# Private training with current head coach



## meatsweats (Nov 20, 2018)

So, there are a number of players doing privates with the head coach of both of my kids teams. I find that unethical. My kids train with a long time trainer that we've used before and love. Olders coach told her yesterday in a conversation that he thinks it's conflicting to train with another trainer as they might be teaching different tactics. Tactics? In private training? Isn't that what team training is for. Am I overreacting or does this seem like a way for coaches to make money off their own players and for parents to basically pay coaches some training cash on the side and get a little preferential treatment. I know it's a pay to play system, but this seems too far. Am I wrong?


----------



## MarkM (Nov 20, 2018)

meatsweats said:


> So, there are a number of players doing privates with the head coach of both of my kids teams. I find that unethical. My kids train with a long time trainer that we've used before and love. Olders coach told her yesterday in a conversation that he thinks it's conflicting to train with another trainer as they might be teaching different tactics. Tactics? In private training? Isn't that what team training is for. Am I overreacting or does this seem like a way for coaches to make money off their own players and for parents to basically pay coaches some training cash on the side and get a little preferential treatment. I know it's a pay to play system, but this seems too far. Am I wrong?


Agree meatsweats.  I wish that there were some standard policies that clubs would be forced to adopt that prevented this stuff.  A simple rule that prevented coaches from giving privates to their own players would go a long way.  They can train other girls within their club, but not their own players.  It would also stop some of the recruiting that goes on by private trainers as well.


----------



## MyDaughtersAKeeper (Nov 20, 2018)

It is wrong but seems to just be the way it is.  At least with some coaches/clubs.


----------



## meatsweats (Nov 20, 2018)

MarkM said:


> Agree meatsweats.  I wish that there were some standard policies that clubs would be forced to adopt that prevented this stuff.  A simple rule that prevented coaches from giving privates to their own players would go a long way.  They can train other girls within their club, but not their own players.  It would also stop some of the recruiting that goes on by private trainers as well.


I thought that was the case back when my older was U11, but seems it was a gentleman's rule, not club and now it appears normal. How would USSF feel about this? Aren't we trying to level our playing field, not divide the haves and have nots even more. How do we know the best players are on the field if some can't afford to pay for privates or choose not to? Do coaches play favorites if they want to continue getting ca$h? All this just seems a complete conflict.


----------



## timbuck (Nov 20, 2018)

How about just build it into your club costs?  Each coach will offer up 3 extra sessions of one hour each, per week for up to 5 players per session.  Use it or lose it.  If you can't fit it in your coach's schedule, you can try to find another coach at the club.


----------



## meatsweats (Nov 20, 2018)

timbuck said:


> How about just build it into your club costs?  Each coach will offer up 3 extra sessions of one hour each, per week for up to 5 players per session.  Use it or lose it.  If you can't fit it in your coach's schedule, you can try to find another coach at the club.


Ha! Yea. OK. That's taxable income.


----------



## timbuck (Nov 20, 2018)

I'm telling you--   All it will take is a pissed off parent with a connection at the IRS and this whole thing blows apart.  Not just the private training, but the entire club soccer enterprise will blow up.  Maybe the top of each club is protected with their 503(c) filings.  But there are so many coaches getting paid (not tons of money, but they are getting paid) without paying taxes. 
And are coaches 1099 or W2 employees? A whole other can of worms.


----------



## Soccerfan2 (Nov 20, 2018)

Agree. Even if a coach is capable of keeping things separate, at the very least it creates a perception of preferential treatment. 
I feel a different perspective is a benefit of a personal trainer. We always select trainers from outside the club.


----------



## Multi Sport (Nov 20, 2018)

timbuck said:


> And are coaches 1099 or W2 employees? A whole other can of worms.


That's an understatement.  I was a subcontractor for a company back in the 80s-90s and the IRS went after them for this exact issue....


----------



## espola (Nov 20, 2018)

Multi Sport said:


> That's an understatement.  I was a subcontractor for a company back in the 80s-90s and the IRS went after them for this exact issue....


