Totally agree if it’s used for what you describe, matching up appropriate level of play. The OP used it as a ample when winning matters, implying that achieving promotion and not getting relegated is important. Again, I think that’s just a result of playing and as you said if it’s meant to balance the competition I don’t have it problem with it. I think most parents feel a lot more strongly about needing to make the top level and stay there than you do.
When does winning matter?
- Thread starter SoccerGuru
- Start date
jpeter
PREMIER
When big moments or opportunities are presented nice to come through or make that big play decision, goal, assist, tackle, clearance. Something about being "clutch" that lasts.
60/40 for being the underdog or the favorite that everyone wants to beat so badly. Each can be motivating in there own way. Sweeter to surprise, come back, from behind, with a rag tag crew or when you push all the way through as the "stacked" favorite all year despised?
60/40 for being the underdog or the favorite that everyone wants to beat so badly. Each can be motivating in there own way. Sweeter to surprise, come back, from behind, with a rag tag crew or when you push all the way through as the "stacked" favorite all year despised?
It depends on what the coach is trying to sell you at that moment. If you are coming off a winning season then winning matters. If you are coming off a bad season then Development is what is important.
I also think it is interesting that at the younger level the coaches that lose every game are the ones that claim they are all about development and that same coach will claim that the ones that win all the time do not develop. I have never understood how winning and development are mutually exclusive.
They aren't but it's particularly a problem with soccer since due to the mechanics of the game there are some tactics at the younger ages that can help you to get you a victory but are detrimental to developing soccer skills...in particular:
-Recruitment of taller and older kids. These kids will have a natural advantage early on because in a small sided game the fastest kids (rather than pass the ball and build an attack creativily) can just outrun opponents to score. But if the kids aren't taught properly, by puberty some of the other kids will have surpassed them and they won't have the benefit of learning how to play creativity and look for the opening when outrunning your opponent no longer works.
-Boot the ball. At the younger ages, kids find it dificult to maintain possession and learn how to pass. So if you lose the ball in your own 1/3 there's a greater danger of being scored against than if you lose the ball in the opponent's 3rd. So rather than build from the back by connecting passes, some coaches will just boot the ball up.
-Goalkicks. The buildup line was put in place to prevent this but most teams after its removed still have the big legged defender boot the ball rather than have the keeper learn the long game or connect via the short game. This keeps the ball from being intercepted in the defensive 3rd but deprives the keeper from learning how to distribute and stops the defenders from learning how to take the initial touch.
-Shooting. At the younger ages, most kids are taught to shoot it high and preferably over the keeper's head. But once the keeper grows into the larger goal, particularly if the keeper is tall, it's going to be harder to score those shots. By contrast, kids will not have learned to shoot a powerful shot on the ground which in the pro game is where a higher percentage of goals are made (as opposed to balls which can tipped over bar of shot into the zone of control of the keeper). But when they are younger, inexperienced keepers can block the lower shot with their feet.
-Throw Ins. "Down the line" as opposed to a backward conversion. Again for fear of losing the ball closer to the goal.
-Playing the ball backwards. Again for fear of losing the ball closer to the goal rather than learn building from the back. How many coaches yell "don't play it back" or tell their kids not to play it to the keeper. It's largely a fear of the kids making a mistake, but that's how they are going to learn.
-Reliance on the fast player. How many teams, particularly at the beginning, rely on 1 or 2 players to carry the team scoring and run most play through them? The fast player is scoring by outrunning the defenders. The fast player isn't learning the benefits of ball handling, passing or creative play, and the supporting players aren't learning how to carry the offense.
-The physical game. Teams that rely on shoving and pushing to win the ball. It works on the younger levels, particularly since many refs are eager to "let them play", but once the kids learn how to pass at the older levels, it becomes much more difficult to gain an advantage this way.
At the younger ages, coaches that play all their players and try to teach their kids proper technique will be at a disadvantage against other coaches that are prepared to take some developmental short cuts. It's just a reality. It doesn't meaning winning and development are exclusive, but winning is a temptation that causes coaches to go astray from the ideals of development.
Wanted to expand on this...three athletes during my generation stick out. Michael Jordan, Tom Brady, and Tiger Woods. All three of them talk about competition from an early age. There is nothing wrong with it and players should be told to win from an early age along with development. It’s a moral I raise my DD with. She did something amazing when she was 9 years old because of this attitude and I will never forget.
