Think about this in a general sense. If you design an exercise that rewards penetration, what mentality are you promoting? If you design an exercise that rewards the completion of a great number of repetitions (juggles, passes, etc.) what mentality are you promoting? To promote adaption, the exercise must be challenging yet not impossible to execute. Too easy training is as bad as too hard training. There is a proper time during the development cycle to focus on perfection in execution, but it is not during the fundamental stage. During the fundamental stage, coaches should focus on perfection of technique--which means a few quality touches not large numbers of repetitions (which often leads to fatigue and poor technique). Not the perfection of tactical execution.
Good points rca2. In my case I'm dealing with high school kids of widely varying playing backgrounds. Some kids are still working on the U5 basics, some kids are also playing on elite-level club teams; most are somewhere in between. We're making tremendous progress on techniques even for the real beginners, it's keeping that training together under sub-optimal situations that we're having issues with this year. These kids have, by and large, had very sheltered, very privileged lives; helping them learn to be hungry and determined and to maintain their heads when things aren't just so is turning out to be a challenge.
A sloppy win by my 04 girls team yesterday. It was a dry 85+ degree day on a turf field. We had to call up 3 girls from the 05 team due to injury and with that we only had 2 subs. A few of the girls ran a 5k charity race in memory of a friend earlier in the day. We played hard and decent soccer the first 25 minutes. We went up 1-0. Our sub rules don't allow for re-entry in the first half (35 minute halves). I have a girl who has knee issues and had to sub her off at about 15 minutes in. She is fast and is a difference maker when she plays. Subbed another girl about 5 minutes later. Other girls on the field were asking to sub off, but I couldn't. Tried to get them some water during a restart. We play a 4-4-2 for the half. Half ends with us up 1-0. The last 5 minutes of the half was us just trying to keep the ball in front of us. Possession wasn't great, but we won balls when we needed. We start the 2nd half in a 4-2-3-1. Ref said she would give us a water break about half way through. Could have used that in the 1st half!!! We break through and score about 10 minutes in with our lone striker dribbling through their defense and burying a shot past their keeper. We park the bus (which I haven't really done to this extent before). But we were trying to survive. It wasn't a beautiful game, but the other team was in a simialr situation. They had 5 subs, but they were cooked from the heat too. I was encouraging/yelling/willing the girsl to suck it up and find some extra energy. I'm usually pretty mellow, but this game needed it. We've been really focusing on possession play and attacking patterns the first half of the season. We looked good, but lost more than we won. Last week at practice we worked on "competing" and what it takes to win. As much as possession soccer is important, I think that kids need to also be pushed to compete to win. I liked our fire and am excited to see if we can put it all together now as we play the last 5 weeks of the season.
My team, a group of U14 travel boys has stopped scoring. Part of this is personnel, as we have been missing some of our stronger players for matches. Our initial issue was pretty clear, we were having problems transitioning from possession at midfield to possession in the offensive third and weren't generating many quality scoring opportunities. Now it has become mental, and I think everyone is pressing a bit. Now we are hitting more than our fair share of posts and cross bars. We are still doing ok for the season as our defense is pretty stout, but I am wracking my brain a bit to work out the offensive kinks.
this week is my final week of the season, and it's making me wonder: how long do your rec seasons run at your clubs? i've been the "academy coach" for our small rec league. i coach our 14Us on monday, 8Us on wed, and 10Us on fri. that makes for a busy week, but the season has flown by. i can't say that i've made as much progress with my players as i would have liked to. our season only runs 6 weeks. is that shorter than most rec programs? i can't see going shorter than that, but what's average? longer serving board members say parents here will complain if we start before labor day and go later into fall breaks. same for the spring. we can't start before spring break, and they complain if we go later into graduations and memorial day.
