Coaching Ideas for U8s

Discussion in 'Coach' started by BrightEyesLA, Aug 26, 2008.

  1. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    No prob. rca gave a good run down of it, so I'll try to hit it from a different perspective.

    It starts out at the very youngest ages: 4-6. Where their coaches will assign L/C/R defense and L/C/R offense. Sadly, I've seen this at the very first practices kids attend. It doesn't have to be this exact set up, but the effect will be the same.

    Then the "lesson" goes on to tell them that they stay in this area until the ball comes near them, then they do something: Go get it, defend, attack. This is all to fight their natural urge to swarm the ball. But making them stay in their "areas of responsibility" is completely the wrong thing to teach them at this stage, because it creates a mentality of "yours or mine" and not "ours".

    The idea in soccer is to defend and attack as a unit or small groups. Positions for young players create this mentality where "I'm on offense, I don't need to win the ball back." or "I'm left wing, I'm not going to move closer to the ball if it's all the way over there." or "I'm left defense, the center defense will handle that attacker." At the beginning stages, we can't teach kids to defend in pairs or threes yet, BUT placing the idea that we're individually responsible and that our responsibilities are specific (as opposed to universal) are habits that are hard to break down the road.

    In contrast, let's say we teach shape. In a diamond, there are still "positions": there always has to be a top, bottom, and the two sides of the diamond. So there are positions and they always have to be filled, but we don't name which player stays in these spots. It's a fluid, dynamic system—much like grown up soccer. The diamond can move all over the field, whereas the other system leaves the majority of players in areas of zero action.

    In all my years of playing, reffing, coaching, and just watching youth soccer I haven't seen a consistent, intentional switch of the attack to beat teams that have overcommitted to one side before U14. The reason grown ups are more disciplined positionally is because at a certain age, players can recognize this weakness and exploit it. Once they do, it's much easier for the 13 YO brain to adjust to not getting sucked out of position, than it is for them to learn to go to where they are needed.

    Can you teach dynamic, thinking soccer with positions? Sure. I just see it rarely done well. Again, it's not the positions but how soccer is taught in relation to positions. In the US, we get into the ideas of formations and systems too early. There are simple, fundamental systems (see diamond explanation above) and there are complex, adult systems where there are responsibilities and if-then decisions that need to be made.

    Coaches are so afraid of swarm-ball, but I believe the aim is to get to a modified version of swarm ball at advanced levels. Modern theory says that the player on the ball should have at least 3 or 4 passing options. So if it's 4 passing options, plus a player on the ball that's 5 players. 50% of one team's field players are in the vicinity of the ball, attracting who knows how many defenders. If you watch the kickoff of a modern, professional soccer game all 20 field players are in a 15-20 yard area of midfield. Watch a kid's game at kickoff and players are spread to the top of each penalty area. Why? They are effectively useless all the way back there.

    Another problem is that when positions are taught they are taught in lines. Defensive line, midfield line, forward line. Soccer is not horizontally linear. It is an angular game.

    sorry long winded.
     
  2. Beau Dure

    Beau Dure Member+

    May 31, 2000
    Vienna, VA
    At U6 and U7, I'm relatively content to just give the kids subtle hints about spreading out. I try to simulate game situations that open things up a bit.

    At U8, where we've been playing 5x5, I get a little less subtle.

    (Bear in mind -- this is one area in which I have issues with the U.S. Soccer curriculum. They're suggesting 7x7 with no tactical training. And people wonder why we end up focusing on the biggest and strongest players -- they're the only ones who can survive in that mob.)

    I asked our team to play with two defenders. I didn't care about left and right (sometimes, it would be more of a D-mid and a sweeper -- mostly because my son likes to hang out near his own goal), and I didn't assign any positions to the other three players. I used a set of pictures to explain what I wanted:

    http://www.sportsmyriad.com/2011/10/single-digit-soccer-position-papers/

    Basically, I wanted two people to hang back, but not sitting in front of the goal picking their noses.

    And I did a lot of practice exercises to get people to spread out.

    But I still spent most of the games trying to get kids out of the woods.
     
  3. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Beau, FWIW, I enjoy reading your blog. It's honest and the writing is insightful.
     
