What will be the next evolution in soccer style/philosophy?

Discussion in 'Coach' started by equus, Jan 18, 2012.

  1. equus

    equus Member

    Jan 6, 2007
    To branch this out from the Latin American youth style thread where we've been discussing how Barcelona got to be Barcelona and its influences, I ask you:

    What do you think will be the next big trend or evolution in soccer philosophy and what club or country will be the standard bearer for it?

    My guess would be some sort of hybrid of Barcelona's tika-taka possession style and more physical, direct play a la Germany. That actually seems to be a philosophy that would benefit the US once the current focus on better control and possession matures.
     
  2. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Total Football (70s)
    Liverpool in the (80s)
    AC Milan (90s)
    JM's Chelsea (00s)
    Barca (currently)

    It's probably a bit cyclical seeing how my list started with "Total Football" and we end up with it's grandchild 40 years later. My list is general as there were more successful teams in those decades than, say, Chelsea. But arguably few coaches captured the zeitgeist like Mourinho's highly discipline, efficient, structured style. If it weren't for Roman Abramovich's ego and Barcelona, I would have a strong feeling that it would be the dominant ideology in football today.

    The Germans and Dortmund might make a claim for the next big thing. They play an attractive, fast style that could really hurt Barca with the right players, IMO.
     
  3. The Friendly Ghost

    Jul 24, 2007
    Because so few teams (anyone really, outside of the Spanish national team) can replicate Barcelona's style of play, I have a hard time saying that's the current evolution. I think the movement these days is towards a fluid, aggressive pressing, quick counterattacking style that is equally adept at attacking through the middle or down the wings, much like BVB (as previously mentioned)--the German NT is a good point of comparison, too, although I don't think the physicality referred to earlier is particularly applicable. This is a style that can be more readily emulated than Barcelona. I also think there is the potential for the return of playmakers (who have become relatively scarce), especially in a 5-person MF, around which the fluid, pressing style will be built, but also with whom possession can be built and retained.
     
  4. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    I think we will see a North American style eventually--a blend after our "melting pot" tradition. What I would like to see is German discipline, American athleticism, and Hispanic presence on the ball. You could easily substitute different nationalities in that description, but you get the idea.

    I think that is what a lot of people have been trying to do and Barca and Spain are the most successful at it right now. I think that Dunga failed most visably and spectacularly with the 2010 world cup side, but you have to appreciate what he was trying to accomplish. Trying to beat physical European teams in Europe with finesse is not easy. It makes Spain's success all the more of a triumph for pretty soccer.
     
  5. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    It's one in the same, but I sometimes wonder if Spain/Barca would be the same without the perfect storm of Xavi and Iniesta coming of age together. Like France a few years earlier, Zidane really put that team over the top (with all respect to one of my favorites, Thierry Henry). Is the philosophy really worth that much without the special someone(s) to make it go?
     
  6. Tom_Heywood

    Tom_Heywood New Member

    Jan 7, 2012
    Club:
    Blackburn Rovers FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Wales
    As a non-coach I think there will be a far more attacking emphasis on the game as things like convoluted offside rules, faster, lighter lighter balls that swerve and dip more and the hero worship of the likes of Messi and Ronaldo in rising markets all add up. The era of the tough no-nonsense central defender (e.g. Tony Adams, Colin Hendry) will be over as teams will experiment with putting hard tackling midfielders in a defensive position, with perhaps one proper central defender just in case.

    The full backs would also be more attacking and pacy, more like Roberto Carlos and Cafu in their prime than solid defenders like Salgado and Henning Berg. All this is of course assuming the team in question has the resources to buy/train players in this way.

    On the other side of the coin, those without the vast pool of cash and talent would become much more solid, pack the centre of the field and play a counter attacking game. England and Switzerland both did this when they beat Spain. In this formation, tough, mobile and intelligent midfielders will be key to blocking the moves of the opposition players, tracking runs and screening the defence. The full backs and wingers also need to be athletic and able to mark players and have a sense of positioning too.

    So I think one group, led by Spain will play a very fluid, flowing system that relies on a load of passing and great movement off the ball whilst other teams, probably led by England, will have a very structured style that will seek to crush any space, work hard and try and take a clear opportunity to counter attack.
     
  7. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    Generally speaking the style is distinct from the players. The players, however, are going to determine success. Barca and Spain will be playing like Barca and Spain after Xavi and Iniesta retire. As they did before Xavi and Iniesta came along. Soccer is very much a game of adapting to circumstances and controlling the match so that you control the circumstances facing the other team. Superior players allow you to control the match. If Barca and Spain had less skillful players, then they would have to adjust their style when facing more skillful teams (or lose).

