# Learning from our U-Littles



## SoccerFan4Life (Feb 15, 2018)

Now that club season has ended for the younger teams, I was ready to call it quits with my young daughter (9).  She wasn't happy as a bench player and she lost her love for soccer sometime over the past year.       It was tough for me to say goodbye to soccer but I was ready to embrace her other hobbies/sports. 
  Suddenly over the past few weeks, I see her juggling at home, kicking the ball, watching videos on Messi.      This is something that I haven't seen in a while from my daughter.     I ask her if she wants to play again and she replies.   " Dad, I love soccer but... I like to play, I don't like practices, they are boring".         

As club saturation  has taken over the younger age groups, I think that my daughter's statement is a testimony that a lot of coaches are using the same strategy with younger kids (5-9) as they do with older kids.      If we want to grow the sport, we need to do the following (parents & coaches):
- Make it fun during practices and include some 4v4 games for at least 30 minutes of each practice.    
- Add scrimmage games where your bench players get a chance to play 40% to 50% of the time.
- Coaches to set realistic expectations with parents about development process.
 - Parents to relax with these young ones. Focus on development and fun rather than trophies and spotlight time.  

I told my daughter that we will focus on having fun this coming year with a new team.  I also showed her the old "Practice, you talking about practice!" video from Allen Iverson.   Even the pro's hate practice.  LOL


----------



## seesnake (Feb 15, 2018)

The points you make are valid. 

It's actually pretty much the direction the top coaching educators are going. Even the new ussf license levels emphasize a Play/Practice/Play model for training with a heavy emphasis on small sided conditioned games as ways to teach decision making along with technical ability and fitness to young players. Think no lines and lots of touches with competition built in. 

To give you a sample below are some conditioned activities I use for the very young players.

I love coaching the youngest players simply because they can find the joy so quickly and learn equally as quickly. I am just moving out of my area and can't wait to start a program for the very young ones once again. 

Fun Games for Technical Work without Lines

Example:


*star wars. *

Cones make "outer space" big enough to allow dribbling but small enough where a "darth vader" can actually take someone's ball.

darth vader on the side, waiting to be called to take balls everyone else in outer space

commands for skills:

Cruising speed= dribble around close control

Light speed= pinky or laces touches at pace in straight lines

air brakes= step on or cut stop

reverse= scoop

black hole= circle dribble either inside or outside of foot

chewbaca= hold ball over head and practice perfect throw-in with a growl

death star= three or four touches and then a blast on goal- recover ball and go back to cruising speed

lightsaber= scissors or step overs

bb8= soul rolls/ladybugs

silly ones are princess leia= hold ball next to head and sigh, yoda= sit on ball and say in silly voice "mmm, good is soccer", luke skywalker= hold the ball like a lightsaber and swing it side to side


after a while shout darth vader and send out the vader to steal balls. balls kicked out of outer space mean the play who lost it joins darth vader as a storm trooper on the side. Play for a bit or until there is just one left. Vaders and troopers can have ball too or no ball.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 15, 2018)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> As club saturation  has taken over the younger age groups, I think that my daughter's statement is a testimony that a lot of coaches are using the same strategy with younger kids (5-9) as they do with older kids.      If we want to grow the sport, we need to do the following (parents & coaches):
> - Make it fun during practices and include some 4v4 games for at least 30 minutes of each practice.
> - Add scrimmage games where your bench players get a chance to play 40% to 50% of the time.
> - Coaches to set realistic expectations with parents about development process.
> - Parents to relax with these young ones. Focus on development and fun rather than trophies and spotlight time.



"If we want to grow the sport"....that's part of the problem.  US Soccer can't decide what's it's objectives are: to ID and train the top 10%, to prepare kids to play college-level ball, or to get as wide of participation as possible.  If anything, AYSO's recent moves away from participatory soccer and the tepid response to the US Soccer recommendations for ULittles (such as regarding tournaments and awards), seem to point away from wide participation as a goal.

As seesnake pointed out, the license curriculum wants coaches to emphasize directed learning through play...ideally very little by way of individual skills education, and building rapidly to one v ones, small sided games and the scrimmage, and very little by way of lines.  Though that may be changing with the grassroots approach, the same was true of both the youngers as the olders.  The tradeoff is that it leaves little time for coaches to do individual skill training, which is why we were told the place to learn that is not team training but through private training, skills academy or the parent.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 15, 2018)

seesnake said:


> silly ones are princess leia= hold ball next to head and sigh, yoda= sit on ball and say in silly voice "mmm, good is soccer", luke skywalker= hold the ball like a lightsaber and swing it side to side


Very cute drill.  Carefully, though, that the SJWs may come after you for implying that girls sigh while luke skywalker can carry a lightsaber.  They'd ask why can't it be Rey who swings the lightsaber, and besides the kids probably know Rey better.


----------



## seesnake (Feb 15, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Very cute drill.  Carefully, though, that the SJWs may come after you for implying that girls sigh while luke skywalker can carry a lightsaber.  They'd ask why can't it be Rey who swings the lightsaber, and besides the kids probably know Rey better.


Funny thing is I actually updated it for this exact reason- I realized it was a bit dated/backwards when I saw Rey kicking butt in whatever movie that was Should probably update on the google doc


----------



## MWN (Feb 15, 2018)

@SoccerFan4Life, if you look at the USSF PDI (https://www.ussoccer.com/~/media/files/coaches/2017/20171018-eng-october-2017-pdi.pdf?la=en) adopted two years ago and enacted in 2017, you will see a number of statements to the effect that its about fun and developing individual skills and ignoring the scoreboard for U10 and under.  Please read the PDI if you have not as it helps you and your coach understand how its supposed to be done.   In fact, the PDI for 7v7 expressly states:

Player Development Philosophy 

Coaches should have the age appropriate license issued by U.S. Soccer 
The training-to-game ratio should be 2-3 training sessions per game played 
Rosters should include no more than 12 players 
Players should participate in no more than 20 games per calendar year and in no more than one game per day 
*Every player should play a minimum of 50% of the time in each game*
*Results and standings should not be recorded*
*Players should have a minimum of 2 rest days per week during the season along with planned breaks from organized soccer during the calendar year*
Any travel should be limited to no more than an hour away
*Events (tournaments, showcases, festivals, etc.) should provide a predetermined number of games with no advancement, placement games or champions*
If your team is properly run and managed by a coach that is following the US Soccer recommendations then there are no "bench players."  But based on your post you clearly had a coach/club that gave the middle finger to the USSF mandates.

