Attitude, effort, intensity, aggression

My high school team is like this almost every year. They're a bunch of nice kids, well-intentioned, (largely) well-raised, caring and kind to a fault; sometimes I swear they don't realize it's okay to beat their opponent to a ball. We largely solved that problem this past year for the first time (we'll see if it sticks come next year) in three ways.

First, I introduced several of them to rondos where I focused more on the defenders in the middle than the offensive players on the outside. Usually the kids in the middle viewed it as "punishment" and just ran around haphazard until someone kicked the ball away. I actually got in the rondo with them and showed them myself exactly how I wanted things done. That worked because the kids were vaguely my size and roughly at the same level of athleticism. It also worked because I could remind them that, "if I can do it at over 40, you can do it in your teens!" Once they started to nick the ball away from their teammates on defense the level of competition on both offense and defense went up and that translated to the games. It wasn't a 100% success, but it was a start.

Second, they never got a negative review for positive effort - we might offer alternatives but good effort always got an audible response, either verbally or clapping on the effort. At first some of the kids laughed at my "good idea!" or "nice look!" or the like, but slowly it helped build their confidence to try things where success wasn't guaranteed - that can be one of the major inhibitors of proper intensity.

Third, and this really was the capstone, we had a few kids who would take things on themselves. Some of the kids had to actually see one of their own doing the things we were talking about and either succeeding or getting praised for having the right idea before they were willing to get in and do it themselves. No amount of coaching, prodding, or praising of their work was going to do it, but seeing another kid do it was the key that unlocked it. I think doubly so because they weren't the "coach's kid" types which made them all the more relatable.

I think @elessar78 has largely the right idea, but I do think that there's a certain aspect beyond technical ability that can take kids and teams to another level. Or as an old coach of mine would say, "effort is a skill all its own".

 

Tough question to answer without seeing your team play.

Is this your first time coaching girls? The mental aspect is different than coaching boys.

Is their behavior on match day different than in training sessions?

Is the problem with the entire team or just with some individuals?

Are you making training competitive? As in Anson Dorrance's competitive cauldron approach.

In answer to your question, I have coached girls. Some of the girls were reluctant to compete to win. I reinforced the positive efforts for the more timid to learn from. I eliminated fear of failure by making positive comments about effort, not results. What surprised me was that, after I taught them that it was alright to compete to win during training, I also had to teach them that it was alright to compete to win during matches against other teams.

I never had a situation where everyone on the team was reluctant to play to win.

There could be many other reasons for the problem, but I think the typical socialization baloney where girls are taught to underachieve is the culprit.

 

I found that a high pressure zone defense bonds the team and boosts confidence in themselves and confidence in their teammates. I used a 433 with the forward line being the line of confrontation. I also tasked the players to play multiple positions. It took several matches to jell, but, after it did, it excited the team like nothing else did. That enthusiasm from successfully winning the ball carried over into all moments of the game. When they lost the ball, they were eager to win it back instead of remorseful.

 

A quick question, you mention indoor - is this 6-a-side or something else? If it is, one reason I've found in our kids for losing aggression is when the run of play goes against them - indoor is a very momentum-driven game and can be almost frenetic if you don't learn to control it. If that is indeed the case I might suggest they work on slowing things down when the run of play is against them - possess more, more hold up play, etc. It gives both the mind and the body a chance to reset and also takes the edge off of your competition. It also translates well to the outdoor game which tends to have a slightly slower pace.

Note: I'm not talking about the tiquitaca "pass the ball for the sake of passing the ball" idea, but rather being far more patient in possession and using hold-up play to generate a different flow. Indoor can lend itself to lots of "if I squeeze this pass in just right it'll be amazing!" sequences, and when the run of play is against you those tend not to come off - instead, play sure passes, hold the ball up (using your body as a shield) and be patient and probe rather than slash. Eventually the defense will make a mistake and then you can capitalize. At worst you'll have taken the sting out of the opposition and given your team some positive momentum to build from.

If it's not the indoor I'm thinking of, then ignore all of the above.

 

I've heard plenty of complaints about modeling with younger kids due to differences in physique and ability - in my case with high school kids, many of them are close to as big as they're going to get so that's not an issue. I do get that you have to be smart about modeling on a 40 year old body what you want a 6 year old to do, but if you're coaching 6 year olds, IMO, you should be able to model a decent approximation of what it should look like for them.

For my kids, and my ability level, I'll often see them do a better job than I do once they internalize what I've shown. I think I'd rather have it that way - they're the ones on the field, after all. And if a guy like Pep can model for his players and then be amazed at what they do, a guy like me can do it too...

