So I've read at various times about the developmental stages that kids go through, and some discussion of how coaching accommodates (or doesn't) these stages. But I'd like to hear what you all think what the emphases coaches should be placing. So for the younger ages (up to age 12?) it seems like the most important skill to teach is ball touch, control, and handling (including dribbling). Ball handling needs to be second nature, instinctive, because without that, everything else falls apart. Spacing needs to be taught, too. Young kids are super self-centered (it's a developmental thing, not that they're taught selfishness at this point), so teaching them the relationship with the ball is important. But when do tactics and positions take up more time at practice than ball handling? And once that starts, are the kids basically on their own to learn stepovers and Cruyff turns and the like? Or is it a phased in sort of thing? And should I gravitate
It obviously will vary with the skill level of the teams you're talking about, but I would say, generally speaking tactics and shape are more prevalent once they get to 11 v 11 (U13). Even then, it often is limited to the training session right before a game, whereas the practices earlier in a week might be more skill-based.
Ideally kids would start learning a move or two when they are young, same time they learn fundamentals. It doesn't take much time so why not. At 5/6/7 it should be fun and they should feel free to experiment and make mistakes. Tactics and positions - increases gradually but would be a big focus in 11v11 as the other commentor said. At U8 I teach basic offense and defense and simple things like how to do freekick, kick-off, not taking the ball from each other, etc. Some kids are starting to scan and move off ball, and then some are still watching butterflies, it varies widely.
Thanks, guys. To be more specific, though I welcome more thoughts on the general, here's my situation. I'm looking at two different clubs for DS. He's a high level player and born 2011. On the one hand is a club which is very cerebral with the high level kids, working not at all on mechanics (ball handling and the like), but quite some on triangles and situations. DS tells me that when he's been with them they didn't work at all on ball handling (obviously, every time you touch a ball you're working on mechanics, whether it be rondo, World Cup, drills, or scrimmages). On the other hand is a club which spends a lot more time on mechanics. For example, DS learned a new move at one of their clinics this year. It was the first time in a long time that I saw him actually have to slow down and try to figure out a new move. I know the TD and coaches there know a lot about the cerebral stuff at this other club, but I've not seen it coached in practice (not that I've seen many). I have seen really spot on corrections at practice (e.g. "Hey, you keep dribbling into the sideline and you lose space. Instead of that, try this." "You weren't on your toes; you were watching. Keep moving so that you're ready to receive the ball."). But this second club lacks a lot of top players. My gut says that the club with the coaching that I think is more appropriate for him and his developmental point is the right one. But the first one consistently has top teams, though, I suspect, a lot of the talent is developed elsewhere and then brought in at the academy level. I think both clubs are solid--both are professional, great administrations. But I also want DS to have a solid group of players around him, because that will raise everyone's game. So back to the general question, if mechanics including ball handling are and should be taught through U13, and not left to the kids to do on their own at home, then I should go with the second mentioned club. If, however, the cerebral part of the game is already paramount, and learning that now will have benefits and he'll just keep getting the mechanics because he'll be touching the ball several times a week, then the former club would be more appropriate for his development. Sorry, doing a lot of processing here, and doing a lot of overthinking. But DS loves nothing more in this world than soccer, and never has loved anything else, so I'm just trying to provide the environment where he will get the most out of it. Me? I like sport and I really enjoy a kickaround in the park, but I'm happy hiking or reading. Were it not for DS's interest, soccer would now likely be pretty marginal in my life.
If he's entering his teens and he's serious about soccer and wants to play at a high level then the more serious club will focus on the cerebral stuff. It's just not a good use of time to focus on individual mechanics, though they should at least do a little and make sure the kids are on track / address problem areas. But if he's playing competitive 11v11 they need to be learning tactics and passing and all the team stuff. I would guide him to work on his mechanics a few ways - by himself, clinics, camps, personal trainer. There are tons of skills on youtube. Sit down with him and write down a comprehensive list of skills and then he can gradually make his way through them.
Co-sign--this is good advice IMHO. @Fuegofan I would also add that playing some low-key pickup for fun--combined with some individual training to address particular mechanical issues--would be a great idea. As my son says "Nature knows how our bodies work optimally--we just need to listen to it." Unstructured play well below top-level competitiveness is underrated, again IMHO. Young players need to give their bodies time in that middle ground between 'rest' and 'high intensity'.
Agree with both of the last two posters. And, at least in my son's experience, those higher-level teammates become more and more important over the next few years. Practicing with them makes you better, raises your game, ..., and they make it possible to compete at higher levels (we've probably all seen teams with one really good player with no one around him who can keep up). And two thumbs up for pickup soccer if you're in a place where he can find it. Re working on his own, if he has a teammate or two who he can work with on some of the nuts-and-bolts technical stuff, that can be a help, too, so all of that isn't solo or just with a coach (some of that might depend on the kid, I guess).
I must have glossed over that. I picked up on U13, which made me think he was 12 or 13. But yeah if he's 2011, then he's what 10 or 11? Maybe he's still on 9v9. But if he's at a club then he's probably still better off focusing on team stuff at that age when the team is together and working on individual skills on his own or in pickup games as big red mentioned. After I look a long hiatus, I started playing again and learned a bunch of new skills just by looking them up, slowly working on the mechanics at home and then trying it in pickup games. I think a club match might be too intimidating to try a new move. You have to fail a few times before getting a move down; better to fail in friendly pickup game than in a organized league match.
