jrcaesar
SILVER ELITE
No ... that's not what it says at all.
Here is the image from that story link - only 15% of plays in the 2011-12 EPL season coverted. Only 4 of 20 EPL teams converted at >20% that year.
Coaches - What do you look for?
- Thread starter Supermodel56
- Start date
Here is the image from that story link - only 15% of plays in the 2011-12 EPL season coverted. Only 4 of 20 EPL teams converted at >20% that year.
coachrefparent
GOLD
Unless there is more data in the story, you cannot determine the percentage of set pieces were "converted" into goals. This would require knowing how many set pieces were taken, and how many goals were scored off those. Neither of these figures are included here.No ... that's not what it says at all.
Here is the image from that story link - only 15% of plays in the 2011-12 EPL season coverted. Only 4 of 20 EPL teams converted at >20% that year.
This graph simply tells us that of X number of goals, Y number were scored off set pieces, and the percentage that represents (and of course X-Y goals were not scored on set pieces.)
Supermodel56
SILVER ELITE
No ... that's not what it says at all.
Here is the image from that story link - only 15% of plays in the 2011-12 EPL season coverted. Only 4 of 20 EPL teams converted at >20% that year.
If you look at the numbers - the highest number of goals scored off set pieces is 14 - and that was for Stoke - which if you look at total # of goals scored - was just 36... it's clear they were missing a significant component of their game outside of set pieces. Set pieces alone do not win games or seasons. I'm guessing that statistically, there's a fairly narrow range of avg # of set pieces that occur in a game. So you're only going to get so many chances - the teams and players that can capitalize on both are the ones that score the most goals. Look at Man City and Man United- they've "maximized" their set pieces and also show a very strong game in regular play with 93 & 89 total goals. If Newcastle could capitalize on more of their set pieces, they could bring it up to maybe 66 total goals. Whereas Blackburn and Chelsea need to score more from the field...
Thinking we're going to just have all tall players so we can win all the set pieces is just plain dumb. The height certainly can play a role, but the reality, you need the speed, agility, and skills to be able to get yourselves into scoring positions and create opportunities. Shorter players have an advantage because of their lower center of gravity and short legs - making them much more nimble - in a football analogy, running backs (with some exceptions) tend to be much shorter so they can make frequent cuts vs. wide receivers who are generally taller so they can run faster, stretch the field, and reach up to grab the passes. WR's just need to be able to make 1-2 cuts per play. Think a giraffe vs a cheetah.
No ... that's not what it says at all.
Here is the image from that story link - only 15% of plays in the 2011-12 EPL season coverted. Only 4 of 20 EPL teams converted at >20% that year.
There is also a missing view - what percentage of a team's shots on goal were from set pieces?
And not all set piece plays intend the ball to go to a tall player.
I think for youngers, its better to have a more skills/technical based tryout.
I personally coach olders and feel that a fairly short passing / dribble drill followed by a longer session of small sided scrimmages are the best way to see a player. Rotate teams and put everyone against everyone. Especially when an awful lot of players show up and there is limited time, while every other team is doing tryouts that same week...
Evaluation wise their first touch, positioning and awareness are critical to me but I can afford to be a little more picky with my selections as we have a solid squad previously.
The kid who gives a lot of energy from the get go [the Alexis], the vocal one [knows the game], and the one who is always moving into space [aware] are usually ones to look out for. I feel it is quite easy to tell who will perform and develop, and who is not quite there yet but of course anyone can be good if so motivated and driven enough.
I personally coach olders and feel that a fairly short passing / dribble drill followed by a longer session of small sided scrimmages are the best way to see a player. Rotate teams and put everyone against everyone. Especially when an awful lot of players show up and there is limited time, while every other team is doing tryouts that same week...
Evaluation wise their first touch, positioning and awareness are critical to me but I can afford to be a little more picky with my selections as we have a solid squad previously.
The kid who gives a lot of energy from the get go [the Alexis], the vocal one [knows the game], and the one who is always moving into space [aware] are usually ones to look out for. I feel it is quite easy to tell who will perform and develop, and who is not quite there yet but of course anyone can be good if so motivated and driven enough.
I agree 100%. My first season doing HS futbol here, my shortest kid was by far the best at heading. He'd often win heads over people seemingly twice his size.
On the flip side I wasn't blessed with forwards but did have a very tall FWD, and someone who could take throws like a set piece. Saw a couple of times the ball hit my FWDs face and deflect away. Not much use there.
The Driver
PREMIER
Bump
The Driver
PREMIER
The article was fire.