    An example of this is Holland. Cruyff & Co. left decades ago, but Holland will forever be attempting to play total soccer with the players that they have. It is a shame they haven't won a world cup, but to people like me how you play is more important than the results. For players, playing is what we love. The final whistle is a let down. In some countries, fans have the same priority. The fans in Brazil, Spain and Holland will forgive a national team loss before they will forgive abandonment of their style to chase results.
     
  8. Dakota Soccer

    Dakota Soccer Member

    Dec 30, 2010
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think we will see the awakening of the playmaker again as well. Right now we are seeing a very defensive and cautious style with every team and country moving to two holding midfielders sitting in front of four backs and a keeper. More and more we need creative playmakers who can break these defenses up and create scoring opportunities.

    My fear though with all of this 4-5-1 (don't muddle it with fancy 4-2-3-1 talk, it's a defensive minded 4-5-1) is we will see more and more international teams playing out low scoring, counter attacking, soccer until someone comes along and helps to change it or there's a rule change about ties. Straight up, soccer at the highest level is results driven. So until we see a change in the reward for the result we will see more and more defensive soccer.
     
  9. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    Playmakers and attacking soccer would be nice. I see your point. In league play where you have 30 matches over a season, the defensive mentality is not as prevelant as in international competition where virtually every match must be won, if your goal is advancement.

    Of course a team facing relegation in a league can be just as defensive minded. Playing to avoid losing is just not as exciting. But not every team follows a defensive strategy to success in the promotion/relegation battles. Teams with modest payrolls can be successful playing an attacking style. So far they are a rare exception, but maybe this will drive some new thinking at the professional level about what product they want to sell.
     
  10. superdave

    superdave Member+

    Jul 14, 1999
    VB, VA
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think teams are going to start considering a 3-5-2, or a 4-4-2 with one of the central defenders given license to go forward and be a deep-lying playmaker, as a way to balance the numbers against the 4-5-1. You see one or the other every once in a while; I expect more teams to try it over the next 2-3 years. If it works, it'll spread. If it doesn't, it won't.
     
  11. Rob55

    Rob55 Member

    Nov 20, 2011
    I don't understand how a certain soccer style/philosophy to success can be universally accepted. Especially, in youth programs, I think you tailor strategy/philosophy to the makeup of your team members abilities, strengths and weaknesses. At the top levels, Germans play different style then Argentina/Brazil because of their genetic makeup of they're players and attributes. The old saying "Don't force square peg into a round hole" comes to mind.
     
  12. Dakota Soccer

    Dakota Soccer Member

    Dec 30, 2010
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Thoroughly agree, however it seems that countries do seem to catch "trends" in tactics. There is an obvious trend towards the 1-4-2-3-1 now, especially at the international level. The trend of doubles "6's" is real big right now as well in club soccer and at the national level. Look at how Klinsmann is trying to guide US development towards a 1-4-3-3.

    Does everyone jump in? No, but there are definite trends to the global game.
     
  13. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    Well I think this discussion depends on how you define style and philosophy. I don't see what the system (442, 433, etc) has to do with style and philosophy. To me the system and your tactical approach to a particular match are not a matter of style and philosophy. To me style and philosophy are what remains after you take away tactics. It is a common basis in approach. A fundamental view of the game.

    I can organize and run any system in many different ways. For example I can play attacking soccer or defensive soccer in any system (playing to win versus playing not to lose is the philosophical difference). It is how I chose to organize the system that I view as style.

    I don't want to divorce style from a discussion of tactics completely, as it is impossible. For instance you have a pressing versus counterattacking. It also involves how much freedom players are allowed to interchange--as in total soccer.

    Another consideration is how important are results compared to the beauty of play? Some people would not understand the question while others think that it is the only question that matters.

    But one thing is clear over the decades of time is that the game does change. In the long view famous players and teams have a global influence on the game. Or else I would still be playing left half in a WM with man-to-man marking on Saturdays :)
     
  14. 8MaCookies

    8MaCookies Member

    Jan 3, 2012
    Club:
    Arsenal FC

    This thinking is horrible. The top teams change their style/philosophy all the time to better their Nation team. Look at Germany 2002 and look at them in 2006. They changed their football philosophy to better their Nation team. They also changed the developement programs of youth nation wide to fit into what the nation team's system. Italy in 02 and 2010 style is completely different. Brazil under Dunga from 06-10 brought a completely different philosophy than the one used in 2002. Less flair and more of a simple no non-sense finesses style of football.

