I'm a coach that loves to learn. Here is what seems to be the options out there: Sign up for the next license level Pros: Usually good courses Cons: Not offered often enough, expensive and too time consuming Read books Pros: Good info, can read at my own pace Cons: Not dynamic, not always "real world", can't really see how drills or philosophies spill over onto the field Videos (online or purchased) Pros: get to see the drills in action. Can watch at your own pace Cons: Like the books, not dynamic enough This forum - Pros - good interaction, good insight. real life examples Cons: Not dynamic and can't "see it." I don't want to sign up for a new license level. I really don't care what my license level is. And I'm not able to commit to full weekends to be in a class. Is anybody out there doing in-person coaching forums? Where coaches tell other coaches what their "secret sauce" is? If as a whole, we all want to develop better players in this country, we need to start helping each other. Aside from coaches within the same club meeting with a DOC, is there any kind of inter-club coach forum out there? (I know there is an annual conference for most state associations, but I'm looking for something a bit more informal). Maybe I'll look to put something together.
Good idea. People meet up for just about any interest: photography, hiking, painting, books, cooking, etc. Why not coaching. USSF runs a formal program of seminars for A license holders, but otherwise USSF is really not into coaching education. The individuals who do the coaching education for NSCAA and the state youth organizations probably do get involved in mentoring and informal groups, but the few I know about are very busy people. That may be typical. Probably the best bet is to try holding informal meetings for your club's coaches to share experiences. Coffee shop roundtables would work. If you can't get a group going, you might try to develop an experienced coach as a mentor. Someone you think you can learn something from. You can learn a lot from just watching another coach'es training sessions. You just have to adapt what they are doing into something appropriate for your group. But then adapting is what coaching is all about. The more you coach the less concerned you will probably get about selecting drills. How you coach an exercise is more important to development than the exercise itself. I read about a U10 coach that used 3v3 SSGs exclusively for everything, very successfully. I believe it was an article in the NSCAA's magazine years ago. I don't think I could be effective to that extreme, but the point is that you can cover a lot of fundamentals in a 3v3 SSG. Coaching methods and coaching points for teaching specific fundamentals interests me more than drills. Like teaching a person how to fish, giving a coach a drill is not as effective as teaching the coach how to adapt a drill to his purposes.
I have my "bread and butter" drills that I can adapt coaching points for. But, I don't like things to be stale for my players. Repetition is great. Until it isn't anymore. I try to check out other practices when I can. I love to watch teams warm up before a game. But I don't talk to coaches much about what they do during a game to change things up. How do you tell your teams when to press and when to back off? How do you tell them to realize that the left side of the defense is weak and to take advantage of it? (Hopefully you teach them during training to think about these things. But what are the cues they should look for and how do you make sure the team is on the same page. Not looking for answers here, just giving hypothetical ideas on the things that I think about).
Assuming you are referring to a zone press rather than immediate pressure during a transition to defense. Think where to press, not when. It is not the same. Think spatially, not temporally. As to how to tell them, don't. If youth, show them with shadow play. If juniors, it is quicker to show them with a diagram.
I don't read books on soccer. But everyone I know sends me books on soccer I like to watch good teams practice. Coaches like to talk after practice. Have a question ask them. Most important thing for any coach is steal what you like from others. On licences what licences do you have? Coaches make mistakes dealing with players even if they were players themselves. You will make less mistakes if you get a licences. I think life experience dealing with people is important. All players are people and not all people are the same. Faster you can read the person the faster you could reach them. You can destroy a player by saying the wrong thing at the wrong time be careful not to do that.
No one uses shadow play any more. But I did I like it. I like functional coaching through demonstration. It is very hard to transition to defense with out putting immediate pressure on the opponent with the ball immediately after he gets the ball. You have to slow down their attack. When you have the ball your support players have to move to cover any spaces the opponent could use to attack you before you lose the ball not after you lose the ball. Hard to counter attack you if you do that. I have always been afraid of an opponents counter attack. Don't give up a goal on a counter and play an organized defense. It was very hard for an opponent to beat us.
I coach u12 girls. I currently have the USSF E license. I also have AYSO u6, u8, u10, u12, intermediate and advanced. These courses have been from a few hours on a weekend (u6-u10) to 2 days long (e and advanced weed both Friday night and 8 hours on Saturday and Sunday). I'd get my "d" license, but it's a 2 weekend course seperate by 6 months. I work a "real" job and when I'm not coaching on a weekend, I like to hang with my family. I don't need a "d" to get a raise or a promotion. But I like the additional education.