As far as US Soccer is concerned and based on the economics of youth Soccer in America, the responsibility for implementing the USSF PDI fall on the Youth Affiliates (AYSO, YES, US Club and US Youth Soccer).  I fundamentally disagree with @GraceT's assessment that US Soccer can't figure it out.  US Soccer knows exactly what its priorities are based on simple economics and that it has no business working with U-11 and unders.  Nearly 90% of US Soccer's revenue and expenditures are related to the US National Team (World Cup and Olympic teams).  US Soccer brings in just over $4M per year from youth registrations/membership.  Its sole method of changing the youth game is to get its Youth Affiliates to enforce the PDI's.  So if you had a bad experience then you should properly blame US Youth Soccer / Cal South / League (SCDSL, CSL, Presidio, etc.) / and the club that allowed your dumbass coach to be put in charge.

What you experienced with your daughter's team is a coach that ignored the USSF Player Development Initiatives.  My strong suggestion is move the kid to a team/coach that makes the experience fun and promises at least 50% playing time (you can find that in AYSO and many coaches of ULittles that understand wins are not that important for 9 year olds, but fun is the most important element).  

Finally, as @seesnake and @Grace T. pointed out, the "Grassroots Coaching" program adopted by the USSF (which is to be implemented by the Youth Affiliates) provides "At its core, the philosophy of U.S. Soccer’s grassroots pathway initiative is *Play-Practice-Play*, a philosophy coaches learn about in the Introduction to Grassroots Coaching module. This approach will focus on the player experiencing and learning through play while also empowering the coach to support his or her player's learning and developmental needs."


----------



## coachsamy (Feb 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> @SoccerFan4Life, if you look at the USSF PDI (https://www.ussoccer.com/~/media/files/coaches/2017/20171018-eng-october-2017-pdi.pdf?la=en) adopted two years ago and enacted in 2017, you will see a number of statements to the effect that its about fun and developing individual skills and ignoring the scoreboard for U10 and under.  Please read the PDI if you have not as it helps you and your coach understand how its supposed to be done.   In fact, the PDI for 7v7 expressly states:
> 
> Player Development Philosophy
> 
> ...


Shouldn't Cal South implement the "Events" rules when approving all of their sanctioned tournaments and leagues? The clowns that run all these circus will continue to do so as long nobody put a good stop to them! But then all clowns know is the circus life.


----------



## galaxydad (Feb 15, 2018)

Coaching U littles and coaching olders are very different. If we want to get the best players one CAN coach the U littles with fun in mind and develop the most important skills needed to become an elite player. The best college and pro coaches also have fun at practice. 

If you are with a U little team and your kid is not playing get out and find a place where they play. Each year there needs to be a discussion by both parents and coaches on how practices change and the practice environment changes  need to reflect the age of the players.

One issue with club soccer is the number of coaches that are not teachers of the game and do not teach to the age level etc of the players they work with 

With that said there are very few qualified to teach youngers. There are special skills, mindset and temperaments needed


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> As far as US Soccer is concerned and based on the economics of youth Soccer in America, the responsibility for implementing the USSF PDI fall on the Youth Affiliates (AYSO, YES, US Club and US Youth Soccer).



Fine.  You want to blame the lower organizations than US Soccer for failure to implement the PDP, o.k. I'll buy that.  I don't know about other states, but at least in CalSouth they are being wildly disregarded.  

No more than 20 games per year- son, niece, son's best friend, our local rival club NOPE
No more than 1 game per day- again son, niece, son's best friend, our local rival club NOPE
Every player should play at least 50%...well here some teams are better than others, including the  ones I've seen when I've reffed.
Results and standings should not be recorded: BIG NOPE HERE
Minimum rest periods: Well, some teams again are better than others here.
Travel limited to an hour away.  Well, that's a BIG NOPE here too, especially once you consider LA weekend traffic.
Tournaments without champions: That's a HELLA NOPE right there....the tournament biz is alive and well in southern California including for the ULittles and as far as I know they almost all declare champions.

Other than AYSO (which itself is moving away from these goals by extending United to the lower age groups, except for the 50% playtime which it is really committed to), I don't know of any clubs in my area that are really adhering to the PDP.  So whose fault is that?  US Soccer could have mandated the changes like it did the build out lines and some of the rules changes...it didn't.  We can argue from there over whose fault that is.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Feb 15, 2018)

Playing FIFA18 should be included in U-Little's weekly soccer curriculum.


----------



## MWN (Feb 15, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> Other than AYSO (which itself is moving away from these goals by extending United to the lower age groups, except for the 50% playtime which it is really committed to), I don't know of any clubs in my area that are really adhering to the PDP.  So whose fault is that?  US Soccer could have mandated the changes like it did the build out lines and some of the rules changes...it didn't.  We can argue from there over whose fault that is.


As members of the USSF, its the job of the Youth Affiliates and their affiliated programs/leagues to follow the PDI's.  The USSF says here is what we are going to do as a nation ... the Youth Affiliates execute.  Its the reason these Youth Affiliates exist.  The birth year, build-out line, no headers, etc., are all part of the PDI's.  50% is part of the PDI, so what we have are Youth Affiliates picking and choosing, which PDI.  This board is a microcosim of the crap the Youth Affiliates have to deal with.  Cal South tells the leagues that U7 Club Soccer won't exist anymore ... why?  Because the USSF PDI's said so.  What happens is parents go ape-shit screaming at Cal South that they can't do that ... their 6 year old NEEDS the competitive environment that Club Soccer presents and goshdarnit, why the heck is SCDSL and CSL not posting scores for the U9's?  We want rankings, scores, trophies, etc.   Ohhh ya ... the USSF PDI's said we were not supposed too ... the SCDSL is stupid.

So now we have parents that have rejected the USSF PDI's and are encouraging their clubs to give them what they want.  The Clubs tell the Leagues, f-this-PDI and that PDI, and the Leagues tell Cal South to go f-themselves.

Want to get this crap together, its starts with the parents.  Read the PDI's and tell your coach and club you back the USSF PDIs.