  4. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    My first coaching experience (U10G) was 20 years ago, but I remember it because I learned so much :) My expectations were too high, but I didn't understand that at the time! The context was 11v11 on a 70 yard field with youth goals and I used a simple 433 diamond back system. (The players had area responsibilities associated with their positions but I didn't criticize roaming that made tactical sense.) Our opponents all played 235 systems with the 5 forwards chasing the ball end to end. I am sure you have seen it used.

    To get to my point, I saw these U10's occassionally make the first pass to open space or a player, either a square pass accross the front of the pack, a through pass around the pack, or a driven ball over the pack. I think that novices will naturally try to avoid the pack, but in chess terms--they were not thinking even one move ahead. What I trained for was simple combination play, which I never was able to produce in a match. (In hindsight I understand why.) While what I saw wasn't a switch to the weakside, it is the precursor of a switch, the important first pass. I remember it still because I was so excited on the rare occassions when they actually made an effective pass during a match.

    I think a lot of good tactics are instinctive (spreading out on attack to use the space, compressing on the ball on defense to take away space and time) and should be nurtured by coaches. I see the danger with U-Littles as unintentionally coaching the good instincts out of the players.
     
  5. equus

    equus Member

    Jan 6, 2007
    I think some of the issue comes from game rules in different leagues. Some U8 divisions are 4v4/no keeper, 5v5/no keeper, 6v6/keeper, 7v7/keeper (mine), 8s and some who inexplicably run 11v11 on adult fields.

    In SSG during training my U8s never are taught to play positions, and we'll vary from 3v3, 4v4 with pop-up goals, to at limited times 5v5 with keepers if everyone on the roster shows up. We're training on a field that is roughly half the size of field we'll play games on.

    "Coach, where do I go?"
    "Wherever you feel you need to go."

    Come game time we're playing 7v7/keeper on a 60x40 field with 6'x21' goals and I really don't want all six outfield players lined shoulder to shoulder hugging the circle at kickoff. Sure, it could teach some valuable lessons, but these other teams won't bother to do a proper kickoff and instead NFL it downfield. I really don't want to deal with a ball in the gut or face of my six year old players and have them spooked the rest of the season or quit the game altogether.

    So I give them starting spots (and I make that clear at the beginning.) Middle, Parents' side, Coach's side. The "back" and "forward" only signifies where they start, not their role, which is why I never use attacker/defender because they think that's their only role when they should be doing both. Backs are about 5-7 yds behind the forwards, and if they don't move up as the attack moves downfield I encourage them to.

    I think as long as you define and communicate it like that to your players you can deal better with larger sides at that age. Not perfect by any means, but better than fixing them to a spot on the field.
     
    Footsatt repped this.
  6. equus

    equus Member

    Jan 6, 2007
    This made me think of something else: a timid may not always be timid.

    I had a player last season who at first I thought was too timid to "get in there" during SSG. Yet during 1v1s he defended very well and wasn't afraid of the tackle.

    Later I realized that he was a pretty smart player. He knew that the ball was eventually going to pop out of that scrum, and he was usually goal side just outside the swarm waiting for it to defend 1v1 or to intercept and take the other way. Principles of play.
     
  7. blech

    blech Member+

    Jun 24, 2002
    California
    thanks. it feels like the issue is partially one of semantics. as you note, the diamond example does not lead to "traditional" positions as we normally think about them, but it surely can involve the use of positions if that is the instruction (whether you assign a player to each point or send them out with the instruction that each point needs a player regardless of which one it is).
     
  8. tonythetard

    tonythetard Member

    Apr 7, 2010
    Topeka
    Club:
    Kansas City Wizards
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    My daughter does the same thing. Her main problem -and maybe it's the same for you and your "timid" kid - is that she assumes everyone else is on the same page. She'll pass and run up the field expecting a returned pass but turns back and sees that the other kid is struggling to dribble around a defender or just plain old booted the ball instead of passing or dribbling. It's funny because my wife thinks that our daughter is "giving the ball away" but I can see (and it's later confirmed by our little one) what was supposed to happen.
    This is why I have some trouble believing that kids at U8 can't understand combination play or stay open for passes and things of that nature. I see her do it all the time. She seems to like to one or two touch pass whenever she has the ball and I have to remind her that she can dribble... I started explaining to her (in the offseason on our own time while kicking the ball around) that holding or dribbling the ball and baiting a defender will open up space for a teammate and she understood the concept almost immediately.
    I HOPE this means she's exceptional, but I think it just means that we watch a hell of a lot more soccer than most of the other families and she can see the effect more easily than some of the other kids. OR maybe I'm just over thinking this too (I've been known to over think things which has already been stated in this thread).
    Anyway, Loved the comments regarding shape vs. positions. I'm going to have to try that this season.
     
