I am soon to be a youth soccer coach and I am sure that there are several things you can warn me about. However, my biggest concern and quite possibly your biggest headaches over your coaching years, are those problem parents and their issues that you have faced as a coach. Whether you are an amatuer or a top coach with several years of experience, which problem parents are destined for every coach involved in youth development from the early years to the latter years of a player's development. I am aware that dealing with parents (at least in America) is about 50% of parent management, ESPECIALLY, when they are very young (at least so i've heard). I am asking you as someone with years under their belt (even if only a couple), what kinds of headaches from parents do I need to be ready to face. What are those that I can change and what are those that I cannot change no matter how hard I try. As a coach, I want to have the wisdom to know what is worth teaching a parent and what is not worth fighting with a parent. I would appreciate any issues that you can give, i.e. The parent that asks, "Why is my kid playing left midfield instead of striker where he performs best?", etc., etc. Thanks
Nah. You don't need to manage them that much. Do your best, keep learning. Engage with them, don't think of them as the enemy. Learn their names. Most times they'll be on the other side of the field and go to their cars straight after. Same with practice. Just play their kid an even amount and you should be fine. Rotate them through different positions and you'll quell any questions about positions. Engage with them regularly before there are problems.
Concerning playing kids the even amount, at some point this has to come at a crossroad when you intend to turn development into winning. Meaning that players cannot play the same amount of time throughout all of youth soccer from U7-U18. To be honest, i've heard of coaches having parents that were no use spending too much time on as no amount of reason or persuasion or whatever you call it was going to change them and some parents were going to change. I've also seen the number of threads made on issues with parents and how it can interefere with the experience. In addition, I also don't believe that any kid should be guaranteed time at least when they enter a certain age group. I believe it can entitle people and create dillusion of being expected to perform regardless of effort or commitment to the team. In addition at some point in youth development it no longer makes sense to play a player who is cleary a center back as a number 10 or number 9. Or to play a kid that is an outside midfielder as a number nine if that is clearly not his strentgh. I also believe that this is a complicated subject due to the number of different situations that can happen which is why it may be hard to for you to get into specifics. I just assumed there were certain types of questions that a parent would ask that can let you know if the parent is already set on their ways or if there was a way to determine a parent that could be educated and it would make sense to spend the time speaking with them. Thanks for the input
You misunderstand the development cycle. Its objective never turns from development to winning. What happens is that at about U16 the objective is to teach the kids how to win, so at that point a development team would appear to an outsider much like a competive team, but nevertheless the objective is to develop each player on the team to his full potential. The exception is rec teams. In rec teams, you stay focused on fundamentals and maybe the U14 level of team tactics. You might have individual players who could handle the advanced topics, but the team isn't there. If there is someone on the team that is not good enough to deserve a share of the playing time, then he should not have been selected for the team to begin with. You don't pick someone and then let him rot on the bench.
You make the point clear about how the development of the team would transition into a competitive team later on which I can comprehend. As far as being on the bench, there is a difference between playing a player 25 minutes one game, 45 minutes another, then maybe 15 minutes in another game, and maybe 60 minutes in yet another game. I believe this is a far cry from letting a player rot in the bench. But if I have a player who because of his commitment and extra training becomes the best player on the team at U16, how can I justify to him that he should play the same minutes as this other player and not 80+ minutes almost every game in the position that he is the most valuable for the team. And to expand on this, to not go too far from the topic, how then can I determine what parents to continue with or not? OR... And this is a big OR. Maybe what may be the case, is that in fact there is no standard question that every coach receives regardless of where he is at but the problems we face with parents are individualized because of the different goals we as coaches have for our teams
Development and winning don't have to be mutually exclusive. But if you have to choose, I'd pick development. Also, what percentage of wins justifies pursuit of winning? "Winning" is an outcome that you may not have much control over. Also, what Faustian bargains do you make to pursue these wins. Leaving a talented defender in the back because she doesn't concede goals but also stunting her potential as an attacker, is one example. Most of the best youth players I've coached could've played any position, it was a disservice to them to be stuck in one role. Earning playing time... it depends on the age. But if you set your culture up correctly, then players bring it no matter what. You can't in good conscience carry a player on your roster who you will not play a decent amount—because they are children playing a game after all. If it's such a poor fit, have a conversation early and maybe recommend a separation.
So this thread didn't turn out to be what I thought and I may not get the answer I searched for but I'll play with where this is going because it is very interesting. Are you saying that from U11-U18 each player will almost play identically the same amount of time because the level of discrepancy between each player is almost unnoticeable? Or at least not noticeable enough to make a difference towards one player being better than the other? And I don't just mean players bringing it to every game because some players will just give you a higher percentage of winning because everybody has different strengths that are innate. How a player thinks, athleticism, etc. A player of James's level simply can't be taught to play like James because he brings it every training and/or game. The environment just optimizes the level of innate thinking he has. In the same way that physical training optimizes CR7's strengths. Isco can never have that no matter how much he brings it. Ultimately, I do believe that if you claim to develop players then you have to win at some point. Otherwise it's not development. The term of 'Development' is based on the premise that a team will turn their learned skills into something tangible such as winning. Brazil used to have a formula for that. Spain had a formula for that. Etc., etc. Even if Lahm can play every position he does not specialize as a number 9. Even if Lewandowski can play right back, by not specializing at U16, etc., it would appear that you are limiting the amount of learning he can do as a number 9. Because the movement needed to master the forward position isnt the same type of movement that an outside back makes. The more time you spend in any position, the more you understand what is required of that position. What if from U15-U18, Xavi spent 33% of the time playing as a number 9 and 33% of the time playing as a right back? That's 66% gone from the time he could have used to play as number 8 for a crucial period of development. That's my take anyway. Also, there is never an intention to bench a player to the point they no longer play. As a player, I saw a teammate who got less time than anyone in iur younger years. Many times he didn't even play unless the game was won. By U17-U18 he was the best player on the team. To the point that I remember a game where everyone was in agreement that we should just give him the ball and let him make stuff happen. Nobody ever expected this but we stuck with development and he just happened to have the biggest improvement
In development, you don't compare players to other players (except during tryouts). You compare the player to themself to measure progress and plan training. I not saying that coaches all do as I describe. Many don't, but that doesn't make it right. The problem with pay to play is that they are obsessed with winning in order to attract and keep parents. Development suffers. Also player development is not team development. Senior teams are concerned with developing teams for present competition. Development coaches are concerned with developing players with an eye to the future. Looking at what happens at the professional level, especially during matches, gives no information about what happens during development.
