This topic is going on right now on another coaching site. They are talking why single topic is better then a multiple topic training session. I agree with that. But what ever you work on in a practice session you will do in a game. The opponent during a game is trying to defend against it. So why not make every practice a dual theme practice? Meaning as you are practice an attacking topic. You also practice at defending it at the same time. I did that I always thought you got more out of your practice doing both. What do you guys think?
Makes sense, rca2/ranova has brought up similar ideas in the past. Why just make a passing topic session when every pass needs a receiver. So run it as a passing AND receiving session, for example. I think anything is fair game as long as you hit your coaching points.
The idea isn't about technical heavy sessions for the average u9. Of course pass and receive will be worked together. As should dribble and shoot! On pass day there will be dribbling, okay, but you're coaching the passing opportunities. Eventually the kids get better and older and the coaching evolves into the larger concepts, and that's where the focus really needs to come in. Sessions get set-up same as usual- warmup, technical work, small sided games, & scrimmage- the instructions simply need to be focused on one topic. The really funny part is you can run basically the same session at different practices but focus on different things. On the day you're focusing on attack, all you do is focus on attack. Of course somebody's defending, but today we're here to beat them, so you simply keep all the instructions to how to beat that defender. So the session evolves from a 1v1 game up to 3v2 and all your instructions have gone out to the attacking side. Break for water and come back to two 4v4 games to endzones. Same deal though, we're only coaching offense today so all our instructions focus on shredding that D. Switch groups, same idea. Attack, attack, attack! End in scrimmage, focusing only on attacking team. Come back next practice, run the same session, all instructions go to Defense this time. Frankly I like the idea. I'm not the commentator type, I don't want to be belching out instructions constantly at practice. It muddles the atmosphere and lessons the value of what I've said. By choosing to focus my instructions on one area per practice I'm already speaking half as much, which means they're playing double= better. Save your breath, speak less, but with more focus and quality.
I'm assuming you are just talking about youth, right? With our HS schedule of 3 games and 2 practices a week, that doesn't seem very doable with how much we need to cover. I'm just checking because I've heard some coaches trying to tell me to do it this way (ie, the guy I'm talking about in the D thread). The only concern I have with kids at that level is they tend to get bored. Even mixing the drills/games up, I always have them wanting to work on something else and eventually, they stop caring about what we are doing that day.
Depends on what you mean by "theme." I prefer to talk about training objectives. But if by theme you mean what the players are doing, like practicing one move in a drill, for 60 minutes. Then the answer is that the short term learning for that one movement will be greater because you practiced it in isolation, but long term learning will be greater if you practice multiple things at the same time. This point is pretty well accepted by coaching experts now. So the answer is if you want to maximize the ability of one movement for tomorrow, then practice it in isolation today. But if you are trying to learn skills as part of long term athletic development, then it is always less efficient to practice movements in isolation. Now back to what is meant by theme. If by that you mean training objectives, then I have to agree that too many objectives for one session is a problem. This is true not just of coaching but of any teaching. I think that if you can actually get through to the student/player on even one teaching/coaching point per practice, that you are doing better than most. From my limited experience I like to have 1 theme/training objective per practice, but because there are not enough practices I will have as many as 3 objectives per session. On top of that I will always give the players an opportunity to use/demonstrate the objective in match-like conditions. I always try to include at least a short unrestricted scrimmage, or a larger group game. Both the SSG and scrimmage provide an opportunity for reinforcement of prior learning, i.e., what you have covered in prior pracitices. This is in addition to my drill designs which while they have a particular objective, I include additional skills as well. Pairing tackling with dribbling and passing and receiving is pretty obvious, but there are other ways. For example in lieu of a classic 4 corner/3 player wall pass drill as practice for give and gos, you could add a simple choice in off-the-ball runs to develop decision making, and end with a strike at a target/goal. Use your training objectives to guide your coaching comments. Restrict your comments to your objectives, but observe everything. I also feel the unrestricted scrimmage time is very valuable for allowing the more gifted players to play at whatever "grade level" that can. If the coach structures his practice too much there is a danger that you are actually holding some or all of the player back. You want to build a foundation for the players, not enclose them with a ceiling.