  9. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Perhaps it's semantics. Down the road, the diamond naturally occurs in various formations 4-4-2, 3-4-3 for example. So it's preparing them for that kind of jump.

    Yes, positions aren't the problem. It's teaching positions as rigid and constraining. It should just be "here's where I start, I leave, and come back when the time is right"
     
  10. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    But its not semantics. We teach the principles of play, not where to be on the field. It just so happens that with 4 players any shape with both maximum width and depth will be a quadilateral shape (diamond, rhombus, square, what you call it is really not material because the game is dynamic and mobility a principle of attack so the actual shape of the team should be in constant flux) simply because it is a shape formed by four points. The distance between points should correlate with supporting distance. It is mobility, depth and width that are required, not points on the field.

    If you want to talk about meaningless sematics, let's talk about the phrase "build from the back." I have played soccer for over 50 years and I don't have a clue what people mean when they say that. Especially given that soccer is an invasion sport. Build what with what and where? What I suspect is that it is a term borrowed from another sport or from another language, or else a metaphor, because it does not make sense literally. Perhaps I have problems because in a match I don't look for players, I look for spaces and anticipate where spaces will be. To me the game is about spaces, not points. I am influenced by what I read in the 1970's and 80's and some of it was written years earlier. Where players are on the field at any moment is not as important as where they will be in the future. So "points" and geometric shapes are really not important to preparing kids for senior soccer. It is the principles that we need to teach.
     
  11. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    Here is what you are missing. In isolation thinking ahead is easy. Combination play requires the team to have a shared vision thinking at least two moves ahead. When you put full sides out there (22 players, referees and a ball) it is extremely confusing. It makes it very difficult for novices to read the game, which is necessary to have a shared vision of what should happen next. That is one reason we use SSG in practice and don't teach team tactics until about U13. 3v3 is much less confusing than 11 a side. I used to run a full sided parents/kids match at the end of the season so that the non-player parents would experience first hand what it is like for their kids. (After 12 weeks of training, the kids would literally run circles around the non-player parents. A fine demonstation of the importance of skill.)
     
  12. Beau Dure

    Beau Dure Member+

    May 31, 2000
    Vienna, VA
    Or that parents aren't finding much time to work out.
     
  13. equus

    equus Member

    Jan 6, 2007
    My U8 son (not the timid one in my previous post) is similar. We watch and play a lot of soccer and I've shown him how 1-2 passes work with a safety cone as a "defender." The first time when he received the pass back after passing to me and rounding the cone his eyes lit up and he smiled at the possibilities.

    But the rest of his outdoor rec team is just not there yet mentally. We focused on basic ball control and 1v1 stuff most of the season with some basic passing, so even if he wanted to try this on his own in a game or SSG, he wouldn't get a pass back and he'd only pass when a teammate was in a scoring position.

    His U8 futsal team this winter is a little more advanced and they can pass back, square and move into space, do a 1-2 here and there, etc. Depends on the kids. I could have done more on passing and combos with the outdoor team, but they needed to become more comfortable and confident on the ball first.
     
  14. Monkey Boy

    Monkey Boy Member

    Jul 21, 2006
    Madison, WI
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Being involved in soccer outside of formal practice/games makes a big difference - watching games (TV and in person), playing pick-up, working on skills in the backyard, etc. The different perspective these activities provide really help a player when given the opportunity to think on the field.

    I've actually watched my U8 team (playing 4v4) use a suggestion from practice in games. A player typically gets trapped by the scrum of usually about 3 defenders, when trapped the player turns and passes back to the supporting player. This player then turns toward the open space to pass to a teammate waiting up ahead. The open player then has a chance to dribble to an open goal while the opposing players scramble to catch up. Great fun to watch!
     