Most likely, if you're here asking for input, you aren't coaching a professional academy , where a kid might make a senior men's team debut at the age of 16 (lewandoski) or 18 (isco). It's a very different game developing assets that are either going to bring wins to your senior team, or, bring in money by being sold to another club. For kids in the US, who might top out at college, play them half a game, move them through positions up until HS. Even then it seems like a lot of the star forwards here have a line when they eventually get written up "smith is handling the change to striker well after spending most of their junior season as a ..."
So I am in the U.S. but the thing is, the club is affiliated with a German club, specifically Mainz but also a few other teams where tryouts can be done. 1 player from the club is wanted by Mainz and they are willing to pay all expenses. He is 13 years old but parents don't want him to leave. And he is also a fan of hockey. Another player is 17 years old and he did one try out with Mainz and was going to go there again in the summer but then COVID happened. Obviously this is not the norm as most will stop by college. But the goal is either MLS or Germany for a select few but College for most.
That sounds interesting. At that level the club you're joining probably has a "philosophy" for the club, so be prepared to communicate it to the parents, and also what your implementation of that philosophy looks like. Simple example: my club had a playing time policy of at least half a game. Some kids would get 2 15 minutes shifts, others would get 3 10 minute shifts. The other team at that age the coach "hockey subbed" where every 3-5 minutes multiple kids were changing. We both met the goal as stated in the club's philosophy.
That definitely must be it. At the younger ages though everyone plays. But around U15-U16 that's where things change. And a player one game may play 10 minutes but in a later game play 60 minutes. And a top player would have played possibly 90 minutes for both games. It just depends on certain factors
Winning, the outcome, involves a lot of things outside of our control. Officiating, calls, weather, luck—all factor in. Not sure what "winning" means—you bring home the plastic-ware every season? Go undefeated? Win a tournament? Have a W-L record over .500? I've been on all sides of these equations. High school age players are recruited to the next level on their individual skills—not on team accomplishments. Which is also to say, if development is done right over time there will be lots of games won. Most of the college coaches and MLS academy coaches I know/interact with know this. They are not fooled by league W-L records or GotSoccer team rankings. Coaches you know and trust act as an informal scouting network. I've been with clubs affiliated with EPL clubs and Serie A clubs. We've had many kids go over—it means something and at the same time it doesn't. One player they're interested in, the others it's basically a money grab.
I think as long as you clearly communicate how playing time is determined and it can be observed consistently. Also it should, in my opinion depends on the situation and the player's entire development environment. A 15 yo stud who makes his HS varsity and gets 10 varsity minutes a game - do you want him being on the club's u18 team also, getting 10 minutes a game, or might they be better served being "the man" on the u15 or u16 team, carrying a big workload, wearing the captain's armband. Good luck
You made a great point. A great third alternative would be like the professional clubs do, let the 15 year old guest occassionally with the u18s in training and maybe even a match. The experience isn't just about training opportunities and speed of play, but also about stoking the internal desire.
It sounds like you are at an established club. What age group will you be coaching? I think you should not worry too much. And also turn to your boss (club director, etc) for guidance or protocols. There will be politics amongst the parents but try to stay above that.
disavow any results ahead of time. you are responsible for providing a safe and positive experience, nearly equal playing time, and to help each child 'learn and practice skills' 'do their best' and 'have fun', with age and aptitude appropriate priorities. no amount of coach vocalizing will actually win a game. My kids director of coaching at the club told us all (parents of teens) "ok, it is like this, they're going to lose every game. There, I said it! So if they win or tie, that's a bonus, be grateful. They are going to get injured... I switched to coaching because I got injured playing in college, see these scars on my leg? There, I've warned you ahead of time, so if they are still healthy enough for HS Soccer, that's a bonus."
I got some great advice from this coach at an MLS academy. If you see his teams play, his teams are legit. And the advice is not unique: As tough as it may be, you the coach (and to a degree the players), have to divorce performance from results. Obsess about the process, about the details, and the wins will follow. Chasing wins without extracting performance is an empty pursuit. This coach, his players go on to play for Big D1 schools like; Stanford, UCLA, and Duke.
I found that the best approach with the parents is to have a meeting with them at the start of the season and make it clear what your expectations are and how you will organise and run the team over the season. Whilst you can't think of everything, at least parents will know where the boundary line is. Key things to say are your policy on playing time, your approach, attendance, commitment and I'm sure you can think of many more without being an experienced coach. Although there are a few exceptions, most parents are good to work with if you are honest with them. Whilst you don't have to explain every decision you make, if you show them that you are one of them doing your best, they will likely take your side and forgive decisions they disagree with. Wheras if you distance yourself from them, they will make conclusions without knowing your perspective. I often invited a different parent into the team talk each week to offer transparency. So if a player reported something back about what they were told, one adult within the parents would know the whole picture. This also helped with mutual respect. There are countless tips you will pick up as you go along and I'm sure you'll do well. Good luck.