----------



## MWN (Feb 15, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> Shouldn't Cal South implement the "Events" rules when approving all of their sanctioned tournaments and leagues? The clowns that run all these circus will continue to do so as long nobody put a good stop to them! But then all clowns know is the circus life.


Yes and no.  Cal South would love to, but the parents don't want it.  See my post above.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> As members of the USSF, its the job of the Youth Affiliates and their affiliated programs/leagues to follow the PDI's.  The USSF says here is what we are going to do as a nation ... the Youth Affiliates execute.  Its the reason these Youth Affiliates exist.  The birth year, build-out line, no headers, etc., are all part of the PDI's.  50% is part of the PDI, so what we have are Youth Affiliates picking and choosing, which PDI.  This board is a microcosim of the crap the Youth Affiliates have to deal with.  Cal South tells the leagues that U7 Club Soccer won't exist anymore ... why?  Because the USSF PDI's said so.  What happens is parents go ape-shit screaming at Cal South that they can't do that ... their 6 year old NEEDS the competitive environment that Club Soccer presents and goshdarnit, why the heck is SCDSL and CSL not posting scores for the U9's?  We want rankings, scores, trophies, etc.   Ohhh ya ... the USSF PDI's said we were not supposed too ... the SCDSL is stupid.
> 
> So now we have parents that have rejected the USSF PDI's and are encouraging their clubs to give them what they want.  The Clubs tell the Leagues, f-this-PDI and that PDI, and the Leagues tell Cal South to go f-themselves.
> 
> Want to get this crap together, its starts with the parents.  Read the PDI's and tell your coach and club you back the USSF PDIs.


I always like the "blame the parents" answer....o.k. we can go back to being friends again.  

But in all seriousness, much like the US Men's Team fiasco, I think there's no one right answer to who bears the blame and lots of people have unclean hands.  Yes, the parents and their demands are partially to blame, so it is a bottom to top problem.  But it's also a top to bottom problem too: they enforced the no header rules (despite grumbling in some quarters), the build out line (despite that it was an ill thought out and poorly tested solution...I like the buildout line but think the way it was done could have been improved), and the birth year change (and all the havoc it caused...if they really meant it they could have gone with 6 month age groups, for example, with the ULittles, with the option to play up for smaller clubs).  To not make all the PDI mandatory was a choice that they made, so they bear part of the responsibility.


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Feb 15, 2018)

- That 50% rule is something that I have never heard.  That should be a mandate at least in the U Little flight 3 level. 
@Grace, I agree with your statements but it really starts with the club organizations rather than USSF.   Parents have a lot of blame on this as well.    We  (and they) are making it too complicated.
All clubs need to do is tell parents: Flight 3 is about having fun , 50% playing time and player development. 
Flight 2: More competitive, 30% playing time, more team development, less player development.  The rest of the individual player development will be on your own through private trainers/camps.

Flight 1: We own you.  You parents have no say, 10% playing time,  it's all about the win and finding the elite players to eventually send to an academy level.

Clearly, I am exaggerating with my statements above but it would clear up a bunch of confusion on expectations.

The one rule I would love for USSF to mandate is to get clubs to focus on personal development in the Spring (futsal, indoor, player development drills) and team development the rest of the year.   Allow 4 to 6 week break in the summer and another 4 weeks in Winter.


----------



## coachsamy (Feb 15, 2018)

MWN said:


> Yes and no.  Cal South would love to, but the parents don't want it.  See my post above.


And you are completely right! Parents keep buying all these tickets to the circus and they are super sugar up into the kool aid. Under no circumstances a ULittle parent should let their child be on a team that won't play them. I wouldn't and I won't let my kid be sitting on a bench watching other kids play. 

Here is a hint for parents: You sign up your kid to play a sport.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 15, 2018)

SoccerFan4Life said:


> - That 50% rule is something that I have never heard.  That should be a mandate at least in the U Little flight 3 level.
> @Grace, I agree with your statements but it really starts with the club organizations rather than USSF.   Parents have a lot of blame on this as well.    We  (and they) are making it too complicated.
> All clubs need to do is tell parents: Flight 3 is about having fun , 50% playing time and player development.
> Flight 2: More competitive, 30% playing time, more team development, less player development.  The rest of the individual player development will be on your own through private trainers/camps.
> ...



The problem with the flight system is that the parents that have the most leverage are the ones who are the top players on the team (o.k. and maybe the team manager) regardless of flight.  If a bench player's parents don't like that the club isn't adhering to the PDP, well maybe the DOC says you don't like it here, maybe some other club might be more to your liking.  But the top players are eyeing promotion either within their own club or with another club.  If the club doesn't win, and get that promotion, maybe they go to another club.  And with pre-DA getting younger and younger, the impetus to move up is always going to be there.  If the club has multiple flights on the ULittles level, probably the best coaches/most attention is being assigned to the flight 1 team anyways, giving the flight 3 team little leverage since the attitude is they should just be grateful to even be there and write the check.  It's a free rider problem since those who have the most leverage (getting scholarships even for some teams....look at the ads for impact players for 2008/2009s and scholarships being available on the soccer announcements boards) also are invested in getting the most wins and the most play time so their kids can in turn move up.  The flights themselves impede the implementing of the PDP.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Feb 15, 2018)

My DD is on a U-Little team with a small roster, so playing time was not an issue.  But our coach did tell all the parents "before" the beginning of the season what the policy is:
-Scrimmage, spring league and fall league: 50% minimum
-Group play in tourneys:  50% minimum
-Semifinal and final in tourneys:  everyone plays, but no guarantee of minimum playing time
-State Cup:  coach has total discretion.  no guarantee at all.
I was fine with the policy, and also appreciated the fact that it was clearly explained to the parents before the season started.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 15, 2018)

Messi>CR7 said:


> My DD is on a U-Little team with a small roster, so playing time was not an issue.  But our coach did tell all the parents "before" the beginning of the season what the policy is:
> -Scrimmage, spring league and fall league: 50% minimum
> -Group play in tourneys:  50% minimum
> -Semifinal and final in tourneys:  everyone plays, but no guarantee of minimum playing time
> ...



