|
Post by Soccerhouse on Feb 6, 2017 10:10:42 GMT -5
So just wrapped up the basketball season. Rec hoops of course. Decent league with a fair amount of players that mostly play other sports, but the kids are still very young, and not quite ready for AAU ball. But its just interesting the difference in coaching other sports vs soccer. In my opinion its not just youth sports either. College hoops is the same...
Basketball coaches coach the entire game. Instructions, corrections, time outs, substitutions, manage the clock, call time outs, pull strings to exploit weaknesses of the opponent. Constantly switch the defense to adjust to the other teams lineups.
Where as with soccer "we"--- I say we here as the vast majority involved in youth soccer etc, want our coaches to sit down and not coach throughout the game. Maybe I'm taking "we" to far, but I want coaches to coach, I dont' want them to scream the entire game etc.
Either way --- we all have different thoughts on how coaches should coach during games, but you can't deny the fact that soccer seems to be the game where coaches are often taught and praised to be quiet. (probably stating this wrong, I apologize) Yes, I know its a different game, the game flows with no stoppages or timeouts and very very limited substitutions at the senior level ---- but the youth level is the opposite, many subs, many chances to make changes throughout, lots of dead balls and lots of opportunities to coach.
Maybe its the mentality of other sports where we seem to play to win more and that concept seems to be gone in youth soccer. we are all about development right. Well in my opinion, development should also be to shut down the opposing teams best player whether that is at u8 or u18. In hoops at the younger age, if a kid is dominating off the dribble or posting your up, you double team him or switch to a box and 1. You try man to man, switch to a 3-2 zone (which a lot of nba'ers hate kids playing zone).
We played hoops with the seasonal sports athletes -- fall football, winter hoops, spring/summer baseball. No question their is much more of a winning mentality in those sports, I see a little bit more attitude in these kids. Yes probably more emotional as well, but yes I'm painting a blanket here, but these kids did not want to lose! And just like my kids soccer team, these kids on our hoops team all played on very good football and travel baseball teams. Very competitive and almost crazy.
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Feb 6, 2017 10:50:03 GMT -5
In academy, I want a coach that is constantly teaching. With almost all of the focus at practice being on developing skills and little time spent covering game situations, the kids need a coach that is teaching them the game while they are playing it. If you wait until practice or the kid is subbed out of the game, the kid has already forgotten the situation. I also like it when the coach is coaching the kids on the bench by pointing out where a player should be or what a player should be doing.
As kids get older and understand game situations better, maybe the style of coaching should change because kids can remember a play for a longer period of time. However, a coach should always be looking at how to defend and attack the other team and instructing players on the other team's weaknesses.
|
|
|
Post by Soccerhouse on Feb 6, 2017 10:51:16 GMT -5
I like this comment a lot mightydawg --- "coach that is constantly teaching"
|
|
|
Post by soccerfan30 on Feb 6, 2017 12:07:56 GMT -5
The phrase I use with my players is that a coach should never "Nintendo Coach" meaning a coach shouldn't be barking out instructions every 10 seconds. Some of my own parents who have come from basketball and football backgrounds have asked me why I don't "yell more".
Soccer is unique that you don't have stoppages of play, time outs or someone calling in plays, it puts a premium on the intelligence of the player to assess situations and problem solve under duress with the game moving 100 MPH. It's my belief that most of the teaching takes place during the week, if a coach is yelling the entire game they either don't trust their players or they haven't done enough during the week to prepare their players.
|
|
|
Post by SoccerMom on Feb 6, 2017 12:53:12 GMT -5
The phrase I use with my players is that a coach should never "Nintendo Coach" meaning a coach shouldn't be barking out instructions every 10 seconds. Some of my own parents who have come from basketball and football backgrounds have asked me why I don't "yell more". Soccer is unique that you don't have stoppages of play, time outs or someone calling in plays, it puts a premium on the intelligence of the player to assess situations and problem solve under duress with the game moving 100 MPH. It's my belief that most of the teaching takes place during the week, if a coach is yelling the entire game they either don't trust their players or they haven't done enough during the week to prepare their players. I have to agree with this statement. Kids have to learn to think for themselves, not wait for the coach to tell them what to do every play, soccer is about fast thinking and understanding the game. Its fine when the kid is subbed out for the coach to talk to them and explain things while its fresh but not constant direction.
