Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Coaching in Oregon

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
    Frankly, no. You're doing everything you can to insulate the players from having to face the reality that players from other countries are working harder and achieving more...which was the point of the post I responded to originally. They're not getting markedly better advice from coaches. If they are, then there are certainly 100's of books/blogs/videos of those coaches communicating their philosophies and methods for our players to read and learn from.

    The 'whole system' being bad isn't a legitimate criticism and certainly doesn't help solve the problem. However, having players who are fit, skilled, and know where to go when they don't have the ball will improve the game locally. All of this can be done without a coach at all.
    Myopic little? You are hopeless.

    Comment


      #47
      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
      It's the whole culture, folks.

      * Coaching quality is part of it, but probably the most important issue. I've known some good coaches and some bad ones. Unfortunately, it's not always easy to tell.

      * Many parents can't tell the difference, especially if they don't know anything about worldwide soccer. Many parents also confuse "good coach" with "coach that starts/likes my kid".

      * Even well-meaning coaches and parents can conspire to stagnate development. Coaches who skip technique and move straight to tactics (in the hope that organization will overcome a lack of skill or athletic ability) are a problem. Parents who assume the coach is playing to win and get angry when his "tactics" obviously backfire (i.e. continuing to play out of the back when the other team knows what is coming and presses high, or getting mad when a teammate is moved to an unfamiliar position and makes mistakes)

      * Yes, many kids don't work on their games outside of organized practice. They don't play pickup soccer. They don't go to the park with a ball and practice shooting, or dribbling, or working off a wall.

      * The perverse incentives of pay-to-play; and coaches who feel they HAVE to put winning or development lest their kids leave.

      * A lack of objective evaluation standards--or at least subjective ones that are written down and communicated. While there is a lot of art to soccer, many things can be measured and tracked for improvement. Unfortunately, the only metric that really gets tracked well is win/loss %, and this is a zero sum metric.
      This is spot on.

      Comment


        #48
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        It's the whole culture, folks.

        * Coaching quality is part of it, but probably the most important issue. I've known some good coaches and some bad ones. Unfortunately, it's not always easy to tell.

        * Many parents can't tell the difference, especially if they don't know anything about worldwide soccer. Many parents also confuse "good coach" with "coach that starts/likes my kid".

        * Even well-meaning coaches and parents can conspire to stagnate development. Coaches who skip technique and move straight to tactics (in the hope that organization will overcome a lack of skill or athletic ability) are a problem. Parents who assume the coach is playing to win and get angry when his "tactics" obviously backfire (i.e. continuing to play out of the back when the other team knows what is coming and presses high, or getting mad when a teammate is moved to an unfamiliar position and makes mistakes)

        * Yes, many kids don't work on their games outside of organized practice. They don't play pickup soccer. They don't go to the park with a ball and practice shooting, or dribbling, or working off a wall.

        * The perverse incentives of pay-to-play; and coaches who feel they HAVE to put winning or development lest their kids leave.

        * A lack of objective evaluation standards--or at least subjective ones that are written down and communicated. While there is a lot of art to soccer, many things can be measured and tracked for improvement. Unfortunately, the only metric that really gets tracked well is win/loss %, and this is a zero sum metric.
        The DA program syllabus addresses almost all of this. It's a really well thought out plan. Our problem locally is there aren't enough high-level kids in most DA programs to make the training pool work like it's supposed to. This isn't a coaching or program issue. I agree with the thought we have enough players locally to make it work. The problem is we just don't have enough players who've committed to making themselves into high level players. They don't have to be pro-ready, but they do need to be able to meet a minimum set of technical skills to allow the more advanced tactical training to happen in the limited field time most teams have.

        Maybe that is a myopic way to think about it, but what other item on that list does a player have 100% control over?

        Comment


          #49
          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          The DA program syllabus addresses almost all of this. It's a really well thought out plan. Our problem locally is there aren't enough high-level kids in most DA programs to make the training pool work like it's supposed to. This isn't a coaching or program issue. I agree with the thought we have enough players locally to make it work. The problem is we just don't have enough players who've committed to making themselves into high level players. They don't have to be pro-ready, but they do need to be able to meet a minimum set of technical skills to allow the more advanced tactical training to happen in the limited field time most teams have.