I like this and it really makes sense.  But to throw one wrench in scaling it up beyond one club: the keepers.  You'd sort of need a special rule for the keepers.  If you have just one, that keeper is stuck in goal and not developing their field skills, which isn't good at the ULittle level.  If you have 2, then potentially the keeper has only 50% playing time and that time is in goal...which means for the keepers you'd need to push for a 75% minimum guarantee or they'd be in a worse position than just having 1 FT keeper.  Or you could do what AYSO does for the U8s and mandate no one in goal for more than one quarter of the time (I can see the merits of that, but it messes around with a midgame substitution, risks injury to an unwarmed keeper, risks injury to an untrained keeper if the coach insists on things like coming out or diving, puts kids in there that really may not want to be, and I know kids like my son would hate that rule since he specifically wants to be a keeper).


----------



## RichMan (Feb 15, 2018)

Messi>CR7 said:


> Playing FIFA18 should be included in U-Little's weekly soccer curriculum.


Hey, no joke, there are seriously some benefits to that!!!


----------



## socalkdg (Feb 19, 2018)

Messi>CR7 said:


> Playing FIFA18 should be included in U-Little's weekly soccer curriculum.


And their parents.


----------



## Red Devil Fan (Feb 19, 2018)

coachsamy said:


> Shouldn't Cal South implement the "Events" rules when approving all of their sanctioned tournaments and leagues? The clowns that run all these circus will continue to do so as long nobody put a good stop to them! But then all clowns know is the circus life.


Right they can’t even implement their own rules in State Cup/National Cup.
To have sanctioning from Cal South they say you need  to have a minimum of 2 game times rest between games. One of my teams played almost back to back games. We were shorted  a half hour of rest time.


----------



## MWN (Feb 19, 2018)

@toucan, child psychologists understand there is an age range where kids become competitive, which is basically between 8-10.  After 10, almost every kid is as competitive as you write and understands the correlation between practice and success on the pitch (U12).  Just like academics, we will have prodigies where competition clicks on at 5.  Our problem from a national perspective is Soccer is the number 5 sport from a popularity standpoint and we don't have generations of fans.  Dad and sons tend to throw around a football or baseball and not kick the soccer ball.  If we are driving kids from the sport at age 9 and 10 because its not fun then we ultimately lose and retard the acceptance of the sport.  So the question becomes do we set the "competitive" level at age 10 or 11, knowing that there will be a few kids that are frustrated or do we allow parents and Youth Affiliates to go against the program.

I appreciate what you are saying and don't disagree with a lot of it.  Having coached 8 and 9 year olds, I always had 2-3 kids that cried when we lost and 7-8 kids that only cared what the after-game snack was.  That said, of those 11 to 12 players, I had 10 parents that cared deeply what the score was even though many of their kids didn't.  Generally, I think we need to set standards and if we are going to deviate, make sure that deviation from the standards are based on sound rationale.

When Klinsman and the USSF adopted these PDI's it did so by examining what was working in Countries like Germany and Belgium.  It relied on the advice of DoublePASS (Belgian Co.), which gained extensive notoriety and is credited with turning around Germany's National program, which adheres to similar competitive concepts as the USSF adopted, so its not just Belgium.  Most European countries don't put 9 year olds in competitive leagues/games, but focus on the fun and development aspect.  (see, https://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/may/23/germany-bust-boom-talent - "We believe it is not good for a nine-year-old to play [regularly] for a professional football club because it changes the reasons why he plays football," says Sebastian Neuf, a member of the football school's management.)

In sum, I tend to agree that the USSF's PDI instructing Youth Affiliates to make changes designed to keep the game fun and develop individual skill through the U11 stage is sound and similar to what many European countries do (especially the ones that tend to kick our butts on a regular basis).


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Feb 20, 2018)

toucan said:


> Let us praise whichever Lord we pray to that Calsouth does not mandate all of its "u-little" rules to all tournaments and in all leagues.
> 
> Americans are competitive.
> Americans love winners and will not tolerate losers. ]
> ...


----------



## seesnake (Feb 21, 2018)

"I believe in a free market allowing for leagues to determine what works for them. I don't want some Belgiphile mandating his preferred system or style of play to me or my league."


The problem with this is that it caters to parents- many of whom have not the slightest idea of what quality soccer is supposed to look like, how it is most likely to develop in very young players, how to periodize rest, or the development psychology of young children- are the ones that will create the market so they may force a poor model on a club or league. Then again, it is the job of the clubs and leagues to educate their market base....


----------



## MWN (Feb 21, 2018)

seesnake said:


> The problem with this is that it caters to parents- many of whom have not the slightest idea of what quality soccer is supposed to look like, how it is most likely to develop in very young players, how to periodize rest, or the development psychology of young children- are the ones that will create the market so they may force a poor model on a club or league. Then again, it is the job of the clubs and leagues to educate their market base....


On this note, the USSF is attacking the "coach" education problem through its new Grass Roots Coaching Licenses that all competitive coaches will need to complete.  The F and E Licenses are now gone, and the all youth coaches will need to complete the free "grassroots coaching" courses, which will reinforce the play-practice-play goals.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 21, 2018)

MWN said:


> On this note, the USSF is attacking the "coach" education problem through its new Grass Roots Coaching Licenses that all competitive coaches will need to complete.  The F and E Licenses are now gone, and the all youth coaches will need to complete the free "grassroots coaching" courses, which will reinforce the play-practice-play goals.



If they are going to be in the licensing biz, it seems to me that one reform they could make is a continuing education requirement.  Lawyers, doctors, accountants, teachers all have them.  They aren't perfect...lots of CE is worthless and gives makework that people just give lip service to.  Supposedly, the argument is that soccer doesn't need to do that because the coaches are supposed to all be working their way up to an A.  But the time and money required to get to an A makes that a challenge for a lot of coaches, particularly if they have day jobs too.  One of my biggest gripes is that a lot of non-goalkeeper coaches are teaching really old methods still (like bending down on your knee to pick a ground ball or having the keeper sit back on the line or the keeper should punt thing) or don't know what to do with their goalkeepers and the licensing courses (at least through the D) don't cover much by way of goalkeeping...the CE's could focus on particular topics like team communication, goalkeeping, game tactics, Coerver-type drilling.