Our Fall seasons used to be 10 weeks. Start last weekend in August, so practice in the week leading up to that, no games Labor Day weekend, practice up to the coach on that Monday, no games Columbus Day weekend, finish with parents vs kids last weekend in October. 7 games, 1 parents vs kids, 2 weeks of practice with no games. Spring was 9 or 10, depending on Easter. Early Easter we'd start practices the week after, always had off for Memorial Day and ended the weekend our public schools system ended. We did 8 weeks straight through last spring and this fall - lack of volunteers led to a tighter schedule.
We usually have gone 8 weeks of games as well with a bonus weekend like a tournament or round robin with other local clubs thrown in at the end depending on the state of things. Fall we usually end around Halloween (with a break for Columbus weekend) and in the Spring just before Memorial Day (with a break for Easter). With our kids in school until the end of June we experimented this past year running into June and starting later (End of April). We had some mixed results.
Our season opens in August and runs through end of October (with some off weekends). We have a tourney just after the season as well, first weekend of November (of course the tourney is optional...it just worked with our schedule this season). We usually start practicing just after July 4. This is for a premier/competitive team. The rec leagues have certain dates they are allowed to start practicing, etc. But the season goes about the same length of time - I think they play end of August through October, pretty much. I believe the rec league plays 7 games and then they have an end of season tourney. Competitive we play 8 league games and tourneys are up to us (we always play 2, sometimes more).
Our rec season for 1st-HS is 8 games. We start the 2nd weekend after school starts and run through the 1st or 2nd weekend in November We play the games over 7 weekends so each team gets at least 1 Sunday game. For Kindergarten the fall season is 7 games.
Man, I feel like I'm on the front lines of "everything that's wrong with US Soccer". After Twellman's (nothing new) rant people are latching on to his video and running their mouths like they know something. Funny, before I felt like I was on the front lines of something else—trying to change the course of soccer in America. Yeah, I coach in the pay to play system. I didn't make the system. While I do get paid, I'm not getting rich off of it. It's probably a break even proposition for me. Our club directors probably make $30K annually, but the rank and file coaches make a fraction of that.
nobody is objecting to coaches being paid. if anything, i think most informed soccer people realize that paid coaches are more likely to do a better job. the problem with pay-for-play is the kids who can't afford the fees, travel, etc. who fall through the cracks. to get "found" in soccer, you have to play club, and that's outrageously expensive in a lot of areas. some areas don't even have legit clubs where good players could even get noticed if they could afford to play. contrast that with basketball: you can play basketball all through school and if you're a good high school player, you're going get scouted. all that basketball is free through schools for the most part. all you need are sneakers, and you can play. sure, playing on a big time aau team would increase your exposure, but basketball it's not required like club soccer is. they don't have the barriers to entry that soccer has that result in poor kids never having a chance to be found by the scouts.
Taylor Twellman mentioned it, our parents of the players in our league mention it and I wonder what everyone's take is on pay-to-play. Maybe we can gather some useful insight to take back to our clubs to determine the proper value players and parents alike are receiving. Are you willing to share some facts about the real costs of your league? In particular I'm interested in what salaried staff and coaches are paid along with fixed costs for insurance, fields/maintenance/equipment, refs, etc. Even if you're not willing to share real numbers, just percentage of budget vs revenue would be helpful. Club: Blitzz FC in Bozeman '05 and older Academy: $1,200 annually per player Breaks down as $495 (twice annually) plus $60 Club Registration and $150 for uniforms (2x jerseys, shorts, socks) '06-'08 Youth Academy: From $671 - $941 annually per player Breaks down as '08: $275.00 (twice annually) plus $60 Club Registration, $24 for training jerseys and $37 for uniforms '07 is $380.00 (twice annually) '06: is $410.00 (twice annually) Adding in revenue from rec league, futsal, tournament, and camps the league generates north of $1MM dollars annually. I'm not sure what our expenses are for each line item but I'm assuming some things here.... So where does $1MM+ dollars of annual revenue go? Insurance: I'm not sure what type of insurance Blitzz carries but I would imagine those costs are offset by money from MYSA and USSF. Salaries: Five full-time salaried employees. Can't imagine their combined salaries would top $200k Coaches/Travel: Not sure what coaches get paid or how much. I do know that many coaches fill that role for multiple teams. Blitzz does cover mileage, lodging and a daily stipend for travel tournaments. As an assistant coach for the '08 boys I am not being paid a "salary" and the head coach said the same thing. Fields/Maintenance: We had no fields this fall (nor any discount to parents reflective of that fact). Can't imagine these costs are very high when you consider how inexpensive baseball, football, camps, etc are in comparison to Blitzz Refs: Primarily youth refs and they are likely paid $10-$15/game. In tournament play I'm assuming refs are paid (at least partially) from revenue generated from entry fees. Equipment: Nets, balls, cones, pinnies. If Blitzz wanted I'm sure they could get sponsors to help offset these costs. Regardless, they can't add up to much in the big picture. Scholarships: Some players don't pay full fees I'm not a financial wizard but I can't see how these costs come anywhere near the annual revenue Blitzz generates. Perhaps there are other costs and if so, they're likely administrative born out of bloat more than necessity. As for paid coaches, what would be a reasonable expectation, perhaps $25/hour? Coaching about 4.5 hours practice/wk plus perhaps 3 hours of game time weekly on average. So 7.5 hours per week times 8 weeks times 14 coaches = $21,000. Even if you upped the average hourly rate to $40 and number of coaches to 20 and hours per week to 15 = $96,000. Can you fill in the following for your clubs: Fees by birth year: Other revenue streams: Expenses: Insurance Salaries Coaches/Travel Fields/Maintenance Equipment Refs Scholarships Other
I just watched the clip of Twellman's rant. Other than he said "pay to play" once, it had nothing to do with you. Knowledgeable people don't like pay to play because the source of funding is the parents and clubs compete with one another to put together a program attractive to parents who don't know anything about youth development, but they can see a scoreboard and track match results. The pressure of selling training to parents distorts youth development into something that is more concerned about team development than player development. That is a real problem at the fundamental level and the early teen levels. What I would like to see is no organized teams, no leagues, no tournaments, and no travel required before soccer age U14 (the stage introducing team tactics). I don't think any circumstances justify those things as good for player development before then. The problem is that if a club were to change it's format, it would lose all its players. A compromise is to let parents have their adult style competitions for kids and provide the real training in fundamentals in separate sessions run by qualified coaches. Like most compromises it truly satisfies neither purpose.
@PirateCaptain The problem is not that things cost money, but rather the problem is who pays and for what. We already have too few qualified coaches at the fundamental stage without asking them to cut their wages or coach for free. From a player development perspective, training, regardless of who pays for it, is wasted on players who don't play or practice outside of contact time with the coach. Sadly that is the vast majority of players.
Not sure if it's everywhere but in my state association: ODP is free (except for the travel, I believe) and no one gets cut. Maybe a way to cut through the cost issue. Not sure if that's entirely accurate about basketball—AAU is an even bigger, more corrupt behemoth than youth soccer. In some cases, I think the barriers to entry are brought down by some questionable operators—play for my AAU team and if you get recruited I get a backpack full of cash (from school or Adidas).
I'm interested in hearing coaches' viewpoints on the failure to qualify. I think that focusing on pay to play overlooks the larger (and, in my opinion, accurate) point that Twellman made in his rant. A failure of this magnitude requires a very critical look at the current program. In the last decade, a lot of time and money went into executing the plan devised by U.S. Soccer and here we are. Rather than making this about club fees, parents and coaches need to work together to address some issues or things won't get better anytime soon.