  15. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    You are joking right? 30 year old adults versus 8 and 9 year olds? (I will use those ages, because I haven't coached younger kids.) Everyone knows 30 year old adults are faster and stronger than their children. The speed of play of U10s is slow enough that it is not going to tax an uninjured adult to stay up with it, provided that the adult knows how to play the game. An uninjured adult player will be able to keep up even if completely out of shape. After 12 weeks of training the kids are all players. Everyone expects the "star" U10 players to excell, the proof though is in the demonstration of success by the players that everyone knows never touched a ball prior to the first practice. It not only demonstrates how the kids have improved over the 12 weeks, but validates the coaching to the parents in a very convincing manner that gives them something more to go on than match results. It is really amazing the progress you can make coaching 8 and 9 year old novices.
     
  16. Beau Dure

    Beau Dure Member+

    May 31, 2000
    Vienna, VA
    Parents in our area are more typically 40. We're broken down. Our kids may not run faster, but they can run longer.
     
  17. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    I take it you were not joking. The thread is about 6 and 7 year olds. My story was about 8 and 9 year olds. Unless the kids are extremely and abnormally biologically mature for their age, they do not have more endurance than an adult due to the biological differences maturity brings. The kids in fact will have far less work capacity, unless the adult has heart disease or other medical problems. In the area of performance, there is a biological world of difference between kids ages 10 and 14 (or 16 for the slow developing males). If the age differences being discussed were 14 and 40, I would not argue the point.
     
  18. Beau Dure

    Beau Dure Member+

    May 31, 2000
    Vienna, VA
    I'm half-joking. I live in an area that takes fitness very seriously (not a lot of fat people here) but also takes work very seriously.

    When I was 8, I could run a 5k race without even thinking about it. Not really fast or anything, but it wasn't a problem.

    Today, at age 41, if I attempted a 5k, I'd be walking through a lot of it. Legs are shot from running cross-country through a major high school growth spurt. Cardio isn't there, even though I did an EKG at age 40 and everything was fine.

    I sometimes scrimmage against my kids by doing 2-on-1 drills. Basically, I'm trying to drill it into their heads that they can beat me (and therefore any defender their age) by passing the ball, but they're not going to beat me (or a really good defender their age) 1-on-1. One kid was occasionally challenging.

    So yeah -- I could see parents in worse shape than I am struggling to keep up with their kids in a scrimmage. If you're not used to running, forget it. You may be relatively healthy -- perhaps you bike and walk a good bit, and your doctor is pleased with your bloodwork and weight. But there's a difference between being in good health and having a body that's ready to deal with the pounding of running.

    Which means -- if you're running now, don't stop. Take a couple of years off, and you may not be able to resume.
     
  19. Monkey Boy

    Monkey Boy Member

    Jul 21, 2006
    Madison, WI
    Club:
    FC Bayern München
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You seriously want to drill this into their heads at such a young age?

    Trying to beat a player 1 on 1 is something we need to be teaching at this age! These kids are already being drilled to pass and it will continue to be the constant drill in their heads for years to come - happens all the time.

    Confidence is one of the greatest things we can give our players as a coach. Please don't drill that out of them right at the start of their experience with the sport!
     
  20. blech

    blech Member+

    Jun 24, 2002
    California
    I was just having a similar discussion, and I agree with you completely. There's a lot to be said for passing and it's fun to see the lightbulb go on when the kids learn how effective a wall pass can be. But, we definitely need to develop more dribblers and players who are willing to take on an opponent one-on-one, even if he/she loses the ball sometimes in the process.
     
  21. blech

    blech Member+

    Jun 24, 2002
    California
    In the context of what I was asking, I do think it is largely semantics. The points on the diamonds can be used to explain and teach roles, but they also represent positions in terms of how this is being taught to kids at this age. The positions refer to the points of the diamond, not defender, midfielder, left, right, etc., but they're still very much positions, and it probably serves a very useful purpose at this age when these concepts are very introductory to be more rigid about it than one might be with older kids where you may not be pre-assigning who will take which role and can reasonably expect them to recognize which roles need to be filled during fluid play.