----------



## Lambchop (Feb 21, 2018)

toucan said:


> Let us praise whichever Lord we pray to that Calsouth does not mandate all of its "u-little" rules to all tournaments and in all leagues.  Rigid "there is only one way to skin a cat" thinking is what kills innovation and development in science, business, government, and yes ... soccer.  Whatever USSF thinks is the "one and only" way of teaching and training today will be cast aside in a couple of years for whatever "newer and shinier" philosophy becomes popular at the time.
> 
> The current USSF philosophy is basically a ripoff of what seems to have worked well in Belgium, and nowhere else.  A couple of knuckleheads at USSF decided that if it works there, it will work in the USA, nothwithstanding that the guidelines and rule-changes were never tested here.  Instead, they were just rammed down everybody's throat.  They never thought to ask, but nobody in the USA wants to become Belgian.  It's a nice little country, and every European conqueror since Julius Caesar must have thought so, because Belgium has lost every war in its history.  I don't want to adopt the philosophy of a country whose only military defense plan is to open its dikes to make its ground soggy.
> 
> ...


You do understand that we have been doing it the "American" way for the last 35 years?  And how has that worked out?  "Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything."


----------



## El Clasico (Feb 21, 2018)

Lambchop said:


> You do understand that we have been doing it the "American" way for the last 35 years?  And how has that worked out?  "Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything."


I believe it is more growing pains than anything else. I am simply amazed by the sheer number of imbeciles at the practices, on the sidelines and at the games who have ZERO experience themselves in the sport, particularly the moms THAT have no experience in any sport preaching to anyone who will listen, what the US needs to do.  Once these idiots age out and the next generation of parents with actual playing experience comes along, you may finally see real change.

As for the "American" way comment, the answer is NO!! Upon arrival 25 years ago, I noticed that there was no style of play.  It seemed that everyone was just winging it and different groups and regions were all trying to copy different styles based on what they thought was best or possibly based on their own roots.  It wasn't until 10 years ago that US Soccer came in and tried to dictate a National style of play and you are correct, that has been a complete disaster. The men have gone from Good (not very good or great) to downright awful. No world cup, not Olympics last two cycles. I still hear people talk about how good they are and those are the people we need to get rid of. They are the cancer that is American soccer. Now we see GDA and the women's side headed in the same direction and parents still line up their kids to lead them to the GDA slaughter house. In 24 months, the USWNT will have trouble staying in the top 10 in the world rankings. I predict that they won't win more than one world cup in the next 10 cycles. The YNT just lost to Mexico for the first time in history and I predict that going forward, we will lose more than we win.

The US needs to embrace their own style. Use what they have always had which is size, speed and athleticism and build on that, which is not to say rely on that.  Use your strengths and then incorporate the technical and tactical aspects of the possession game and make no mistake, I do not mean to say that size is everything.  No sir, not at all.  Open the doors to more diverse players by style and background. Maybe purge out some of the wealthy suburban players that are only there because they write checks that don't bounce and replace them with players of less means but much more passion and flair.

Lastly, get rid of all the a** kissers that volunteer at all levels, but mostly at the top that tow the company line rather than see for themselves that maybe something should be changed. You can see who they are on the fields and on the boards here.  It's the people that always feel the need to defend the stupid rules and regulations that Cal south and leagues implement. I came here from a much smaller country that beats the US team and we don't have any of the silly rules that they have here. Most kids before 13 or 14 don't even have coaches, let alone high dollar ones but you still refuse to think outside of the box.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 21, 2018)

El Clasico said:


> I believe it is more growing pains than anything else. I am simply amazed by the sheer number of imbeciles at the practices, on the sidelines and at the games who have ZERO experience themselves in the sport, particularly the moms THAT have no experience in any sport preaching to anyone who will listen, what the US needs to do.  Once these idiots age out and the next generation of parents with actual playing experience comes along, you may finally see real change.


You say some stuff I agree with and some stuff I don't.  But on the whole we moms have more experience than the dads in the sport.  Remember in the 80s and 90s soccer was consider a "girl's sport"...while I knew lots of girl's in the burbs playing soccer there were very few boys doing it (anyone remember the film "Lady Bugs").  From my AYSO volunteer days, the women coaches generally had some experience (even if just a little) playing.  The dads might have broader coaching experience (across multiple sports), but a lot of what they were trying to apply was from American football (I've told the story before about how one coach tried to get the kids into a three point stance to rush across the build out line in the U7 level).  I reffed both my kids in AYSO and it was always the dads that came in with the killer winner-take-all attitude....rarely had problems in the girl's games...sure the mom coaches could be obnoxious too in yelling instructions at the kids but it usually contained more by way of direction. All stereotypes, but given how prevalent the sport was among girls v. boys in the 80s and 90s, I think the "particularly the moms" comment isn't well grounded in fact.


----------



## MWN (Feb 21, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> If they are going to be in the licensing biz, it seems to me that one reform they could make is a continuing education requirement.  Lawyers, doctors, accountants, teachers all have them.  They aren't perfect...lots of CE is worthless and gives makework that people just give lip service to.  Supposedly, the argument is that soccer doesn't need to do that because the coaches are supposed to all be working their way up to an A.  But the time and money required to get to an A makes that a challenge for a lot of coaches, particularly if they have day jobs too.  One of my biggest gripes is that a lot of non-goalkeeper coaches are teaching really old methods still (like bending down on your knee to pick a ground ball or having the keeper sit back on the line or the keeper should punt thing) or don't know what to do with their goalkeepers and the licensing courses (at least through the D) don't cover much by way of goalkeeping...the CE's could focus on particular topics like team communication, goalkeeping, game tactics, Coerver-type drilling.


There is no question that GK coaching from a USSF perspective is lacking and they basically left it to the NSCAA to fill that gap.  I'm very curious to see what the new grassroots programs will emphasize on the GK front (my son is a 03 GK).  That said, I highly recommend the NSCAA GK coaching videos if you have not seen them.


----------



## timbuck (Feb 21, 2018)

The coaching education isn’t terrible. It’s the coaches that don’t follow any of it that are the problem. 
I’ve nevrr heard any coaching class talk about have a u10 team play with a deep lying sweeper. 
And we have the build out line and no punting for younger players. But as soon as the cross into the next age group everyone is whacking the ball down the field as hard and as far as possible.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 21, 2018)

MWN said:


> There is no question that GK coaching from a USSF perspective is lacking and they basically left it to the NSCAA to fill that gap.  I'm very curious to see what the new grassroots programs will emphasize on the GK front (my son is a 03 GK).  That said, I highly recommend the NSCAA GK coaching videos if you have not seen them.