|
|
|
Post by mightydawg on Feb 6, 2017 15:31:12 GMT -5
Every sport is about fast thinking and understanding the game. That is not unique to soccer. I have yet to find a sport where players do not have to analyze situations and make decisions, often with the game moving fast. With any sport, the coach has to give the players the tools to be able to analyze the situation according to the style of play of a coach and make good decisions. This comes from teaching, whether in practice or in the game. Failure to continue to teach during the game just reinforces bad habits and bad decisions. The thing with soccer is that it is difficult to communicate effectively 30, 40, 50 or 60 yards away.
|
|
|
Post by Porterhouse on Feb 7, 2017 10:52:09 GMT -5
What is it you wish for your coach to "coach" during a game? Too many try to coach technique Vs tactics and end up freezing their players mentally. If a coach providing instruction on visual cues, when to overlap (for younger players) then fine but the game in the end is the best teacher. The coach should just be a facilitator during matches.
Also how many coaches actually spend training time practicing the different formations or adjustments they want implemented during a game. Just a few thoughts from a previous lurker
|
|
|
Post by chelsea14 on Feb 7, 2017 11:28:01 GMT -5
I definitely don't want the coach to sit down and not talk during the games. we had this for years and kids did not learn anything and played kick and run, did not improve, and did not learn the game. current coach would likely be accused of over-coaching but i would rather see that than nothing at all. current team has improved dramatically over the fall season, kids have learned how to play very attractive soccer, and it has 100% to do with the coaching.
|
|
|
Post by soccerfan30 on Feb 7, 2017 11:52:38 GMT -5
Every sport is about fast thinking and understanding the game. That is not unique to soccer. I have yet to find a sport where players do not have to analyze situations and make decisions, often with the game moving fast. With any sport, the coach has to give the players the tools to be able to analyze the situation according to the style of play of a coach and make good decisions. This comes from teaching, whether in practice or in the game. Failure to continue to teach during the game just reinforces bad habits and bad decisions. The thing with soccer is that it is difficult to communicate effectively 30, 40, 50 or 60 yards away. of course players need intelligence in every sport but the point I was trying to make is in basketball and football players are running scripted plays that a coach is calling out....on just about every single play, that is not true for soccer. Yes you practice certain scenarios and tactics but I still believe more onus is on the soccer player to read, assess and react vs running scripted plays.
|
|
|
Post by jash on Feb 7, 2017 14:09:21 GMT -5
In my opinion I'd like to see the coach coaching during almost the ENTIRE game. But I'd like to see about 20% silent observation, about 20% general instructions to players on the field, about 20% talking to the players on the bench about things he is seeing, and about 40% talking quietly to the players who just subbed off about what he saw them do.
In other words, we should rarely hear the coach, and he should not be trying to micro-manage the players on the field, but he should be teaching almost the entire time.
|
|
|
Post by touchlinedad on Feb 8, 2017 10:16:36 GMT -5
I think coaches should be positive on the sidelines and only give general instruction, remaining quiet for most of the games. Soccer is a game you learn by doing and making mistakes, especially at the Academy level. I'd prefer if a coach sees a player making a mistake, he or she should write it down and talk to the player later in a calm fashion rather than yelling in the moment. I also agree with this quote from Claudio Reyna: “In our country, we feel we have to do things because of our other sports, which are very much dominated by calling a timeout, writing up a play, 'do this, do that. There is more of an influence from the coach in those sports to solve a situation for the players." Coaches, understandably, want to solve problems on the field. But they should focus on teaching the players the tools and techniques needed to avoid those problems instead of yelling at them for an entire game.
|
|
|
Post by soccerlegacy on Feb 15, 2017 14:32:33 GMT -5
I can see where this is topic can be very polarizing, but interesting topic. Many soccer "purists" seem to think coaching should only be done during the week and they should let the kids play and think for themselves during the games. They think that those that don't feel this way just don't understand the complexity of soccer and how players must be able to learn to assess the situations and adapt on their own.
