Are taller younger usually in defense?

[Jamisfoes]

I can assure you this is not us. I’m proud watching my son play defense. I don’t even care.

How do you find a coach that doesn’t care only about winning?

Normally the losing ones say they don’t care about winning.
Winning is important. Winning attracts talents, get you assigned to the top team in the club, make parents happy.
I still can’t believe how many parents think coaching develops players. Players are developed by themselves in pickup games, always having a ball at their feet at home, by practicing on your own.

 

[Slobodan]

Normally the losing ones say they don’t care about winning.
Winning is important. Winning attracts talents, get you assigned to the top team in the club, make parents happy.
I still can’t believe how many parents think coaching develops players. Players are developed by themselves in pickup games, always having a ball at their feet at home, by practicing on your own.

I'm going to take some exception to this. MVLA in NorCal doesn't appear to subscribe to this philosophy. They're very big about learning the positions, keeping possession and making good passes under duress. Almost to the point of it being robotic at younger ages. Their teams aren't beating the brakes off other, smaller clubs until they really get to 16 and up. There's a reason Stanford pulls players every year. Mustang in a similar fashion but they're more likely to grab developed players from other clubs because it's ECNL and has the tradition.

I will agree with you that players are more to credit for development in terms of foot skills, etc.

 

[Jamisfoes]

I'm going to take some exception to this. MVLA in NorCal doesn't appear to subscribe to this philosophy. They're very big about learning the positions, keeping possession and making good passes under duress. Almost to the point of it being robotic at younger ages. Their teams aren't beating the brakes off other, smaller clubs until they really get to 16 and up. There's a reason Stanford pulls players every year. Mustang in a similar fashion but they're more likely to grab developed players from other clubs because it's ECNL and has the tradition.

I will agree with you that players are more to credit for development in terms of foot skills, etc.

I agree with you the style of play is up to the coach. My comments are more about on the ball foot skills, shooting and finishing, aggressiveness with the ball…anything not tactic or team shape related.

 

[Slobodan]

I agree with you the style of play is up to the coach. My comments are more about on the ball foot skills, shooting and finishing, aggressiveness with the ball…anything not tactic or team shape related.

Agreed. Every kid my DD played with, that went on to play D1, did all the futsal and extra trainings. Private or otherwise. Now most of them are in the portal. Social media sucks.

 

[rainbow_unicorn]

Normally the losing ones say they don’t care about winning.
Winning is important. Winning attracts talents, get you assigned to the top team in the club, make parents happy.
I still can’t believe how many parents think coaching develops players. Players are developed by themselves in pickup games, always having a ball at their feet at home, by practicing on your own.

This is another big problematic area for US youth soccer: parents that place way too much emphasis on winning at the expense of development, parents that want to post trophies on social media.

Yes individual training is a must but coaches teach players on HOW to play. If you don't have good coaching then you have a bunch of skilled cone dribblers playing with their head down. When the USWNT is booting the ball, can't maintain possession, relying on fast forwards and look horrible against top countries just remember that it shouldn't be a surprise when you watch the "top" winning clubs at the younger ages playing the same way.

 

[Mystery Train]

I can assure you this is not us. I’m proud watching my son play defense. I don’t even care.

How do you find a coach that doesn’t care only about winning?

Well, it's not easy. I like that you worded it, "only" about winning. Because, yes, winning is something a coach should care about. If you didn't try to win, it wouldn't be competition, right? But there is a subtle, yet HUGE difference between trying to teach, inspire, develop, train, and mold players so that they can win in the long run, vs. being only results oriented, and trying to put players together to win right now.

To answer your question, the only way is to meet a lot of coaches, interview them, ask questions, be curious about their style and methods and philosphy, and then observe what they actually do: Do they just talk the talk? Or do they practice what they preach? Ask other parents. In particular, seek out parents of older players, or HS players, or especially college players and ask them about their experience and who they thought were impactful coaches.

The best coaches my daughter played for in both youth & college won a lot of games. But their approach wasn't so much fixated on the wins as much as how to get the players prepared to win. By contrast, she also had two or three who were the opposite. Interestingly, those coaches had short term success followed by player turn over and long term failure. Two of them quit coaching as well. The players that stuck with those "win-first" coaches also suffered in their careers and either quit or did not reach their goals and potential.

This is not to diminish the earlier comment that players should be in charge of their own development. That is true also. But it sure makes that journey more enjoyable if you have a great coach to help along the way.

 

[watfly]

I still can’t believe how many parents think coaching develops players. Players are developed by themselves in pickup games, always having a ball at their feet at home, by practicing on your own.

This is mostly true. Unfortunately, I've seen more coaches inhibit a player's development with joy-sticking and temperament then I've seen coaches enhance a player's development.

At the end of the day its your kid's ability and passion for the sport that determines whether they will play at a higher level. Not the club, coach, team, position, league or tournaments.

 

[watfly]

Well, it's not easy. I like that you worded it, "only" about winning. Because, yes, winning is something a coach should care about. If you didn't try to win, it wouldn't be competition, right? But there is a subtle, yet HUGE difference between trying to teach, inspire, develop, train, and mold players so that they can win in the long run, vs. being only results oriented, and trying to put players together to win right now.

To answer your question, the only way is to meet a lot of coaches, interview them, ask questions, be curious about their style and methods and philosphy, and then observe what they actually do: Do they just talk the talk? Or do they practice what they preach? Ask other parents. In particular, seek out parents of older players, or HS players, or especially college players and ask them about their experience and who they thought were impactful coaches.

The best coaches my daughter played for in both youth & college won a lot of games. But their approach wasn't so much fixated on the wins as much as how to get the players prepared to win. By contrast, she also had two or three who were the opposite. Interestingly, those coaches had short term success followed by player turn over and long term failure. Two of them quit coaching as well. The players that stuck with those "win-first" coaches also suffered in their careers and either quit or did not reach their goals and potential.

This is not to diminish the earlier comment that players should be in charge of their own development. That is true also. But it sure makes that journey more enjoyable if you have a great coach to help along the way.

Your last two posts on this thread should go in a handbook for newbie soccer parents.

 

[Mystery Train]

Your last two posts on this thread should go in a handbook for newbie soccer parents.

School of hard knocks, ya know? Now that we're on the back nine as soccer parents, I look back and wish I had known this stuff when we started.

 

[watfly]

School of hard knocks, ya know? Now that we're on the back nine as soccer parents, I look back and wish I had known this stuff when we started.

We did what we thought was best at the time. I don't look back with any regrets. We had so many fun experiences and met so many great people, some of who I still keep in contact with today. It's hard to say if coaching drove my son out of the sport, but it certainly didn't help him develop a passion for the game. Without soccer my son never would have developed the footwork and coordination to be as competitive as he is in football. I'd say of all the top level kids my son played with in the early teens, probably less than 40% are still playing soccer, with most of those playing for fun in High School and very few playing club. (that ratio is probably higher for girls since they don't have as many sport alternatives as boys)

Am I bummed he's not playing soccer anymore? 100%. Particularly now since he would be one of the bigger kids playing (or at least taller) as opposed to being the smallest and I'm curious to see if that would have any impact. He could play HS soccer, but again shitty coach so he has no interest. I hold out hope that the HS coach retires, and he would consider playing soccer again, but I'm probably delusional.