    My question to you, how is it good for England not to change thier philosophy from long ball football, (which hasn't worked for them in any nation tournaments since 93'); to more of short passing or getting the ball wide and getting crosses in?
     
  15. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    As Dakota said... Trends.

    Spain didn't always play like this. It started when they had a pair of midfielders come along who started lighting it up for Barca.

    Although it can happen more easily at the club level. Barca has a philosophy and it drives the type of players they bring into their youth academy, what is taught to these players, and how they play.

    You gotta have a philosophy otherwise, what do you do? You just buy every good player even if he doesn't fit into your system?
     
  16. Pragidealist

    Pragidealist Member+

    Mar 3, 2010

    Its definitely a combination and as I said in another thread, to me its about emphasis.

    Germany changes its "style" through Klinsman/Lowe (credit whomever you want). Was it philosophy, tactics, system of play, or player changes? I think the answer is yes.

    Germany is much more fluid than the mechanical style is used to be. But it still highlights crosses from the outside, because that is a team strength. They come together to create the style.

    Some if it is philosophy- such as Klinsmann saying they want to be more proative than Bradley's reactive. Some of it is tactics, such as a using a 4 2 3 1 over the Brazilian Box.

    It all comes together and its difficult. Some of it changes by game. Some aspects of style are dictated by personel. How much more dangerous would Spain be if they had someone that could consistenly win crosses in the air on the attack. They get bogged down sometimes with their style, win teams do what the US did and smother the middle and requiere them to beat them through the air or crosses.

    Mexico has the same problem with size. Mexico's possesion/ground oriented attack is very different from Brazil's or Spain's. They differ in tactics, personnel, and in some cases philosophy.

    The question of style .. what it is, how to develop it, and how it fits with current trends and tacitics....

    I think its a good discussion for soccer as a whole. Particulary US soccer.
     
  17. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    Actually the size problem driving Mexico's MNT style is 1) a lack of size in the back making it very weak defending against high balls into the box against taller teams coupled with 2) the back line's lack of ability to maintain possession of the ball while under heavy pressure. Against pressing teams, it forces Mexico to defend high up the pitch and maintain possession with its forwards and midfielders. That effectively deprives them of depth while in possession and forces them to be more direct in their attack than would be the case if their backs had better skills on the ball. If they had one of the USA's 6'5 keepers, they would be a real serious contender for the next two cups. As it is, they will do very well.
     
  18. Rebaño_Sagrado

    Rebaño_Sagrado Member+

    May 21, 2006
    Home
    Nat'l Team:
    Mexico
    I had to recheck the heights of the 2 leading candidates for starting center back positions for Mexico come world cup qualifiers. Hector Moreno is listed at 6' 0" and Maza Rodriguez is listed at 6'3". Even assuming those numbers are inflated as typically is in sports, they are not much different than Spain's Puyol (5'10") and Pique (6'4") and taller than Mathijsen and Heitinga listed numbers. Although, the last 4 look closer to the truth.

    Rafa Marquez (6'0") was the other starting centerback, along side Rodriguez in South Africa, and there is no way in hell he is that tall. I'll agree with you regarding the skill because Rafa was the most technically skilled centerback when it came to skill on the ball.

    Just found your comment interesting.
     
  19. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    My conclusion was reached while watching the Gold Cup final last summer. If you have the match on tape watch the keeper. Spain's centerbacks may be as short as Mexico's, but Spain has a keeper that can come off his line and clear away balls. Casillas is arguably the best goal keeper in Europe and the world. Mexico is not so fortunate. And its centerbacks are not tall enough to get by without someone like Casillas behind them.

    I would very much like to see Mexico win the cup. They certainly are going to dominate North America and should be a top 10 team for the next decade. I really only see this one weakness, but it is a problem. It is not a problem playing North American teams, except for the US which presses and is tall. It is a problem playing against European teams.
     
  20. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    I've been seeing this thread title regularly and it makes me think on it each time.

    There are many styles and philosophies in existence right now, but just not very well known. What's Real's style/philo? Is it the same as Mourinho's style and philosophy at Inter/Chelsea/Porto? JM seems to be the embodiment of a chameleon coach where he can adapt his style/philo to the players he has (instead of the other way around). But at the same time, I'm sure he has fundamental beliefs that carry across his teams.

    The media also drives the dominant style that gets copied. Right now it's Barca. In the 90s it was Milan (and maybe Ajax). But I'm sure teams in Germany, Italy, and Holland have some exciting ideas about the game that only the soccer-geeks really know about.

    With that in mind, the next dominant style/philo will probably come from one of the major leagues like EPL, La Liga (again), or Serie A (is it even still relevant?). Or it stems from whoever captures the public's imagination at the 2014 WC.