 

The only thing I have to say about modeling is that researchers say that children learn better when the demonstrator is someone their own age rather than an adult. So the U-Littles coaches' first choice for modeling should be one of the players rather than the coach. Something to keep in mind.

I have spoke against coaches playing against young kids before, but that was because of the physical mismatch not providing useful experience for the kids and because the coach is stepping out of his authority figure role into a peer role. Takes social sophistication and a lot of trust to work well. Especially with girls, this can end up reinforcing intentional underachievement.

One form of modeling I have read about but never done, is a coach assuming a player's spot and having the player shadow him during play for some minutes. This is in particular a great way to improve an older 11v11 player's decision making and positioning. In fact it is I suspect the "best" coaching method for it, but I have never seen it used.

 

Typical men.. always looking answer on technical way Sorry to be so rude. If I understand right, u were asking why they play so different in games, that intension or aggression, not the same what u see in practice?

Have you think what is the mental side on this thing? Aggression is needed if you want to win one on one situations. U need that aggression to get ball to your team sometimes. Otherwise u run after your opponent and the ball. If there is no aggression on use on games, there is always some mental issue under the surface. Usually it is fear. I do mental training with teams, so we talk usually that emotional side. Ask your players what are "those thing", why they don't use that aggression or intensity on games, that u can see on practice. And if they feel free to answer they will. If not, u have done something wrong and they don't trust u or the group. If they answer, do not say don't think like that or that kind of thinking won't help anything. They need to say out loud what they think other wise they won't change their style easily. U can dive under the surface if you are willing to listen what they have on their minds.

-Sami

 

Interesting comments, Sami. I have attended some soccer coaching classes and demonstrations here and no one tells coaches to listen to players. The focus is on training tactics and technique. The physical aspect is ignored. A very simple view of the mental aspect is presented where the coach encourages the players by talking to them.

That is not to say that no US soccer coaches listen to players. Listening is an important communication skill and most coaches have it and use it, even if they don't talk about it.

I have a couple of books on coaching the mental aspects by sports psychologists, but haven't really got any information from soccer coaches, except their view of what to say and how to say it.

As an aside, I also have a couple of books on athlete development, but that too is considered by soccer coaches a separate field--"strength and conditioning" coaches is what we call them here in the US. Most soccer coaches consider them specialists, when in fact they are generalists and could be coaching any sport.

 

Hmm.. that is same problem here. They don't teach coaches to how to talk and listen players, only those technical issues.. I try to change that culture here in Finland. Really big job, it goes thru hole culture... So no worries !
Most of the problems on sports comes out from interaction. Teams, clubs ect.. every level.. and they won't teach any of that to the people who work in sports. That is so fool. Like I say.. too much technical thinkers
Talking of emotions is hard job. You really got to know what are u doing. Many times it is enough to listen what they fear or what makes them angry I don't have to teach them what to do with that emotion. Everybody have their own way to handle emotions and if you learn to talk emotions in group, it makes everything easier, including life it self

-Sami

 

rca2..

Sometimes "it" is the most big problem of those books. Writers are psychologist. They learn lots of theory and statistics on university, nothing of their own emotions. If u don't know your emotions, how can u help someone with theirs ? I have talk few psychologist here in Finland, who try to help our pro athletics. Quite theoretical persons... too much of that. Talking with them, feels like u are talking to a statue
Best books I have read are talking about analytical psychotherapy aspect of human.. Good luck with that, it goes quite deep in to your soul !

 

One of the biggest gains I made this past year was the use of video to go over in-game moments. Within those gains some of the most long-lasting were when I could stop the video and ask, "why did you do that?" The trick is asking to learn what was going on in his or her head rather than accusing them of not seeing the "right" answer - what's "obvious" on video or on the sidelines might not even be visible on the field.

If their response was downright wrong that provides an obvious teaching moment. If it was just sub-optimal then we discuss (and I do mean discuss - it's bi-directional, not just me lecturing them) what other options I can see. I prefer to do this in a team setting rather than 1-on-1 because then everyone gets to learn; it's "safe" because everyone gets "called out" eventually and nobody gets beaten up.

Finally, this exercise also helps to learn what's going on in their heads. Is X afraid to make a mistake? Is Y afraid of contact? Does Z not trust his teammates? Some kids this is harder for than others, but with a little repetition they learn to place themselves back in the situation.

Maybe this won't work for you, but perhaps the concept might be something you could adapt.

 

Hello Peter !

In my view, you are doing good work ! Mental side in sports is usually only side order, it should be main course. It is most important thing. Without good mental health, good skills won´t help you to become great player.

-Sami