Cruyff made the same point, but in different words. (I think. He spoke in Dutch and I was listening to a translator.) He said something like the way you attack is also defense, which I took to mean shape. He was explaining the 433 morphing into a 343 (diamond midfield) while in possession. I was used to a CB moving to a CM position. His diagram had the LB moving to a LM position higher than the holding mid. The impression I had was that he believed in always controlling the center of the field.
I'd also like to hear how coaches structure their season. How they build from one practice to the next. Do they see something in a game and put that into their next practice session. Or do they stick to their original plan. How do they feel about tournaments? Why do they pick the ones they do to play in? How many? Why? What do you tell your teams to do at home? Do you hold them accountable? Do you have skills "standards" for different age groups? All of the stuff that you could talk about over a chalk board, a few beers and a grass field once in a while.
My practice plans I started the next plan right after games and right after the end of my practice while I was still on the field. In the Plan was any weakness I saw in games or practice. I would constantly change the plan and try to make it better. I like working on the practice plan it was fun. Funny thing now that I retired from coaching. I cant get myself to do it anymore. At the next practice I never did the plan from beginning to end. I would change it on the practice field to add something I saw during the practice. I liked players who could play more then one position I liked versitle players. So I could make moves in games with out making substitutions that came in handy in adult games to get better individual match ups. I only made subs to Improve the team. Not to give players playing time or fresh legs I hated that term. Scorers was a different story. I believe you need 2 true strikers and one comming off the bench to get enough goals to win games. I think you need one player in the midfield who has it in him to always be up when the ball is up so he can score. No matter where you put him. He could get lost by the opponents defense. I think your defensive mid has to be a great tackler and he should have a shot from far out. He should get at least two or three shots a game besides doing the other things he needs to do in a game. I thing you keeper should be a sweeper keeper not just a keeper to cut off through passes you have in a game. I think a least two backs a wing back and one of the center back should over lap and attack in games but not both at the same time and be dangerous or don't do it at all until he is dangerous on attack. Keeper try not to goal kick or punt. Try to throw or do half volley destribute into space or pass it takes less time.
On tournaments no tournaments at the beginning of the season. Your not ready to do well in them. Want to play at the beginning of the season. Practice at least 2 months before the start of the season to do well in them. Tournament is not a vacation for the family.
Topics I would like to hear about are-- What is age appropriate and how does it change over the years? What are the attributes of the ideal player we should be creating? I see a lot of discussion about what style of play and system of play we should have, but the focus of player development should be on the type of player we are trying to develop. We should be developing players who are versatile, able to play any style and multiple positions. A player's position on a team should change as players move in and out of different groups of players and systems change. One evolving trend I see coming at the highest level is hybrid systems where teams shift their organization through a set of temporary systems constantly as circumstances change. This requires more vision, more discipline, more focus and more versatility.
That is an interesting question that I have been playing with in my head. First night of tryouts is tonight. First actual exposure to the new USSF birth year adjustment. U-12 division just got 5 months younger across the board. Not sure how much that will impact, but I am curious to see if it is noticeable to have to adjust practices slightly backward to the 'new' age group.
My ultimate vision for this would be coaches helping other coaches. Thereby helping the kids we coach to become better players. Around here, there is so much bad blood between coaches. Player poaching, crappy tactics to win games, etc. And then you have DOCs who were promoted that have grudges against other coaches. It seems like every club around here has had some sort of a lawsuit where a coach sues a club or a club sues a coach.
I used to coach based I saw at our game that weekend. But the problem is that you're solving last week's problem. It's a very reactive way to coach. Over time, I've developed beliefs on what skills a player should have relative to their "soccer age". I plan out the whole year based on what I believe they should know by the end of the year. There's a temptation to cover everything, so don't. This is an area I believe the US Soccer curriculum is good for—they have a matrix, by age, on what players should know. Do I agree with it completely? I agree with a lot of it and it's just as good a list as any out there. If I see something that I feel they have missed, then I add that (or take away something they are not ready for). Tryouts this year were interesting fielding A, B, and C teams (and sometimes D). As probably are ahead 6-12 months of soccer age. Bs are at age, but there is a tendency to call them "deficient" when they are probably where they should be age wise. Cs are 6-18 months behind. Ds Are 12+ months behind. Generally. We held them accountable this winter with "touches" worksheets. They had to turn in a touches sheet each week. Some kids did the minimum. Some kids crushed it—tens of thousands of touches in a month. One kid got like 200K touches in one month. Then we give a small prize. We play four tournaments a year, but I wish it was only 2. I like your ideas of having informal, non-license oriented coaching lessons. I mentioned similar things like having a weekly coaching education session.
