Aside from it being a longer class- what’s is actually taught during the higher licensed classes? Is it more technical? More tactical? More how to breakdown opponents? Video analysis? Player scouting? Other team scouting?
Tim, part of the problem is the constant changing of the materials. Overall USSF is keeping a tight control of all license course content. There shouldn't be much difference from one B course to another. From the website: "The B Course focuses on the principles of long-term player development and developing a team." USSF says that in the B Course "we cover everything." https://www.ussoccer.com/stories/20...de-long-term-development-of-players-and-teams
My understanding is: E is about coaching the individual player in the context of a team training session. D is about coaching a line of players in the context of a team training session. C is about coaching all the lines in the context of a team training session. So you naturally cover systems of play. Last year the E was about planning a session. D and C progressed from there in planning. Now they pushed back session planned from E. I don't know if it was pushed to D or all the way to C. Another change over the years is the age level associated with the license. Unless it changed again, E is to age 12, D is early teens, C is high school, college, and the DA (although B and A licenses are probably preferred).
Somewhat rhetorical but.... Why not include some aspects of coaching lines at the D and C levels too? Or put some info out there for coaches that don’t have the time or money to spend on the A and B to understand what US soccer wants coaches to know.
USSF courses are license testing rather than educational. You get material to prep for the test and get feedback from the instructors, but in the past it was primarily testing and evaluation. Now that may be changing. Supposedly the instructors now are going to observe candidates with their teams between the split sessions. I don't know how much mentoring they are going to do, but it has some real potential for learning. In the E the candidates work with lines, but have to demonstrate the ability to improve an individual player. The context may be the same. Just what is tested is different. Think of it this way. The coaching challenges increase in scale (individual, line, side) but the session exercises may look the same as far as format. For instance the final session exercise may be a full side (9v9 or 11v11). If someone cannot coach an individual, how would they coach a line or side? Keep in mind that people mostly learn to coach on the job. So if they can coach an individual, they get an E license and hopefully will continue to develop and come back for the D.
The old D, IMO, was about coaching up to 2 lines. There was emphasis in mine about using multiple lines. Definitely 2 lines in stage 3 and definitely 3 lines in stage 4. Stage 2 you could coach only one line.
The D is now still small sided, but about coaching a singular line of players. The C brings together 2 functional groups or lines. My guess would be that the B combines 3 lines, and the A would go into full sided team play. The C is oriented toward player development and the 6 tasks of a coach. It is my understanding that those continue into more depth as you progress through the pathway.