Anyway, since I am a stat nerd, if any of you watched “The Last Dance” the video below (just 10 minutes of your life) will show you just how great MJ was. Again, MJ wanted to beat his brother since he was 3 years old.
Numbers tell a truth that you rarely see.
kickingandscreaming
PREMIER
When the parents on the other side are annoying. The more annoying they are, the more it matters.
Somberland Til I Die
BRONZE
Well said.
SoccerFan4Life
PREMIER
Agreed. I always told my kids, I don’t care if the team wins but you played poorly. To me it’s about preparation and effort. Winning is fun but as a player, you have to contribute. Eve a bench player who gives his heart out, will become a better person than those that have talent but lack commitment.
winning is great for sports but most of our kids are going to enter the workforce where effort, passion, interpersonal skills are more important.
Heck look at Woods and Jordan. Best players for their sports but shitty human beings.
RedNevilles
BRONZE
Winning matters! But winning is different to whoever you are and whatever your “win” is.
For young players the win should be doing something that may be out of their comfort zone. Something that takes them over an edge and helps them grow. That is not to say they shouldn’t want to win the actual game too. The ultimate aim and desire within the top players will be to win every single game.
As players get a little older the teamwork and base that has been built should start to turn into positive results (wins) in games if the first area was met. However, the challenge is managing the players and parents to see the longer goal to get to that stage and not just jump ship.
The parents aim should be that of what the poster said above. How their individual child is developing. Helping to share the same message as the coach and seeing your child compete as hard as they can. The disconnect here comes when a parent believes all other team mates are not competing as hard as their child or when a parent thinks the game result is the be all and end all.
The coaches aim thru the ages should be focused on developing the players at the youngest age groups, instilling a good technical base, a love for the ball and challenging each player while still expecting high standards in effort. As they get a little older change that focus to the team development and how they can all work together then the older ages U15+ how can the players make the small changes to get the results in close games.
Here is the disconnect:
1. Parents are paying a lot of money therefore may not want to invest in more than a year at a time and that stunts development. If there isn’t that immediate win this may not be seen as a satisfactory “return on investment”
2. Coaches may not have support of the club and directors, therefore if a parent complains as the team is not winning they may be taken off the team. In order to not be taken off the team the coach turns on their own ideals and finds a way to win, as mentioned in previous posts.
3. Lack of direction from a club. What are they trying to achieve and how are they trying to get there? Is there a clear objective for a player to develop and do they have the right people in place. You will see this by the clubs who can show you what their coaches are teaching year on year and also how long coaches stay on teams or within a certain age band. If they chop and change every year they do not trust their own system or their coaches. Are all the coaches teaching the same thing in each age group or are they left to their own devices? If they do not have a clear outline you are not joining a club but rather a coach and you better hope you have them for long enough or they are definitely the right “fit” for your kid.
Overall when does winning matter? From what I have seen from a lot of clubs all the time would be the answer. The Ajax analysis is different as they do not make any money until the players are professional whereas here you make money on 6 year olds. Do I agree this should be the way? No. Will it change? No
For young players the win should be doing something that may be out of their comfort zone. Something that takes them over an edge and helps them grow. That is not to say they shouldn’t want to win the actual game too. The ultimate aim and desire within the top players will be to win every single game.
As players get a little older the teamwork and base that has been built should start to turn into positive results (wins) in games if the first area was met. However, the challenge is managing the players and parents to see the longer goal to get to that stage and not just jump ship.
The parents aim should be that of what the poster said above. How their individual child is developing. Helping to share the same message as the coach and seeing your child compete as hard as they can. The disconnect here comes when a parent believes all other team mates are not competing as hard as their child or when a parent thinks the game result is the be all and end all.
The coaches aim thru the ages should be focused on developing the players at the youngest age groups, instilling a good technical base, a love for the ball and challenging each player while still expecting high standards in effort. As they get a little older change that focus to the team development and how they can all work together then the older ages U15+ how can the players make the small changes to get the results in close games.