I'm the same way. I think this is something a lot of coaches don't do enough of—they have a bad practice/good practice/awesome practice and they don't review it and refine it. I think this is why having a limited set of drills and practices is good— you can refine and throw away things about it that didn't work. Also to improve it if it didn't go very well.
US Club Soccer has a new coaching education course called LaLiga Formation Methodology, where LaLiga methodology advisors teach 2.5 day courses throughout the States. Full disclaimer: I work for US Club and I attended a recent course in California, but can honestly - and as objectively as possible - say that these LaLiga guys really share a lot of valuable information and tips. There are a couple courses coming up in the D.C. area (July 29-31) and Chicago (Aug. 5-7). Feel free to take a look, and reply if you have any questions.
Old thread, I know, but I'm combing through trying to pick up a few things. Can you go into this a little more? Are you suggesting that the attack some what plays behind the ball while moving forward. I think this is relevant to a thread I recently started. I also see RCA's comment about the morphing of formation from 433 to 343 but I'm not sure how to apply it.
Old, but a good thread to bump. On "morphing" what I was referring to was not merely pushing players forward but teaching separate systems of play for different phases of the game. This is my understanding of what is done at a very few top professional clubs. What has been typical since the days long ago of the 424, players switch lines during the flow of play to adjust to circumstance. We went through a couple of generations of very rigid 442 systems being popular so the typical player didn't grow up switching between lines in a 424 system. Fewer players grew up playing small sided "street soccer" so less experience with free-form play. To explain. Think of a team as being composed of 3 lines rather than 10 field players. The number of players in the lines can vary and which players are in a line at any given time can vary, but there is always 3 lines. Each line has its own role. The backs position against attacks, the forwards position for attacks, the midfielders position to link the other two lines together as a team. When defending it helps to have more players protecting the goal. When attacking it helps to have more players attacking the opponent's goal. A simple system for novice players is pretty rigid with little interchange between lines. The more experience and higher the level, the more flexibility and movement between lines. In a 424 for instance, backs became additional midfielders when in possession and forwards became additional midfielders when out of possession. In the context of the classic Dutch 433, the team shifted to a 343 shape when in possession by means of the LB moving to a LM position in a diamond midfield. Brazil's original 433 system shifted to a 442 out of possession by the LW dropping into the LM position of a 4 man midfield line.
My mistake. I was thinking of a later comment in the context of player development. The comment you referenced was about pushing a player forward (from back to midfield lines) in the attack.
Yes, and specifically I was trying to draw a correlation between the Attack to Defend thread I started. I thought nicklaino's post was relevant to that in some way. Support to defend when in possession, but how? Does opening up not always mean forward?
I use "opening up" and "pushing forward" to refer to two different concepts. By "opening up" I mean for the team shape, on transition to attack, to expand. Not so much that they go out of supporting distance, but to enlarge the area that the opponent has to defend. This forces the opponent to expand and makes the gaps larger. The expansion is in all directions appropriate for the circumstances. For instance if a back has won the ball, he should not be the last field player. So another back may have to drop back to provide supporting cover if the ball is lost. The expansion is also sideways. So it is not just everyone charging up field. For example, typically the keeper after making a save will be taught to distribute away from the direction that the attack came. So if the attack came from his left, he would distribute to his right. The thought being that the open space would be found on his right. That means most of the players would be on the wrong side of the field to support the attack, so some of them need to move into space to support the right side. By "pushing forward [into the attack]" I am referring to someone switching lines, moving from the back line into the midfield line or midfield line to forward line. I also talk about "dropping back" referring to a forward switching to the midfield line or a midfielder switching to the back line. In summary I am talking about changing roles rather than just moving on the field. The most common cue for players switching to a different line is gaining or losing possession, but the game plan could have switches made on other cues. An obvious one would be reacting to a switch by your opponent. For instance the opponent may switch from 3 forwards to 1 forward, attempting to overload a different area of the field. Or the reverse could happen. The opponent could switch from 1 forward to 3 trying to overwhelm the back line. Hope that helped instead of making things muddier. One caution, other people may mean different things by the words. The game is the same everywhere, but not our words.