Who's ready for fall!?

Odds are she will be placed on a team that plays kick and run and she will get nothing out of it other than bad habits that some coach will end up having to break her of. On the other hand, if you volunteer to coach the team you will either be unable to influence how the team plays because you have zero practices or you will get them to play the right way but get hammered by teams that play kick and run. Good luck!

 

Hello Sunshine









but yeah - what he said

 

It's not that hard. You just show them in warmups what it means to dribble with small touches and tell them to do that and only that. No kicking, period. I think your daughter is like 3-4 or something, right? If so, they aren't going to be passing so they shouldn't be kicking the ball, full stop. Of course, the other team will be kicking the ball as hard as they can and, because that's a super effective way of winning games at that age and because your kids will be less than stellar at dribbling, you're likely to get pounded hard.

 

How old is your kid?

 

So, playing 4 v4? Not sure really bad habits will result. If some bad habits happen and she has fun, I don't see much of an issue. First step is soccer being fun. Then we can begin skills.

 

Yesterday. Adult game at 9:30 am. Three games for the U-12's in the afternoon.
Temperature for adult game started at 31 degrees and rose to a balmy 37. I had to pull goalkeeper duty as our regular guy was out of town. Still played a decent match. High line in an over 40 league and I can beat just about any striker to the ball. Post game beer was drank in a lake effect snow squall.

Dressed up in 4+ layers to coach the afternoon matches. Temps started in the high thirties and finished around 35 for the 5:00 game which was running 30 minutes late thanks to a dipshit ref.

Very disappointed in our A team's 3-0 loss. It was the definition of insanity as we kept trying to rush down the middle, bypass our midfielders (who did not do a good job of putting themselves in good spots to receive the balls). 0-3 result. Still digesting that result, but the bad part is three of the players who were causing the issues are the 'untouchables', the ones assured of a place on the A team based on tryouts back in July. They are now the weakest links in this group and frankly can benefit playing with the B group for a while.

Other two games went better. Our C team won 3-0. B group lost 2-1 but there at least we had positives aside from our finishing.

The outdoor game season is over for the A and B groups. C has one more game next Sunday. We may do a series of friendlies with another club next week to try to squeeze another game or two out of the fall.

Dreaded indoor starts October 31st.

 

I must add, I was very happy that my players took the suggestion. Every single one of them, 30+ U-12 players showed up to play ball in shorts in 35-40 degree temps. They were smart and brought blankets and jackets for the bench but they all played in shorts.

Pet peeve of mine when players show up to play matches in pants.

 

I thought your team was U11? Do you have "starters" and "reserves" at U11? And is this player you are referring to only playing as a CB at U11?

 

Amen, brother. My team parents make fun of me for my "no sweatpants" rule, but anyone who has tried to play soccer in sweatpants knows why they are banned. That said, I am OK with underarmour style leggings (which you can barely see with shorts and tall socks) and I'm even OK with the newer soccer-style sweat pants that are tight and very fitted from the calf down, at least for training. If it were cold enough, I might even be OK with them in a game. But old school sweat pants are banned for sure.

 

I don't know how y'all play in cold weather. I hated it when I was younger and I won't even show up if the temperature is under 50 anymore.

 

I know its not at me, but yeah, I'm not that way. My starting lineup is usually the first 7 that show up for warm ups. I

Wow. I love playing in the 80's and getting a good sweat, but damn, I feel like I can run forever when the temperature is in the 40's. Throw on some under armor or nike cold gear and you remain comfy for hours.

 

I've heard of using first to the field for warm ups as starters. Also heard of starting (and giving extra playing time to) the kids who show up to the most practices, the kids who work the hardest in practice and, of course, the kids who simply are the best players. In the end, I have found all of those approaches to be flawed:

Earliest to Warm-ups: I ask everyone to be there 30 minutes before kick off. Should the players who show up first for warm-ups get to start even if everyone ended up showing up on time? What about if some of the first to arrive missed the entire week of practice or goofed off in practice all week?

Practice Attendance: I believe that kids should play multiple sports, and that means they're sometimes going to miss my practices. If I then turn around and give them less playing time, then I really don't have my money where my mouth is, do I? What if kids are sick or injured, have a big test the next day, too much homework, their parents were just lazy or their car broke down? Am I supposed to be in the business of assessing which missed practices are OK and which aren't? I've taken to telling the parents that all team practices essentially are optional. You paid your money. If you want to come to practice and improve your game, that's up to you. Your reward for attending practice is getting better, not getting more playing time in games.

Working Hard in Practice: What if a kid works super hard in practice when he's there, but only attends two-thirds of practices and shows up late for the game? Some kids are just more focused than others at U10. I praise hard work to encourage it and, like attending practice, I believe that the reward for hard work is improvement, not additional playing time in games.