Here is the disconnect:
1. Parents are paying a lot of money therefore may not want to invest in more than a year at a time and that stunts development. If there isn’t that immediate win this may not be seen as a satisfactory “return on investment”
2. Coaches may not have support of the club and directors, therefore if a parent complains as the team is not winning they may be taken off the team. In order to not be taken off the team the coach turns on their own ideals and finds a way to win, as mentioned in previous posts.
3. Lack of direction from a club. What are they trying to achieve and how are they trying to get there? Is there a clear objective for a player to develop and do they have the right people in place. You will see this by the clubs who can show you what their coaches are teaching year on year and also how long coaches stay on teams or within a certain age band. If they chop and change every year they do not trust their own system or their coaches. Are all the coaches teaching the same thing in each age group or are they left to their own devices? If they do not have a clear outline you are not joining a club but rather a coach and you better hope you have them for long enough or they are definitely the right “fit” for your kid.
Overall when does winning matter? From what I have seen from a lot of clubs all the time would be the answer. The Ajax analysis is different as they do not make any money until the players are professional whereas here you make money on 6 year olds. Do I agree this should be the way? No. Will it change? No
SoccerFan6
SILVER ELITE
Great conversation and great points by everyone. The word development is being thrown around a lot. There are a lot of different kinds of development. Are we talking about developing character traits and mental traits (ie. work ethic, competitive spirit, never give up attitude) or are we talking about technical skills development. One could argue that trying to win (and win a lot) from the younger ages can develop the character traits, whereas a "development" focused team will develop the technical skills. Since 99.9% of our kids will not be professional soccer players, don't we have our kids in sports to build character and have fun? I'm also sure that the kids who play on the winningest teams at the younger ages (here in OC its Strikers for boys and Blues for girls) will look back on all the trophies with fond memories for years to come.
I think we're trying to have fun and develop character. Winning can do both. Yes, you can learn a lot from losing too, but even the best teams lose - and those losses tend to be more heartbreaking for the players which turn into even more teachable moments.
By the way as I'm typing this I'm realizing it seems like I'm saying these two things are mutually exclusive. You can have a bad team that doesn't develop technical/tactical skills and a good team who does. I've had kids be a part of both and if you can get on the latter it is obviously the best of both worlds.
I think we're trying to have fun and develop character. Winning can do both. Yes, you can learn a lot from losing too, but even the best teams lose - and those losses tend to be more heartbreaking for the players which turn into even more teachable moments.
By the way as I'm typing this I'm realizing it seems like I'm saying these two things are mutually exclusive. You can have a bad team that doesn't develop technical/tactical skills and a good team who does. I've had kids be a part of both and if you can get on the latter it is obviously the best of both worlds.
SoccerGuru
SILVER ELITE
Some great posts. I asked this because my DD was watching a little bit of last dance and mentioned that MJ was pretty good. I had to inform her that she has no idea just how dominant this guy was and compared it to soccer. I told her you know how there is an argument of who is the best Ronaldinho, Messi, Ronaldo, etc? I explained to her, in basketball there is no argument. MJ is hands down THE BEST to ever play. She then asked an awesome question, How can I be like MJ or what I heard "how can I be like Mike?". That is what brought me to ask this question so thank you to all of you for giving me a lot of input to tell her. I was debating if telling her winning matters would change her mindset or if I should approach it a different way. A lot of your input was great and I now know how to explain it to her.
Great stuff. I think each kid is different as is each club sells something different For example, Blues sells winning and to be the best of the best. To be the best, you have to win at the highest levels in any sport. Sports kings are the winners. Trying to win is the key. My dd loves to win as a team. Getting to 1000 juggles is not winning for her, but it is for others who lose with their teams. My biggest rant was team soccer became an individual get out of my way sport. Soccer is a team sport first
Nice picture but it’s a two dimensional glimpse of a man who built character. Winning trophies was the byproduct of the character he built in his players.
You cant have one without the other. You can't just be about winning and cheat or just be about development without the winning.
In my high school, we used to display the class ranking in a bulletin board outside the main office. Students can check their class rankings and compare against their peers. It helped to breed a very competitive environment academically.
I don't know why schools don't rank their students in public anymore. Now, its all about development and learning.
I don't know why schools don't rank their students in public anymore. Now, its all about development and learning.
Banana Hammock
SILVER ELITE
to many snowflakes. (or losers)