    By the same token, I recognize that there are coaches who will, as an example, tie the right defender to a 15x15 plot of grass where the player is supposed to remain irrespective of the location of the ball, teammates, and opponents (and other factors that might impact one's decision-making such as the score and the time remaining in the game), but there are also coaches who will work with the right defender in terms of roles (not location on the field).

    Again, the big piece that I'm thinking about at this particular time is less about the various points that have been made and more specifically about their implementation and application at this age level - 6 and 7 year olds - and what both the average and the advanced player at these age will take from them, how they will best understand them, and if some of it should be delayed with time spent focusing on other matters more critical to their development at this age (specifically technical development).
     
  22. Beau Dure

    Beau Dure Member+

    May 31, 2000
    Vienna, VA
    Ah, one of the great controversies of the U.S. Soccer curriculum! The "overdribbling" issue!

    But applied to my team -- basically, they're ahead of the game in terms of 1v1 confidence, and I can often count on one hand the number of passes they complete in a game. I'm trying to get them out of "mob ball," where it's just a matter of whoever can come out of the pack with the ball, kick it ahead and run after it.

    I'm not really drilling them on passes. We're not doing the old line-up-and-kick-to-each-other drill. I'm trying to put them in fun situations in which it's to their advantage to pass.

    We still plenty of "dribble with your head up" games. This season, I may put my U8s into some 1v1 exercises now that I think they can handle it from a competitive point of view.

    This isn't a team that can knock the ball around but is afraid to take on players 1v1. I haven't seen that at U8. I'd probably have a heart attack if I did.
     
  23. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    The difference between my coaching views and training practices and yours are real and not semantics. Here is what I did specifically with novice U10s. For SSGs I start with a 3v1 keep-away game in a defined space, no goals, no positions, no roles, no instruction from me at all related to tactics (only technique). The objective is to teach about space, i.e., the principles of play. They also improve their ball skills, defensive skills, and off-the ball support. We gradually over weeks work up to 3v3 and 4v4 SSGs with goals, with an additional purpose of learning to play within a line so it transfers to a 433. Only when training team tactics in the context of the 433 system did I train positions and roles. I made no mention of roles or positions in anything less than a full side.

    I intentionally picked one label for each position in the full side for consistency and simplicity and intentionally never referred to any position outside of the full side context. Even when training the full side I explained roles, I explained interchanging of positions, and I intentionally never suggested that there was one right solution to any problem. Most importantly I never told a player where to be on the field. Everything I said about team tactics was in terms of what the 11 a side team was trying to accomplish. Everything I "said" about SSG tactics was in how I set up the exercise--nothing about small group tactics was verbal, other than praising good play and good decisions regardless of results.

    My objective was to develop skills, knowledge of the LOTG, vision, soccer smarts (as to how to contribute in any given circumstance), a love of the game, and confidence. I wanted players who made quick decisions, tough on defense and creative on the attack. You don't develop those types of players by assigning them positions or roles in a 4v4 game. Or by telling them the "right" way to play.
     
  24. Pragidealist

    Pragidealist Member+

    Mar 3, 2010
    This is the way I have always coached. I have attempted before to teach "shape" in 4 v 4- diamonds and triangles, but not positions.

    If anything, I have to drill the positions out of their heads as players always seem to come to me with the mindset that "I am a ____" insert position. Rather than I am a soccer player.

    I don't even teach "shape" very much now, as my attempts in the past really created too much static play. I teach passing lanes and support angles.
     
  25. blech

    blech Member+

    Jun 24, 2002
    California
    With all due respect, you do not know my views or my training practices on these issues. I have coached at older levels and at younger levels, but am taking a fresh look at this specific u8 level. So, I am asking questions and I am forming views and thinking about the development of training sessions. I agree with much of what you say, but don't follow all of it in the context of a u8 discussion, especially since we will never see "full sided" games and since I am looking at the small sided game piece of it as well as the training session.

    Just so I understand, do you only play full sided games (11v11) and, if you were playing a smaller sided game against another team (whatever it might be from 4v4 to 7v7) would you not have positions in some form or another? And, if you didn't have positions, what instruction would you send them out with?
     

Share This Page