Best Players Start: I view my job as being to develop the players and make them better. The weaker players actually need playing time more than the better players, so it seems totally backwards and counter-productive to give them less playing time. How are they supposed to get better (much less catch up to the stronger players) if they are getting less playing time? And what if the best players are the ones missing practices and/or not working hard in practice? Am I really just rewarding them for being naturally talented? Seems to me that the only real reason to start and/or give more playing time to your best players is in an attempt to win the game. But my goal at ages below U13 is not to win games, it's to develop players and make them better.

In the end, I've decided that everyone should get the same number of starts and the same playing time at ages below U13 (i.e., developmental ages). That seems to stay truest to the developmental model and avoids the problems of having conflicts between the other four ways described above (such as a great player who doesn't work hard in practice or a player who works really hard but is constantly late to everything).

I also rotate everyone through every position. For example, I use three defenders in the first half of every game and a different three defenders in the second half of every game. If a kid isn't very good at a particular position, that's a reason for giving them MORE playing time at that position, not less.

If you have players who aren't good enough for the level your team is playing, then you shouldn't have picked them and the solution is to have them find another team next year. You're stuck with them this year, so you may as well develop them.

 

Speaking of developmental soccer, had a very frustrating game yesterday. I'm following a strict developmental model for my U10s. As mentioned above, everyone gets equal playing time and rotates through positions. No dedicated keeper (though a couple kids do get more playing time in goal, having expressed an interest in the position). I've never seen a high level game with a keeper who doesn't take goal kicks, so I think keepers should be the ones to take the goal kicks, even if they suck at it. First option should be a short goal kick if it is on because that allows the kids to play out of the back and move the ball up the field through the midfielders. There are more examples, but those are the biggies.

So yesterday we play one of the mega-clubs. You know, the guys who pride themselves on "development first" (or at least pride themselves on saying it). For starters, they were better than my team regardless of what style of soccer the teams played. They are just bigger, faster, stronger and more athletic than we are, and their skill is about the same as ours. I'm OK with all of that. I understand that the big clubs are going to have tryouts and roll out some high powered teams.

What I'm not OK with is that this team had four subs and kept its three best players on the field virtually all game, locked into their best positions. They had two really weak players, weaker than my weakest player. Those two kids played about 20 (out of 60) minutes each. After the first really weak player took a five minute shift, the coach yanked him and I heard the coach say to him "I can't leave you in the game if you are going to play like that."

They had a dedicated keeper who clearly trains as a keeper and played the entire game in goal. Kid was amazing in goal and had great form. Every time the keeper got the ball, he boomed a 40 yard punt. We started laying off him altogether and giving him the short roll to his defenders, but he just kept booming it. He, however, did NOT take their goal kicks. Goal kick duties were given to the giant defender who can (and does, every time) kick the ball past midfield, in the air. He never played it short once even after we started retreating our entire team into our own half to defend the long punt.

All of these "developmentally sound" tactics continued even as the score got to 0-6. We had our chances. Hit three point-blank shots right at the keeper, keeper made two top class saves and we hit a post and the crossbar. I think the fact that we kept almost scoring is what led the other coach to never take his foot off the gas. He seemed intent on not just winning, but shutting us out.

All that, and the coach was a "great" guy too. We were playing at their home field and they had ridiculous, pencil thin, light-yellow field lines that you could barely see from your knees. So I approached him during warmups and said I thought, in light of the absurd field lining, we should tell the ref to be lenient if one of the 9 year old keepers picked the ball up outside the box. He looked at me like I had three heads and said "the keepers just need to be aware of where they are." OK, that settles that then, thanks!

 

I send reminders for that type of stuff otherwise they won't show up with it.

 

Fall sunday in PA: game starts 38 degrees, gray drizzle, turf field.
Opp striker scores 4. Turns to driving sleet, big wet snow flakes at the 20 minute mark. Team spends the next 10 minutes in the opponents half, get 1 goal. Precipitation ends, opp strker gets his 5th & 6th, halftime comes, 2nd half is played under sunny skies, might have hit 40. Opp coach only subs in his mini Lewandoski twice for about 10 minutes total, he gets another, assists, and score his last one on a shot from 30m into the upper corner as he's running laterally from left to right. I thnk he's left footed naturally

We're looking for outdoor November tournaments north of Interstate 80 at this point...

 

For what it's worth, my son was in a similar situation last winter. He had done some local clinics and we signed him up for a 3v3 indoor league run by some coaches from local clubs. It was his first "team" experience and the coaching was more or less making sure the kids got equal playing time, with very little instruction and no pressure. He absolutely loved it. His interest in soccer increased exponentially. He started watching Premier League games on Saturday morning before his games and now he's always screwing around with the ball. I credit that experience with helping him fall in love with the game, and it had very little to do with any instruction he received from the coaches. They simply made it fun and mixed in a few coaching points here and there, which is probably all you need for 5 year olds. If you think this league will have a similar environment, it may really ignite her interest (assuming she's not already in love with the game)

 

Good choice. Top priority is a positive experience.