I have them.  They are good.  Wanted to take some of the live classes when I was still coaching my son in GK but they were mostly in the South and East Coast.  They are a great introduction, but they miss some of the subtleties such as corrections to look for.  For example, my son while solid on the low balls and good on the high balls or direct hits, was struggling on mid height balls for which short aerial collapsing dives were required (he hasn't been introduced yet to the high dive)...the trainer noted he was falling a hair too early probably from nerves during the game...problem fixed after a few practice sessions....his coach, let alone myself, would never have noticed that.  Several goalkeeper coaches had missed it too.



timbuck said:


> The coaching education isn’t terrible. It’s the coaches that don’t follow any of it that are the problem.
> I’ve nevrr heard any coaching class talk about have a u10 team play with a deep lying sweeper.
> And we have the build out line and no punting for younger players. But as soon as the cross into the next age group everyone is whacking the ball down the field as hard and as far as possible.


This is a problem of the coach not having been shown the data and educated.  The data that's been done now in a few studies shows that punting into a 50/50 situation is a horrible idea and leads to turnovers and counterattacks.  The only time it gives you an advantage is if you have a goalkeeper that not only has excellent punting technique and excellent aim, but also a striker that can 1) control the aerial, 2) is fast 3) can turn it quickly, 4) can stay in an onside position (that's partially a flaw in ref education too....a goalkeeper punt to a striker in an offside position is still a turnover but a lot of refs don't call it) and 5) has an opposing coach that doesn't know how to counter (a high defensive line).  Short of that, the punt is only really effective to force a team that has a high press and a goalkeeper that floats up to fall back and relieve pressure on the high press....the goalkeeper should vary between a long and short in that situation to keep the other side guessing.  Also a very limited exception: short field and you have a goalkeeper that can actually score off the punt because the opposite goalkeeper is pressing high and playing in a Neuer sweeper keeper style.  Coaches if they had the data would be ridiculous to go back to the old way of doing it....many do it because the refs don't enforce the rule....part of the problem with the build out line and CalSouth was that it wasn't accompanied with sufficient training to either coaches or refs to explain why (the refs had problems enforcing it even consistently).


----------



## watfly (Feb 21, 2018)

I few thoughts....First, I'm less curious about what other countries are doing to create world class soccer players and more curious about what other countries are doing to create world class athletes in American dominated sports like basketball.  In the last couple of decades the % of foreign born players in the NBA has grown from negligible to over 25%.  How did this happen?  Did other countries follow an American model to create these players or did they adapt a model that fit their culture.  Maybe this analysis wouldn't bear fruit but I am curious because whatever US Soccer is doing now to create world class players is clearly not working.

As far as the PDI's go they are well-intentioned, but ill-conceived.  I'm sure they looked good on the whiteboard but are of limited value in reality.  Take the build out line for example.  It's great to encourage playing out the back but legislating it only provides short term benefits, if any.  It needs to be taught, not legislated to have any real long term benefit.  The ineffectiveness of the BOL was only compounded by the fact that many refs are still struggling with the application of the BOL over a year after it has been implemented.  Some of the ref's interpretations completely defeated the intent to encourage building out the back.  Not to mention the coaches that just figured out how to bomb the ball forward within the confines of the BOL rule.  Small field and small sided games are a great idea but instead of creating all these rules and postage stamp field sizes, US Soccer could of just said "play more futsal".  I don't blame organizations for ignoring some of the fields sizes implemented by US Soccer.  Anyone that saw the 7v7 games at Surf Cup the last two years with the US Soccer regulation fields realized that these postage stamp fields mainly just encouraged shot taking from anywhere on the field.  IMHO US Soccer needs to do less legislating of and more investing in soccer (like making advanced coaching training more accessible and less costly, DA is still a largely a pay-to-play model, etc).

Finally, I'm kind of tired of the statement "as long as they're having fun".  I'm being a bit facetious but "fun" is overrated, I prefer a passion for the sport.  Passion will get you through those tough and demanding practices, fun won't.  Yes, there has to be some element of having fun but for highly competitive kids that's not going to cut it.  Soccer also has to be challenging and rewarding, among other things.  My son's team had a lot of fun this year, I've never seen a group of kids bond as friends more quickly.  However, some of that fun came at the expense of focus.  At times, it bothered my son as it made practices less productive.  Even our coach commented that it was a tough sometimes to balance the free spirited, fun loving nature of the kids with productive soccer training.


----------



## Lambchop (Feb 21, 2018)

El Clasico said:


> I believe it is more growing pains than anything else. I am simply amazed by the sheer number of imbeciles at the practices, on the sidelines and at the games who have ZERO experience themselves in the sport, particularly the moms THAT have no experience in any sport preaching to anyone who will listen, what the US needs to do.  Once these idiots age out and the next generation of parents with actual playing experience comes along, you may finally see real change.
> 
> As for the "American" way comment, the answer is NO!! Upon arrival 25 years ago, I noticed that there was no style of play.  It seemed that everyone was just winging it and different groups and regions were all trying to copy different styles based on what they thought was best or possibly based on their own roots.  It wasn't until 10 years ago that US Soccer came in and tried to dictate a National style of play and you are correct, that has been a complete disaster. The men have gone from Good (not very good or great) to downright awful. No world cup, not Olympics last two cycles. I still hear people talk about how good they are and those are the people we need to get rid of. They are the cancer that is American soccer. Now we see GDA and the women's side headed in the same direction and parents still line up their kids to lead them to the GDA slaughter house. In 24 months, the USWNT will have trouble staying in the top 10 in the world rankings. I predict that they won't win more than one world cup in the next 10 cycles. The YNT just lost to Mexico for the first time in history and I predict that going forward, we will lose more than we win.
> 
> ...