    My money will be on the German system, as they're players will be peaking and they have play a way that is pleasing to watch.
     
  21. Dakota Soccer

    Dakota Soccer Member

    Dec 30, 2010
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Reading through the last couple of comments on the thread I started to think about what I've seen over my short lifetime in style and what I know about the teams that came before. In my mind a team or country's style is driven by two things; an entertaining idea of soccer or a results oriented philosophy.

    A lot of the soccer philosophies we've seen over the years have been driven by these two motivators, and it just depends where the country is at and what the fans are demanding.

    Classic example is Ajax and the Dutch of the 70's and 80's. More important than winning was playing the right way. Entertaining the fans with attacking soccer. The old English style of long ball can be put in the same boat. They wanted goals, and lots of them.

    Then you look at some of the trends the dominated the evolution of soccer as teams started droping numbers from the forwards line to the back line. Soccer was becoming more results oriented and focusing on keeping numbers in front of the ball. Look at the USA philosophy of the 90's, counter attacking soccer that would help us get the best results at tournaments. Our sports fans in general are very results oriented (hating the tie is a classic example), and they didn't care how we played as long as we could get a result; ie. WC 2002 and 2010. No one really is hard on the team as long as they make the knockout stage.
     
  22. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    Your comments have dovetailed with what I have been reading recently. I am going to leave fans out of this altogether. Just focused on coaching.

    First the "old English style of long ball" is a bit misleading. Look at what Jonathon Wilson has written about Charles Hughes. "Long ball" became the English FA official policy in the 1990's under the influence of Charles Hughes, despite success of English teams playing a different style in Europe, such as Liverpool. I don't think Hughes' views were a shared vision of English coaches then or since, but he was in charge of coaching at th FA so his views were official policy.

    (My take on Hughes' views is that it is an unsound approach. He is basing training on a perceived successful tactic, when training should be based on what could happen, not on what you think likely to happen. I don't care what field you talk about, good management requires planning and preparing for contingencies, not just what is most likely to happen. By analogy you can play a round of golf with two clubs, but why handicap yourself by having only two clubs in your bag?)

    The most interesting point I want to make is that the US move during the 90's to the heavily tournament and match oriented focus of youth training was directly influenced by the Dutch. In 1991 the Dutch formally reversed its former development approach by making "winning matches" the TOP priority for youth development. NSCAA formally reported and taught this new development to the US coaching establishment as "the Dutch method." See chapter 5 of the 2012 NSCAA book, Coaching Soccer the NSCAA Way (aka Best of Soccer Journal), "From Looking Good to Winning" at page 224.

    (The mistake I see here is not considering the four phases of athletic development. For pre-teens you want competitive elements in the training, but you don't want competitive matches. Competitive matches and training "teams" should not be a focus until you actually want to start training team tactics. Youth training should be focused on fundamental training rather than functional training.)

    Dakota you are among the small group of coaches in the US who actually deal with the four phases of development. Most of us deal with only one or two phases, and don't get to see the big picture first hand. By the way I recently read a stat: only 17,000 licensed soccer coaches in the US. Compare this to over 24 million players, a ratio over 1000 to 1!
     
  23. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Wow. When it needs to be about 15 to 1? Simple solution we need about 1.5 million new, licensed coaches!
     
  24. equus

    equus Member

    Jan 6, 2007
    And where do many of that 24 million play? In rec leagues where states either have no coaching education plan or offer courses (like the Youth Module), but it's only recommended. Most volunteer coaches don't bother with it because they don't feel it's necessary because it's rec, or they think they know how to coach soccer.

    Were I king, if you volunteered to coach a rec team, you'd be required to take the five-hour Youth Module and make it part of the coaches meeting at the beginning of the season. Take the course (if they haven't already), get your roster. It's a morning and half an afternoon on a Saturday, or break it up into two 2.5-hour sessions as long as the concepts are taught.

    The kids would benefit because they'd get more quality, consistent training and experience as they switch teams during their rec career, clubs would have better players coming in when rec players decide to enter club soccer and associations would be better off when it came to liabilities because they coaches were officially trained in risk management, etc.
     
  25. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    To put this in perspective, youth players number about 20 million. USYSA claims only 2.2 million players. AYSO claims less than a third of that number. USYSA recommends that every coach of a U18 or higher team be fully licensed (A license, National Keeper, and Fitness) as if that was realistic. How many A license--all your tickets punched--coaches do you think the 78 US DA clubs have? I think a better goal would be to get an A license DOC at every club. The USA has 9,000 clubs according to FIFA.
     

Share This Page