Regardless of what you identify as the problem I'm really hoping to gather some info from others so that I can share it with parents here in my town that are fed up with the one and only option they have. I'd actually like to consider starting a program based around the principles you suggested in your previous post. Forget about the games, or just allow the kids to play the rec league for a hundred bucks but in the meantime offer them meaningful time on the ball with peers and coaches that actually know what they're doing. I'm considering approaching anywhere from 5-10 coaches to form a training group that would allow players to develop faster and eliminate the costs parents incur with fees, travel, gear etc. If our focus was on elementary kids that could still get some fun out of rec league games for $100/season and we charged parents $100/player and we had 30 - 50 players we'd be off and running. Now parents would have a choice of spending anywhere from $100 - $200 for a season vs. what is realistically $500 minimum per season after travel, lodging, food, jerseys, etc)
My pay to play club costs: tuition: $2500 (included: ten months, indoor league and indoor training 2x per week for 5 months of winter, 4 tournaments, professional licensed coaching) uniform kit: $250 travel to tournaments (4 per year): $300 for hotel, $200 for gas for the weekend, $200 for food. local travel club costs: tuition: $100 per season uniform: $100 no tournaments, no indoor optional: Indoor training would be: $200 for twice a week for 10 weeks. Indoor league would be: $100 for 10 weeks. coaching: hit or miss, could be licensed with experience but unlikely. Call it $6,000 per year for p2p club vs $1000 per year for travel soccer. Really if you cut out the tournaments then it would be much less expensive.
Counterintuitively, the future may not be as bleak as Twellman makes it. Currently, we have more players in top academies. Places like Chelsea, Barca, Real, Dortmund, Arsenal, Manchester United. We also have the US Development Academies and MLS academies going. In 2008 a lot of these things were just getting rolling. I believe Columbus Crew recruited the head of Valencia FC's academy to be their academy director. So thing may not be as bleak. Coaching education, is not where it needs to be. I was talking to a German coach recently. Everything up to you B-license is basically free. their federation hosts regular lectures. They have a ridiculous website for coaches from U4 to U35: https://www.dfb.de/trainer/d-juniorin/artikel/online-blaetterfunktionen-aller-info-abende-634/ response to a question about the German system: Inside the talent development program they can and do. The coaches of the DFB bases, all-state teams and youth national teams are bound to the DFB philosophy, tactical systems, etc. For club soccer they can't force coaches to play their way, but you are forced to have higher DFB licenses to coach in the high level youth leagues. To get your academy licensed you also have to employ coaches with high DFB licenses. And of course they teach their philosophy with the licenses. For the lower leagues and younger kids they can't really force anything. But they invest heavily in coaches education at the grassroots level. For example you can get free seminars for your coaches at your club and they do a demonstration twice yearly at every DFB Base, you can find all of them here: DFB Infoabend Licenses are really cheap and clubs get paid a small amount every year for every coach with B License or above they have. So especially the B License is basically free, because after 2 or 3 years your club got the whole money back they paid for your license.
Interesting. I'm not as bullish on the DA. It has geographical limits and is insulated from outside competition, which I believe will lead to some complacency. Throw in the fact that the MLS teams and the non-MLS teams have different agendas and I don't think it comes close to fulfilling its mission in its current form.
Is it like what they have in Spain or Germany? Probably not. But it's a step in the right direction. Way better than what we had before.
The DA is a step sort of in the right direction. In regards to the level of coaches and training. However, most DA programs recruit talent from smaller local clubs, and therefore have not built anything. The biggest thing with the DA is that USSF said "X club is a DA club". That club did not earn it. There should be regional competitions all the way down to each state level. Scrap ODP(it is a cancer and money grab, has been for 30 years), ECNL, NPL, etc. Each route is trying to get a piece of their pie and be the best option. It waters down the entire pool and program. Let the best teams in each state association (for example, Florida has 4 regions, so say top team from each one) be in the DA. And so forth from other areas. All clubs can compete, and they have earned the right to do it based on merit vs money.
There were requirements that had to be met to be designated DA. I don't think it was just by royal proclamation.
Of course. I’m not implying that these clubs didn’t meat any standards. The point I was attempting to make is that they didn’t earn it based on merit. The clubs with the most money have DA. They have paid coaches with A or B licenses. Not saying those folks haven’t paid their dues, as lots have. If the incentive of earning a place among the elite based on merit was in place, we could be further along as a nation in this sport. I’m not attempting to state that the DA doesn’t have great players, but that it could be better and hopefully will be in the future.