Your comment is so off on the "wealthy suburban players" it isn't even funny.  I work two jobs so that my kids can play and so that I don't bounce checks. At one point I worked three jobs because I am a single parent.  Maybe if some of the parents of those who can't afford to pay  would pick up an extra job or two, they could afford it too.  But I guess it is easier to sit back and complain, oh poor me, I can't afford it. By the way, my kids have plenty of passion and you can usually find them in the street, yard or house kicking the ball around for fun when they aren't at school or practice.  So many stupid assumptions.


----------



## Mystery Train (Feb 21, 2018)

Grace T. said:


> The data that's been done now in a few studies shows that punting into a 50/50 situation is a horrible idea and leads to turnovers and counterattacks.


True.  I would add, however, one more reason coaches fall back on demanding the GK to punt the hell out of the ball:  If both teams basically suck at connecting passes, punting deep means that even if you lose the 50/50 ball off the punt, the other team is going to turn it right back over to you, but in their defensive half instead of yours.  It's lazy coaching and downright awful to watch, but it will win games when the passing and possession skills aren't there.  This is true for most AYSO games and 100% of the HS soccer games I watched this year.  Unfortunately, it seems to be the M.O. for most of the college soccer world, too.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 21, 2018)

watfly said:


> I few thoughts....First, I'm less curious about what other countries are doing to create world class soccer players and more curious about what other countries are doing to create world class athletes in American dominated sports like basketball.  In the last couple of decades the % of foreign born players in the NBA has grown from negligible to over 25%.  How did this happen?  Did other countries follow an American model to create these players or did they adapt a model that fit their culture.  Maybe this analysis wouldn't bear fruit but I am curious because whatever US Soccer is doing now to create world class players is clearly not working.
> 
> .


I'm not an expert but I can answer a bit what Italy does.  In Italy, youth basketball is organized largely the same way as soccer.  The professional adult leagues have promotion and relegation and are organized in a pyramid of leagues, and have affiliated academies, like with soccer.    There is also some pay-to-play there too, particularly over the last 20 years or so, to bring over American coaches, because the academy system isn't very deep.  They also, like with soccer, have a very extensive rec program, and particularly many beach towns have made investments in basketball courts to be played over the summer when the soccer season is down  They play on postage sized basketball courts too (3 v 3 in the early years).  Side editorial: the postage size soccer courts in Italy have more to do with real estate space than anything else....they have fewer larger fields than we do and those are generally kept pristine and under lock and key....you can't show up with buddies and just scrimmage on them.

I remember reading an article with Kobe Bryant a while back (who actually spent a significant amount of time in Italy as a kid learning basketball).  He said that the training in Italy emphasized technique a lot more than athleticism (which I take with a grain of salt since he was already very athletic).  He criticized AAU ball for emphasizing athleticism over technique.


----------



## Grace T. (Feb 21, 2018)

Mystery Train said:


> True.  I would add, however, one more reason coaches fall back on demanding the GK to punt the hell out of the ball:  If both teams basically suck at connecting passes, punting deep means that even if you lose the 50/50 ball off the punt, the other team is going to turn it right back over to you, but in their defensive half instead of yours.  It's lazy coaching and downright awful to watch, but it will win games when the passing and possession skills aren't there.  This is true for most AYSO games and 100% of the HS soccer games I watched this year.  Unfortunately, it seems to be the M.O. for most of the college soccer world, too.


Fair.  On the bronze level, though, I've seen teams that tried this get slammed by teams that can actually pass.  And I would hope that at least by U11 for teams playing in silver or above, connecting a pass isn't less than a 50/50 proposition, but I could be wrong......


----------



## El Clasico (Feb 21, 2018)

Lambchop said:


> Your comment is so off on the "wealthy suburban players" it isn't even funny.  I work two jobs so that my kids can play and so that I don't bounce checks. At one point I worked three jobs because I am a single parent.  Maybe if some of the parents of those who can't afford to pay  would pick up an extra job or two, they could afford it too.  But I guess it is easier to sit back and complain, oh poor me, I can't afford it. By the way, my kids have plenty of passion and you can usually find them in the street, yard or house kicking the ball around for fun when they aren't at school or practice.  So many stupid assumptions.


Thanks for helping me make my point about the clueless soccer moms yapping on the sidelines. If your kids aren't "wealthy suburban players", why would you, as a random poster, feel the need to let other anonymous posters know that you are a single mom who works two or three jobs so your kids could play club soccer demonstrating your life priorities?  Why do we care?  Why do you care? Why do you feel the need to lash out if this doesn't apply to you? Some of those parents who "can't afford it" usually just play Sunday leagues and spend time with their kids rather than take on a second or third job. Their priorities are just different than yours. Generally, the ones playing club are because some track suit scouted the mex league games and told them not to worry, we can get other chumps to pony up so your kid can play club. Sorry, that you get the sharp end of the stick but life isn't fair and you should already know that by now.  Lastly, nobody is disputing that latchkey kids can usually be found in the streets.


----------



## Lambchop (Feb 21, 2018)

El Clasico said:


> Thanks for helping me make my point about the clueless soccer moms yapping on the sidelines. If your kids aren't "wealthy suburban players", why would you, as a random poster, feel the need to let other anonymous posters know that you are a single mom who works two or three jobs so your kids could play club soccer demonstrating your life priorities?  Why do we care?  Why do you care? Why do you feel the need to lash out if this doesn't apply to you? Some of those parents who "can't afford it" usually just play Sunday leagues and spend time with their kids rather than take on a second or third job. Their priorities are just different than yours. Generally, the ones playing club are because some track suit scouted the mex league games and told them not to worry, we can get other chumps to pony up so your kid can play club. Sorry, that you get the sharp end of the stick but life isn't fair and you should already know that by now.  Lastly, nobody is disputing that latchkey kids can usually be found in the streets.


My kids have actually played the so called "Sunday" league that is when players actually care enough to show up or aren't on vacation as they say. The reason I made the comment is because you made so many generalizations it is pathetic.  My life priorities are my children I wonder if your children are your priority.  If you only knew, but alas you sound like some macho dad know it all.


----------



## Denied (Feb 21, 2018)

My daughter, who is 21 and playing soccer in college, sent me a text to inform me that she is now a coach for a boys U8 soccer team. This is right up her alley because she plans on teaching. She asked me for advice, the only thing I told her was make practice fun.


