass in one direction,,,,calm, cool and collected he tuned them out---cut the other way and put in a deadly through ball that our striker merely had to tap for the goal. People ate crow after that. Ironically---HIS COACH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO WAS SILENT. Smart guy that played professionally in Europe.

I think games are for learning as well and games provide TONS of situations that aren't produced in practices. I think coaches should use these opportunities to provide guidance and coaching points while the kids are on the field. It's not joysticking, it's teaching. I don't want my kid on a team where the coach says nothing. But that's just me.

Well, I hope you keep this opinion to yourself on the field, and don't try to micromanage how the coach is doing his/her job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I watched a DA game recently where one coach was micro managing his players movements. Total joystick coaching. The other barely spoke - and when he did was something along the lines of "hey, where should you be", rather than directing his players as to where they should be. The ones getting less coaching during the game played much better. They made some bad decisions, of course, but the joystick kids seemed nervous the whole time.

They are nervous. They don’t have freedom. The 2nd coach is smart—by asking makes he the player think and start making decisions for himself. The best teacher is the game. Poor decisions (I don’t believe in “wrong”) have consequences. The player allowed to make mistakes, particularly costly ones, will not make that mistake again.

I have played for both styles. I enjoyed the game much more without somebody screaming at me. Kids are afraid to make mistakes and not please a reactionary coach/parent and will not take risks, will not be creative and are looking to the sidelines instead of having their head in the game. Whether it’s the parent or the coach, the kids getting screamed at never play as well.

The quiet coaches are not -not coaching. I see the coach talk the players on the sidelines before going in or after they get subbed out. They also address at half time what is going wrong and what they need to do better. Post-game is a re-hash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Smart Coach.

This is how it is supposed to be done.

Kids make decisions on the field. Coach can address when they are subbed out, at half time and end of game talk. Practice is for learning and game is where what they learn is implemented.

The best coaches we have had, coach this style.

They may give very limited direction----such as push up, etc. But, they will not make player's decisions for them.

The worst is when the parents start doing that. By the time somebody screams---the kid has already had to commit in his brain so what you are screaming is worthless.

I saw my U15 yesterday have a million different people on and off the field screaming at him to pass in one direction,,,,calm, cool and collected he tuned them out---cut the other way and put in a deadly through ball that our striker merely had to tap for the goal. People ate crow after that. Ironically---HIS COACH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO WAS SILENT. Smart guy that played professionally in Europe.

I think games are for learning as well and games provide TONS of situations that aren't produced in practices. I think coaches should use these opportunities to provide guidance and coaching points while the kids are on the field. It's not joysticking, it's teaching. I don't want my kid on a team where the coach says nothing. But that's just me.

Well, I hope you keep this opinion to yourself on the field, and don't try to micromanage how the coach is doing his/her job.

I'm not even sure what you mean by your comments. You hope I keep my opinion to myself? How does a parent even go about micromanaging the coach? But I anyway...I guess I don't have to do these things. I don't let my kid play for coaches that don't teach while they are on the field. To me, a game is a practice. I expect the coach to coach during practice and at games. Letting the game be the teacher is BS because kids don't know what they don't know. My son's coach isn't a screamer nor a joysticker, but he is certainly vocal during games. Our coach does talk to the kids when they are subbed out, and at half, and at the end, etc. He also says...Jimmy, where should you be? He uses guided discovery, but he also says...Franky, you need to be wider. You need to give better angles. Johnny, you need to check in there. Remember next time. Stevie, I need to see better effort from you. I know you can work harder. etc. That's what I look for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Smart Coach.

This is how it is supposed to be done.

Kids make decisions on the field. Coach can address when they are subbed out, at half time and end of game talk. Practice is for learning and game is where what they learn is implemented.

The best coaches we have had, coach this style.

They may give very limited direction----such as push up, etc. But, they will not make player's decisions for them.

The worst is when the parents start doing that. By the time somebody screams---the kid has already had to commit in his brain so what you are screaming is worthless.

I saw my U15 yesterday have a million different people on and off the field screaming at him to pass in one direction,,,,calm, cool and collected he tuned them out---cut the other way and put in a deadly through ball that our striker merely had to tap for the goal. People ate crow after that. Ironically---HIS COACH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO WAS SILENT. Smart guy that played professionally in Europe.

I think games are for learning as well and games provide TONS of situations that aren't produced in practices. I think coaches should use these opportunities to provide guidance and coaching points while the kids are on the field. It's not joysticking, it's teaching. I don't want my kid on a team where the coach says nothing. But that's just me.