However, my opinion is that you can and should coach during the game. It just needs to be done in the correct manner. No, I don't believe in "joystick" coaching where they are telling players where to go and what to do, but if you see something that is reinforcing what you worked on in practice and a player could benefit from it in the moment or immediately following it... I have no problem with the coach letting that player know. For instance, "play the way your facing" or " look for the splits" or "get wide", these are general suggestions and simple things that can help a team regain focus DURING a game and are not going to make them robots at the same time.
A wise coach I know (who has coached at the highest levels and for over 30 years) once told me in a class (I was taking of his), was always try to phrase your coaching by asking the player questions if you can? Make them think about what the correct answer is and have them figure it out. This way, they are not being programmed to do a certain thing but rather adapt as they see things form there perspective and over time, they will begin to think for themselves on the field with the proper decisions. For example, in a game if you see a player make a mistake, aske them "What was the better play there?" or Where should you be?"...
Most of what I'm speaking to IS for the younger players but there is value in coaching even with the older players during the game.
|
|
|
Post by randomparent on Feb 16, 2017 11:00:27 GMT -5
So just wrapped up the basketball season. Rec hoops of course. Decent league with a fair amount of players that mostly play other sports, but the kids are still very young, and not quite ready for AAU ball. But its just interesting the difference in coaching other sports vs soccer. In my opinion its not just youth sports either. College hoops is the same... Basketball coaches coach the entire game. Instructions, corrections, time outs, substitutions, manage the clock, call time outs, pull strings to exploit weaknesses of the opponent. Constantly switch the defense to adjust to the other teams lineups. Where as with soccer "we"--- I say we here as the vast majority involved in youth soccer etc, want our coaches to sit down and not coach throughout the game. Maybe I'm taking "we" to far, but I want coaches to coach, I dont' want them to scream the entire game etc. Either way --- we all have different thoughts on how coaches should coach during games, but you can't deny the fact that soccer seems to be the game where coaches are often taught and praised to be quiet. (probably stating this wrong, I apologize) Yes, I know its a different game, the game flows with no stoppages or timeouts and very very limited substitutions at the senior level ---- but the youth level is the opposite, many subs, many chances to make changes throughout, lots of dead balls and lots of opportunities to coach. Maybe its the mentality of other sports where we seem to play to win more and that concept seems to be gone in youth soccer. we are all about development right. Well in my opinion, development should also be to shut down the opposing teams best player whether that is at u8 or u18. In hoops at the younger age, if a kid is dominating off the dribble or posting your up, you double team him or switch to a box and 1. You try man to man, switch to a 3-2 zone (which a lot of nba'ers hate kids playing zone). We played hoops with the seasonal sports athletes -- fall football, winter hoops, spring/summer baseball. No question their is much more of a winning mentality in those sports, I see a little bit more attitude in these kids. Yes probably more emotional as well, but yes I'm painting a blanket here, but these kids did not want to lose! And just like my kids soccer team, these kids on our hoops team all played on very good football and travel baseball teams. Very competitive and almost crazy. I have to say your post hit a cord with me. We just finished up basketball also, just some random observations from a parent of a "soccer" family - - All the kids from our academy in this league were generally the stars of their respective teams, shows what good athletes they are - Basketball was fun and competitive - The kids wanted to win and showed it. There is a tournament at the end with a bracket, if you lose your out - none of this nonsense well we lost that game but if the orange team beats them purple crickets by two points and dynamos tie and the son is shining at 45 degrees we get to play in the final of the tournament - All the games had two refs who were adults. - Coaching was fun and engaging. You could see the teams adjusting to one another and the other teams players. For $100 bucks my kids had a blast at basketball. The dollar to fun ratio was pretty high. To be fair I would have to say that indoor definitely had a high dollar to fun ratio.
|
|
|
Post by guest on Feb 16, 2017 11:22:13 GMT -5
I coach Lacrosse. It's a bit of a mix between football and soccer. Clock is always running, so there are no set plays in the football sense. But at 4th grade they are on a full size field. With helmets! Just try and yell instructions across the field to a kid with a helmet on. Ha! And every year about half the kids have never played before. 2 weeks of practice and then games start. That's not near enough time to teach rules, positioning, tactics, etc. We're still working on cradling, which is the 'dribbling' of lacrosse.
One neat thing about it is subs are unlimited and are on the fly. One group of middies run off and another run on in the middle of a game. It's part of the strategery (to use a Bushism).
|
|