----------



## outside! (Feb 22, 2018)

Denied said:


> My daughter, who is 21 and playing soccer in college, sent me a text to inform me that she is now a coach for a boys U8 soccer team. This is right up her alley because she plans on teaching. She asked me for advice, the only thing I told her was make practice fun.


More scrimmage, less drills. Let the kids run the scrimmage, pull players aside for quick 0ne-on-one tips.


----------



## Messi>CR7 (Feb 22, 2018)

Denied said:


> My daughter, who is 21 and playing soccer in college, sent me a text to inform me that she is now a coach for a boys U8 soccer team. This is right up her alley because she plans on teaching. She asked me for advice, the only thing I told her was make practice fun.


U8 means they're six turning seven, right?  Hand out candies at the end of every practice.

If she has a small budget , go to Dollar Tree store and buy some cheap super hero craps.  Hand them out to kids that did something special during training sessions.


----------



## coachsamy (Feb 22, 2018)

Lambchop said:


> Your comment is so off on the "wealthy suburban players" it isn't even funny. * I work two jobs so that my kids can play* and so that I don't bounce checks. At one point I worked three jobs because I am a single parent.  Maybe if some of the parents of those who can't afford to pay  would pick up an extra job or two, they could afford it too.  But I guess it is easier to sit back and complain, oh poor me, I can't afford it. By the way, my kids have plenty of passion and you can usually find them in the street, yard or house kicking the ball around for fun when they aren't at school or practice.  So many stupid assumptions.


Are you seriously saying that you work 2 jobs to pay the range rover's lease of some tracksuit wearing used car salesman?


----------



## SoccerFan4Life (Feb 22, 2018)

In my 8 years of rec/club soccer experience, I have seen some women get out of control with the yelling and berating of refs and kids.  However, it's typically the men that start problems with coaches, refs, and other parents.   Then they wonder why their child wants to quit.  I always yell at them and tell them to "relax,it's just a youth soccer game, it's not the world cup".    This typically works and they shut up.


----------



## ilovethisgame (Feb 23, 2018)

Too bad this thread got sideways with all the banter....

Just wish everyone would call out the U-Little coaches that suck the life out of our kids.

Maybe then they would start teaching the kids on the team instead of recruiting the next athlete.

I know wishful thinking...Maybe we should just look at all the clubs that suddenly become irrelevant after U11.


----------



## Chalklines (Feb 23, 2018)

Or how about calling out the parents who suck the life out of a program because they cant accept their player isn't any good.

It's funny how year in and year out its always the bench players parents who always make the biggest stink and end up blaming the coaches or other players on the team for their lack of ability.

AYSO serves a great purpose for these special walks of life


----------



## ilovethisgame (Feb 23, 2018)

Chalklines said:


> Or how about calling out the parents who suck the life out of a program because they cant accept their player isn't any good.
> 
> It's funny how year in and year out its always the bench players parents who always make the biggest stink and end up blaming the coaches or other players on the team for their lack of ability.
> 
> AYSO serves a great purpose for these special walks of life


My younger boy hasn’t been in that position, but it does suck watching the managers kid pick daisy’s and carve out time from players.

The Elite st coach can’t fit his head in the car by the end of the day after getting told how wonderful he is.  Where are they when those same super stars are sitting on the bench in 2-3 years?  Polishing their U-9 trophies I bet!


----------



## timbuck (Mar 1, 2018)

I was going to take the first course last night - 4v4.  Cost is $25.  Anyone have a coupon code?


----------



## AFC (Mar 1, 2018)

toucan said:


> In other words, USSF has decided that there is only one true way to structure practices, and one true way to train players, and it will not give licenses to those who don't agree with its homodoctrinal approach.
> 
> In 17th-century Europe, you couldn't get a degree in medicine unless you could show proficiency in astrology.  Galileo was put under house arrest by the Church for suggesting that the universe did not revolve around the Earth.  In 21st Century America, USSF will not license you unless you confess that its "play-practice-play" doctrine is the only correct doctrine.


This has always been this way at USSF licensing. To pass the course you need to do what instructors tell you. Once you are coaching, it's all up to you now.


----------



## MWN (Mar 1, 2018)

toucan said:


> In other words, USSF has decided that there is only one true way to structure practices, and one true way to train players, and it will not give licenses to those who don't agree with its homodoctrinal approach.
> 
> In 17th-century Europe, you couldn't get a degree in medicine unless you could show proficiency in astrology.  Galileo was put under house arrest by the Church for suggesting that the universe did not revolve around the Earth.  In 21st Century America, USSF will not license you unless you confess that its "play-practice-play" doctrine is the only correct doctrine.


First let me say ... "Heretic, Heretic, HERETIC!!!!" 

Now that we have that out of the way, I think many of us forget that the vast majority of soccer players are not in the club/competitive system.  They are just kids looking for fun and exercise and play multiple sports.  The coaching ranks are filled with Dads and Moms that don't know how to run a practice and make it fun.  I can't tell you how many times I've seen some Recreational Coach spend 15 minutes having 7 year olds do "static warmup/stretches" and then move to drills, drills, drills and finish with some game like "sharks and minnows" because "dammit, that is how we did it when I was a kid."  The grassroots courses are for these guys.

The move is to put in a system that allows those parent-coaches to get some basic guidance on how to keep these kids in the sport and create a love for the sport so "futbol / football / soccer" becomes something they recreationally play and watch.

With regard to the 10% of kids that will move into the club ranks and the .05% that will play at a high level, the D-A licenses exist.

Nothing in the grassroots courses and upper level courses prevents a coach from running a practice however they see fit, but at least they will be taught a system the USSF believes in.


----------



## timbuck (Mar 1, 2018)

Flame suit on-
But the  AYSO u8, u10 and u12 courses pretty much mirrors what ussf is doing with these new  grassroots courses.  And the AYSO courses are free of charge.
Too bad US soccer couldn’t work with AYSO instead of reinventing the wheel ($$$$).


----------



## outside! (Mar 1, 2018)

timbuck said:


> Flame suit on-
> But the  AYSO u8, u10 and u12 courses pretty much mirrors what ussf is doing with these new  grassroots courses.  And the AYSO courses are free of charge.
> Too bad US soccer couldn’t work with AYSO instead of reinventing the wheel ($$$$).


Why on earth do you expect adults to work together for the benefit of the kids?


----------