You were a subcontractor for a soccer coaching company?


----------



## MWN (Nov 21, 2018)

A few points.  At 99% of all "private" lessons (1 on 1) the coach is working on foot skills, ball control, using the non-dominant foot, etc., rather than tactics.  The exception may be private GK lessons or when its a small group private lesson.  My son is a GK and our coach would ask him to come out to the private lesson (usually finishing) and take shots from the student.   It worked out for all parties and there was very little "tactic" training.

The only issue I see is when the less skilled kid taking the privates is put on the field in favor of those that are not taking private lessons thats unfair.

<Boring Tax/Legal Discussion>
As far as the 501(c)(3) comment, I'm not as much worried about clubs loosing their non-profit status as I am the 1099 v. W-2 employee.  The IRS has actually looked at youth coaches and US Youth Soccer has issued guidance (see, https://www.kiplinger.com/members/taxlinks/082407/Youth-soccer.pdf)

Ironically, one of the elements that favors treating the "coach" as a 1099-Independent Contractor is the independence of the Coach to operate his/her own business, which would mean the coach is free to provide additional soccer training for others, thus, providing private lessons for others would be evidence that the coach isn't an employee, but an independent contractor.  If a club were to tell the coach "no private lessons" then the Club is asserting control over the coach's income opportunities and now the coach looks more like a W-2 employee.
</Boring Tax/Legal Discussion>


----------



## StrikerOC (Nov 21, 2018)

timbuck said:


> How about just build it into your club costs?  Each coach will offer up 3 extra sessions of one hour each, per week for up to 5 players per session.  Use it or lose it.  If you can't fit it in your coach's schedule, you can try to find another coach at the club.


This is actually a really good idea, especially for the kids (teams) under U-12. It would give the club (especially if they are DA) an idea of what kids are really dedicated to the sport and which kids play soccer as a 2nd or 3rd sport. U-12 seems to be the age that the kids really separate themselves in terms of technical ability... IMO


----------



## mirage (Nov 21, 2018)

meatsweats said:


> So, there are a number of players doing privates with the head coach of both of my kids teams. I find that unethical.......Am I wrong?


May or may not be unethical, depending on the context and behavior, but it looks wrong at the least.  It certainly is a conflict of interest.

I would never keep my kid on the team, if the coach insisted privates be done by the coach.  We've had a coach recommend other coaches or that recommended doing privates to work on few things.  Never with the coach of the team.


----------



## Overlap (Nov 23, 2018)

meatsweats said:


> So, there are a number of players doing privates with the head coach of both of my kids teams. I find that unethical. My kids train with a long time trainer that we've used before and love. Olders coach told her yesterday in a conversation that he thinks it's conflicting to train with another trainer as they might be teaching different tactics. Tactics? In private training? Isn't that what team training is for. Am I overreacting or does this seem like a way for coaches to make money off their own players and for parents to basically pay coaches some training cash on the side and get a little preferential treatment. I know it's a pay to play system, but this seems too far. Am I wrong?


you're spot on, we had this same issue several years back and it cost a lot of rif between parents and player's. If it looks bad, it probably is bad. It cause a lot of issue at the club, the parents complained to the BOD, new rules came down, they could still do privates however, not with a player from their own team, seemed to stop the complaining.


----------



## AGINAZ (Nov 29, 2018)

Pros and cons.  Yes, parents could be "buying" favoritism and playing time.

But, who knows better what your kids "weaknesses" are than the person who is coaching them and, more importantly, what they need from them for the team?  Also, who has a bigger vested interest in improving said player than the coach he/she plays for?  Also, the privates allow the coach some valuable one on one time with your kid that regular team training doesn't necessarily allow for.

It's not a black and white issue.


----------



## mirage (Nov 29, 2018)

AGINAZ said:


> .....But, who knows better what your kids "weaknesses" are than the person who is coaching them and, more importantly, what they need from them for the team?....
> 
> It's not a black and white issue.