Well, I hope you keep this opinion to yourself on the field, and don't try to micromanage how the coach is doing his/her job.

I'm not even sure what you mean by your comments. You hope I keep my opinion to myself? How does a parent even go about micromanaging the coach? But I anyway...I guess I don't have to do these things. I don't let my kid play for coaches that don't teach while they are on the field. To me, a game is a practice. I expect the coach to coach during practice and at games. Letting the game be the teacher is BS because kids don't know what they don't know. My son's coach isn't a screamer nor a joysticker, but he is certainly vocal during games. Our coach does talk to the kids when they are subbed out, and at half, and at the end, etc. He also says...Jimmy, where should you be? He uses guided discovery, but he also says...Franky, you need to be wider. You need to give better angles. Johnny, you need to check in there. Remember next time. Stevie, I need to see better effort from you. I know you can work harder. etc. That's what I look for.

That isn't joy sticking. You can stand down with your outrage.

Joy sticking is when the coach is directing your kid where they should be, who they should pass to and when they should pass.

[Anonymous]

We were talking about this on another thread. Apparently there is a style called "guided discovery."

It's not a choice between silence and joysticking -- It's about what you say and when.

There is a difference between (1) saying nothing, (2) "Go over there," and (3) "where do you need to be right now?"

I think players learn the most from (1) and (3), and that's the style of coaching I prefer for my kids. But all coaches need to mix it up (and about everyone does.)

It's about striking the right balance, and not every player at every stage is going to need the same thing. The best coaches are a bit eclectic in style and can match their approach to their player -- say the optimal thing to each individual at the right time.

Dropping this off in case others enjoy it.

https://www.soccerwire.com/news/dunshee-ten-reasons-to-not-coach-the-player-in-possession/

Ten reasons to not coach the player in possession

1. Young players can’t multi-task:
2. They won’t talk to each other if you do all the talking
3. The moment is gone
4. You rob them of a chance to make a decision. They don’t discover solutions and are therefore less likely to remember them
5. You miss a chance to analyze the game
6. You miss the chance to coach those you can and should influence
7. You make the player in possession nervous
8. They can’t hear you
9. You may be wrong
10. They can’t be brilliant if you are pulling the strings – they can only be robots

Of course we must speak to the player in possession from time to time. Here are some ideas of things we can say in practice or in games to improve decision making and model good communication without making the decisions for the players.

“Turn / Hold / Man On / Turn and Go” – As an example to the team of how and when to communicate. This is information that helps the player in possession make a decision.
“Pick your head up, have a look” – Helps them make a decision but doesn’t decide for them.
“Can we get to goal?” – As a reminder of our top priority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Smart Coach.

This is how it is supposed to be done.

Kids make decisions on the field. Coach can address when they are subbed out, at half time and end of game talk. Practice is for learning and game is where what they learn is implemented.

The best coaches we have had, coach this style.

They may give very limited direction----such as push up, etc. But, they will not make player's decisions for them.

The worst is when the parents start doing that. By the time somebody screams---the kid has already had to commit in his brain so what you are screaming is worthless.

I saw my U15 yesterday have a million different people on and off the field screaming at him to pass in one direction,,,,calm, cool and collected he tuned them out---cut the other way and put in a deadly through ball that our striker merely had to tap for the goal. People ate crow after that. Ironically---HIS COACH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO WAS SILENT. Smart guy that played professionally in Europe.

I think games are for learning as well and games provide TONS of situations that aren't produced in practices. I think coaches should use these opportunities to provide guidance and coaching points while the kids are on the field. It's not joysticking, it's teaching. I don't want my kid on a team where the coach says nothing. But that's just me.

Well, I hope you keep this opinion to yourself on the field, and don't try to micromanage how the coach is doing his/her job.

I'm not even sure what you mean by your comments. You hope I keep my opinion to myself? How does a parent even go about micromanaging the coach? But I anyway...I guess I don't have to do these things. I don't let my kid play for coaches that don't teach while they are on the field. To me, a game is a practice. I expect the coach to coach during practice and at games. Letting the game be the teacher is BS because kids don't know what they don't know. My son's coach isn't a screamer nor a joysticker, but he is certainly vocal during games. Our coach does talk to the kids when they are subbed out, and at half, and at the end, etc. He also says...Jimmy, where should you be? He uses guided discovery, but he also says...Franky, you need to be wider. You need to give better angles. Johnny, you need to check in there. Remember next time. Stevie, I need to see better effort from you. I know you can work harder. etc. That's what I look for.