The most common stages cited are as follows: U7-U12 Technical U13-U15 Formative U16-U19 Competitive Technical is just as is stated, create a technical foundation. Formative is focused on forming and teaching team play. Competitive is focused on training and preparing to win games.
Go here, especially if he's under 15. Those corrections/coaching points are worth a lot. If this "topteam" club has tryouts every year up through u18, he always has a chance to join them. They sound like talent aggregators, if he's talented, theyll want him.
I dont think players ever stop training technical. For successful teams anyways. Coach that focuses on good techniques, good fundamentals, good habits. Fitness. Is patient. IMO, the rest comes together pretty nicely. Team with skilled players generally win games.
I should add, that the phases are added to not replacing the previous phase meaning for example technical is always taught at all phases, perhaps not the primary focus of training at U17 but technical elements are always incorporated and ideally corrected.
A team where the players practice skills on their own, and when the team practices they work on tactics, shape, building from the back, through balls, crossing and finishing, winning 50/50s, set pieces, defensive lines, pressing, etc... these are the teams that will win over a team that when they practice spend too much time running and seeing who can get the most juggles. Not saying that great teams don't work on fitness, but they have to delegate some of that to the individual and not eat up too much team time on that stuff because there's only so many hours that the team is together, so use the time wisely.
While I dont disagree with you, it would be hard pressed to find a couple of youth players with the motivation, discipline, and know how to train effectively on their own, let alone an entire team. Also fitness may be the wrong word to use (maybe conditioning is better. Help me find the right word) I am thinking speed and power, stamina and agility. Preferably geared towards soccer so best to utilize a professional trainer or gain some experience on how to train if you are going to be running the session. I think you may be underestimating what is included in technical training. For a younger youth team playing on a full sized pitch in higher tiered league that has 3 training sessions a week, 1 is for conditioning. 1 is techinical. 1 is tactical. I see a lot of this. Older youth team, can be determined by the group of players and coach based on team needs I supposed. And this is just my opinion, but girls start getting it at around 12 or 13 years old. Boys start to get it at around 13 or 14 years old. By get it, I mean learning tactics. Also their interest in competing and playing physically also picks up (for those that werent so interested before).
When should the physical part become an important part of practice? I've always been one who believes that practice should be all about ball touches. Sure, five minutes of warmup and of cool down are a good idea, but beyond that it seems that practice should be reserved for touching the ball. But I have seen teams at the U11 level do 15 or even 30 minutes of running and pushups and other calisthenics at the beginning of a 1.5 hour practice. What are your experiences and thoughts on the issue?
There should be minimal conditioning happening during most practice, especially if you're only practicing 2-3 days a week for 1.5 hours each day. Kids need to be doing their own conditioning separate from practice. It's easy to tell which kids are in shape and which aren't by the middle of a game. And those that are out of shape don't play as much as others, typically. I've seen some practices where some fitness happens as part of a drill, but not the primary focus. For example, if you have three groups of players doing small sided games, instead of standing and watching two teams play, the third team can either be doing a lap or other calisthenics / core work.
It's tough to say; would depend on the situation - is it rec? comp? how many kids are out of shape? etc I think it's a case by case situation. If lack of stamina is holding the kids back from actually playing soccer then you may have to work on the conditioning.
That's a fair assessment. And in answer to the level, it's a pre-academy level, i.e., top team for the club (too young for academy at this point).
I think for a 1.5 hour practice, 15 mins or so of fitness is reasonable. Physicality does matter, imo. Yes ball control is vital, but you can have great ball control and get beat if you are not in good shape. You really need both.
Part of the problem is that kids don't get much unstructured physical activity--if they spent more 'down time' doing outdoorsy stuff (riding bikes, climbing trees, playing games--maybe even soccer!--without coaches or much structure--you could probably skip a lot of fitness stuff at the younger ages. IMHO.
Schools these days certainly don't seem to help, either. At the local elementary, they had to take a collection to get enough money for recess monitors, and recess plus lunch is only 25 minutes! Add PE what, two days a week and kids at that school aren't coming out fit.
Oh man, that was a pet peeve of mine at my son's old Elementary school. That was over a decade ago, but it doesn't sound like things have got much better.
Shoutout to the woman who ran the PE program at my sons' elementary school. She turned part of the PE program into a running club for the kids, who trained several days a week. She, unfortunately, died while my youngest was there and others took it over, created a small-scale 5k for the students and then sponsored any who wanted to (there were a bunch) in the 5k portion of a local marathon. Her influence helped turn my oldest into a runner (ran competitively through HS and still running now, at 20) and helped turn his little brother into the fittest kid on the soccer field (or at least one of them) for a bunch of seasons. But that was all an extraordinary (and, from what I can tell, unusual) effort on her part.
At my son's school, it was the recess--or lack thereof--which really bothered me (that and the over-policing of bus stops) buy yeah, PE is a problem as well. Mad props to your son's late PE teacher. What an incredible legacy.