Has the game in the US improved over the last 30 years?

Discussion in 'Coach' started by rca2, Jan 24, 2018.

  1. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    I was watching the US WNT friendly against Denmark and was struck by how similar the US style of play was to how my amateur adult team played in the mid-1980s. We played against small college programs, but my team mates were mostly from Central America and Europe, mostly Hispanic, and the coach was Haitian. We played a more technical game than our opponents (more dribbling and more short passing), but still direct.

    From playing against and with 100's of former college players over many years, there is no question in my mind that college players have generally gotten better over the last 40 years and that more college teams are playing a decent game today than in the 1980's, but still I don't see that the today's play is significantly better than the best college teams 20 years ago.

    While a few coaches use a possession style, most still use a very athletic-dependent direct style of play.

    In my view it is very unsophisticated and 20 years out of touch with the modern game at its best. As 'best" I am thinking of Ajax circa 1970, AC Milan circa 1990, and Barca circa 2010. The common thread is Dutch Style Principles wedded with a very technically skilled team.

    Let me make a quick illustration. One basic Dutch principle is compactness of the team--a shorter than typical distance between the forward and back lines. The current mantra at both USSF and the former NSCAA is exactly the opposite--an extreme distance from CB to striker, like an 80-yard diameter rondo. The result is very little interchange between lines, less close support, and longer passes.

    The biggest difference I see between the current US game and these other teams is in how players move off the ball while in possession.

    Does anyone else see a lack of progress? Am I too pessimistic?
     
    NewDadaCoach and elessar78 repped this.
  2. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Still not enough diffusion of quality play IMO. The upper echelons of youth soccer teams that play good soccer are more plentiful, but you get below that tier and it's still rudimentary. No offense against other coaches and I'm by no means the perfect coach, but there's still a lot of the old school that needs to retire. But we also have a lot of ex-college players in the coaching ranks that I would characterize as "unenlightened". They are still regurgitating the stuff they grew up with and haven't accepted that teaching methods and philosophies have evolved drastically.
     
    rca2 repped this.
  3. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    #3 rca2, Jan 25, 2018
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2018
    In my mind "best practices" haven't changed since at least 1980. USSF and USC (NSCAA) apparently have recently changed the traditional session structure to play-practice-play instead of building intensity and scale from low to high. (I am not disagreeing with you. I am suggesting that these coaches were never correct, rather than outdated.)

    In my mind this play-practice-play format is a rejection of science and "best practices."

    1. At the youngest ages, every phase should be game like, but that doesn't mean unrestricted play.

    2. Older ages absolutely need a warm up phase for injury prevention. Some people say that a warm-up phase for younger players is unnecessary because they are naturally limber without a warm-up. This argument ignores the fact that flexibility is only 1 of several objectives of the warm-up phase. For instance joint strength, not just range of motion, is a concern.

    3. Best practice is to train technique in conjunction with the warm-up phase while players are fresh. Quality performance is optimal, not quantity. Fatigue inhibits perfect performance and therefore is counterproductive.

    Instead of play-practice-play the solution to player boredom is to make the warm-ups fun and keep best practices.

    The example I read of a replacement for a warmup for U6 players was a 1v1 and 2v2 SSG with the coach participating. I am so dead set against this. First off, I weighed 5 times more than the players. With adult players I was always very careful not to step on their feet because I would likely break their adult foot if I did. Second off, playing directly against an adult is counter productive because we invariably move slower than normal and have a much longer reach than same size opponents. This means our play is completely different. An adult playing keeper in a youth goal is particularly bad. This is simply not the same thing as a coach serving balls or being a neutral in an exercise, where the players interact with the ball rather than the coach. Finally it is immediately starting with high intensity play.
     
  4. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    so is Play-Practice-Play out in the literature yet? I've heard talk of it but have not seen it broadly from USSF or other bodies.
     
  5. rca2

    rca2 Member+

    Nov 25, 2005
    My understanding is that it is in the new Grassroots license materials that replace the E and F license, but I haven't looked at them--just read about them in a Soccer America article.
     
  6. Dynamo Kev

    Dynamo Kev Member

    Oct 24, 2000
    I had the chance to watch the Philly Union u10/11 team practice last night and was blown away by the skill level these kids possess. I think due to youtube, the amount of soccer on TV, the quality of paid youth coaches, the willingness of parents to join these top clubs- the top level of youth players has most certainly improved over the last 10 years. It's slowly trickling down but it will take another 10/20 years until it's ingrained in our culture and only then will there be a true improvement across the board.
     
    NewDadaCoach repped this.
  7. elessar78

    elessar78 Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 12, 2010
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Yeah we've gotten scored by DAs before. It's sad. My best player would just be one of their players. Then the style of play is incredible for the age. We do well locally enough to be placed in these brackets but not nearly good enough to play with them.

    I.can't speak for the country as a whole,locally, I think it's way better than twenty years ago.
     
    rca2 repped this.
  8. NewDadaCoach

    NewDadaCoach Member

    Tottenham Hotspur
    United States
    Sep 28, 2019
    U10 sounds so young for an MLS DA. I didn't know they started that young.
     
  9. stphnsn

    stphnsn Member+

    Jan 30, 2009
    We had 13U Indiana Fire DA kids at my course meeting in August. I too was blown away. Those kids would have given my spring 19Us a run for their money despite being bigger, faster, and stronger.
     
    rca2 repped this.
  10. Dynamo Kev

    Dynamo Kev Member

    Oct 24, 2000
    DA doesn't officially start until u13 now but they all have pre-academy teams.. Check these guys out:
    Pep would shed a tear of pride at this build out.
     
    NewDadaCoach repped this.

Share This Page