+1000. This is what our coach does as well. I love this coaching style but it doesn’t work for all of his players. Some of players are constantly out of positions, and are clueless. Hence I think guided discovery only works with some players while specific direction is twisted for other players.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Smart Coach.

This is how it is supposed to be done.

Kids make decisions on the field. Coach can address when they are subbed out, at half time and end of game talk. Practice is for learning and game is where what they learn is implemented.

The best coaches we have had, coach this style.

They may give very limited direction----such as push up, etc. But, they will not make player's decisions for them.

The worst is when the parents start doing that. By the time somebody screams---the kid has already had to commit in his brain so what you are screaming is worthless.

I saw my U15 yesterday have a million different people on and off the field screaming at him to pass in one direction,,,,calm, cool and collected he tuned them out---cut the other way and put in a deadly through ball that our striker merely had to tap for the goal. People ate crow after that. Ironically---HIS COACH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO WAS SILENT. Smart guy that played professionally in Europe.

I think games are for learning as well and games provide TONS of situations that aren't produced in practices. I think coaches should use these opportunities to provide guidance and coaching points while the kids are on the field. It's not joysticking, it's teaching. I don't want my kid on a team where the coach says nothing. But that's just me.

Well, I hope you keep this opinion to yourself on the field, and don't try to micromanage how the coach is doing his/her job.

I'm not even sure what you mean by your comments. You hope I keep my opinion to myself? How does a parent even go about micromanaging the coach? But I anyway...I guess I don't have to do these things. I don't let my kid play for coaches that don't teach while they are on the field. To me, a game is a practice. I expect the coach to coach during practice and at games. Letting the game be the teacher is BS because kids don't know what they don't know. My son's coach isn't a screamer nor a joysticker, but he is certainly vocal during games. Our coach does talk to the kids when they are subbed out, and at half, and at the end, etc. He also says...Jimmy, where should you be? He uses guided discovery, but he also says...Franky, you need to be wider. You need to give better angles. Johnny, you need to check in there. Remember next time. Stevie, I need to see better effort from you. I know you can work harder. etc. That's what I look for.

+1000. This is what our coach does as well. I love this coaching style but it doesn’t work for all of his players. Some of players are constantly out of positions, and are clueless. Hence I think guided discovery only works with some players while specific direction is twisted for other players.

Sorry. required not twisted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Smart Coach.

This is how it is supposed to be done.

Kids make decisions on the field. Coach can address when they are subbed out, at half time and end of game talk. Practice is for learning and game is where what they learn is implemented.

The best coaches we have had, coach this style.

They may give very limited direction----such as push up, etc. But, they will not make player's decisions for them.

The worst is when the parents start doing that. By the time somebody screams---the kid has already had to commit in his brain so what you are screaming is worthless.

I saw my U15 yesterday have a million different people on and off the field screaming at him to pass in one direction,,,,calm, cool and collected he tuned them out---cut the other way and put in a deadly through ball that our striker merely had to tap for the goal. People ate crow after that. Ironically---HIS COACH WAS THE ONLY ONE WHO WAS SILENT. Smart guy that played professionally in Europe.

I think games are for learning as well and games provide TONS of situations that aren't produced in practices. I think coaches should use these opportunities to provide guidance and coaching points while the kids are on the field. It's not joysticking, it's teaching. I don't want my kid on a team where the coach says nothing. But that's just me.

Well, I hope you keep this opinion to yourself on the field, and don't try to micromanage how the coach is doing his/her job.

When I first started coaching I had a handful of parents who knew nothing about soccer constantly murmuring that I should be instructing the kids more on the field. And they started yelling at the kids what to do. This consisted largely of "Larlo, Kick the ball!, kick the ball!" They were very distracting to the players, and to me. And they yelled so much that when I did try to communicate something to the players, the players couldn't hear me over the din of the parents. Took me a full season to tamp that down. Unnecessary stress.

[Anonymous]

I think the best coaches adjust depending on age/skill of players and do a lot more talking with the younger ages. At that age kids need more than to "discover," they need to be told and corrected.

That said, I love the coaches who instruct on the sideline rather than yelling at players on the field while the play is happening. One of my sons' coaches in U9-U10 would talk to the kids on the bench all the time, asking them questions, and so on. He'd also pull kids off the field all the time, give them instructions and put them back in. I thought it was a very effective way to coach.