Completely agree - its not black and white and is individual situation based.  But, the issue isn't that.

As I'd indicated earlier post above, the team coach can recommend a trainer other than himself that is known for certain expertise for developing needed skills.  In other words, the coach knows many other good coaches that can address the needs of the player and communicate the issue with that coach on the behalf of the player.

We had this situation when our older kid was U11.  He was very athletic but required skills in certain areas.  His coach connected us with another coach that excelled with working with younger kids (vs older players) that coached possession style game emphasizing skills.  While team coach may have been able to help, he put us in touch with the best person he knew for our kid's needs.

Even when the intent is honorable and pure, the appearance of conflict causes issues with others on the team, which can poison the team chemistry.

So why complicate things when you don't have to....


----------



## espola (Nov 29, 2018)

AGINAZ said:


> Pros and cons.  Yes, parents could be "buying" favoritism and playing time.
> 
> But, who knows better what your kids "weaknesses" are than the person who is coaching them and, more importantly, what they need from them for the team?  Also, who has a bigger vested interest in improving said player than the coach he/she plays for?  Also, the privates allow the coach some valuable one on one time with your kid that regular team training doesn't necessarily allow for.
> 
> It's not a black and white issue.


The coach could ask certain players to stay after practice for 30 minutes or so to work on their weaknesses, at no extra charge.

That assumes that the coach can recognize player weaknesses and is competent to resolve them.


----------



## Socal United (Nov 29, 2018)

mirage said:


> Completely agree - its not black and white and is individual situation based.  But, the issue isn't that.
> 
> As I'd indicated earlier post above, the team coach can recommend a trainer other than himself that is known for certain expertise for developing needed skills.  In other words, the coach knows many other good coaches that can address the needs of the player and communicate the issue with that coach on the behalf of the player.
> 
> ...


I completely agree.  There are a lot of coaches that use this to target a few kids to build their team around.  I know of 4-5 coaches I like, I send my players that way and give them a breakdown of the areas of need.  They appreciate the work and honestly it is going to help me as well.  Even for those that are well meaning, the perception is enough to make it look bad.


----------



## Eagle33 (Nov 29, 2018)

Socal United said:


> I completely agree.  There are a lot of coaches that use this to target a few kids to build their team around.  I know of 4-5 coaches I like, I send my players that way and give them a breakdown of the areas of need.  They appreciate the work and honestly it is going to help me as well.  Even for those that are well meaning, the perception is enough to make it look bad.


Do you get kick back from those coaches?


----------



## Socal United (Nov 29, 2018)

Eagle33 said:


> Do you get kick back from those coaches?


I am guessing you mean financially?  No, I don't that that would be right.  Helps my team be more successful and the player to get better, I like that compensation package.


----------



## outside! (Nov 29, 2018)

In general, club coaches should not give private lessons to their players, but it can work. Early in DD's club career she was on a lower level team. She was a starter and usually played all game. She was also the biggest, fastest player on the team. I asked if the coach could recommend a trainer. The coach said that he could train her. While I was a bit hesitant, it worked out well. The lessons were great, he would finish the lesson sweating like he had played a game and would even give some tips to her younger brother and I while we kicked the ball around. Her skill seemed to increase weekly with each lesson. He was a great coach and his guidance was crucial in her ability to move to higher level teams.


----------



## OrangeCountyDad (Dec 4, 2018)

had one coach who did voluntary group/privates for free, certain days/times.  He lived near practice field, worked further away so he would just stick around after his day job.  changed coaches end of the season, same club, also provided group extra-training at a cost, you got a deal if you paid for the month upfront.  Always felt kind of shady, coached two teams already, adjacent age groups, with many players dual rostered, then this compensation on the side.  The worst part was he'd guilt the girls into attending. 

The unspoken thing was "if you don't come to extra training, you won't play as much."  My kid was a 80 minute player and didn't see their time dip, but still, for some of the other kids it seemed pretty underhanded.


----------