          Maybe that is a myopic way to think about it, but what other item on that list does a player have 100% control over?
          You're still here trying to blame the kids? (So you know, I'm more teasing than being serious with my tone. You do bring up reasonable points.)

          That said, here are some data points to consider. The US (according to FIFA) has more than 11M people registered at clubs for soccer. The US recently surpassed 800k players in high school. We are number 2 in the world for registered youth players. I recognize you note as well that it's not a numbers problem and these statistics prove that. The problem, however, with your argument is that it's really hard to believe that out of those sorts of numbers that we cannot find a larger pool of players that want to work at the level that you think is necessary. My point is that we do have that kind of number of kids who do want to work at that level of frequency, duration, intensity. Just by shear volume of kids versus other countries and by just random selection we likely have more absolute number of kids who want to work at that level. (So you know, other countries are really not even close to Germany #1 and US #2 in terms of absolute numbers.)

          You point to the DA program as an example of a program that is correctly capturing the needs of players who want to advance to higher and higher levels. I agree. The part that I am pointing to is that the vast majority of programs that our younger kids are involved in are not at the level of DA as a conceptual benchmark. The original OP notes that coaches need to provide more specific advice and guidance to players. I have through all my kids' years in this sport continually have asked that question: what is your role, what are you working on, etc. I have asked other kids the same. It has been rare that this very large sampling of kids have any idea of how to respond to such a simple question.

          Seems to me that you are trying to blame the kids for not being able to answer these questions. I am blaming the coaches. I'll say the same thing through analogy. Imagine your kids' teachers not providing homework and no feedback. That's the coaching issue we have.

          I agree with you that on average, our kids can do more. I disagree with you that we cannot find enough players who want that level that you think is necessary. I think our coaches can do a much better job of being teachers of the game and providing each individual player guidance on what s(he) can do on their own time. And, I also think that we as parents can do a much better job of helping the system focus on the long term, rather than each single game.

          Comment


            #50
            People always blame others for their failures. The peoblem is the lack of quality coaching.

            Comment


              #51
              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              People always blame others for their failures. The peoblem is the lack of quality coaching.
              See what ya did there?

              Comment


                #52
                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                See what ya did there?
                Logic escapes you. I am not a coach. Oregon coaches love to blame the kids and population in Oregon and the need to consolidate and and and.... the list goes on. The problem is the lack of quality coaching.

                Comment


                  #53
                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  Logic escapes you. I am not a coach. Oregon coaches love to blame the kids and population in Oregon and the need to consolidate and and and.... the list goes on. The problem is the lack of quality coaching.
                  Coaching is just one piece of the puzzle, without quality players it doesn't matter the 'quality' of the coaching. It's tough to get blood out of stone my friend. Jus an FYI some consolidation coupled with quality coaching has made Oregon nationally relevant in the past decades. Today it's about playing in your local backyard with your buddies and a coach who is willing to supervise the fun. It's all good they say.

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                    Coaching is just one piece of the puzzle, without quality players it doesn't matter the 'quality' of the coaching. It's tough to get blood out of stone my friend. Jus an FYI some consolidation coupled with quality coaching has made Oregon nationally relevant in the past decades. Today it's about playing in your local backyard with your buddies and a coach who is willing to supervise the fun. It's all good they say.
                    There are plenty of athletes playing soccer. Quality players come from quality coaching. Investing time outside practice comes from coaches investing in their players and setting expectations.

                    Sitting back whining that players aren’t here is EXACTLY the problem. You are not good enough. You are our problem.

                    Comment


                      #55
                      The amount of quality coaches in the pdx sw WA area is lacking.

                      The pay is awful and parents are terrible.

                      The lies are rampant however:

                      1. Pathway to pros

                      2. League acronyms will get you what you want

                      3. The further you travel the better you are?

                      4. Coach was a good player so that means they are a good coach.

                      5. Coach used to coach college soccer (as if that means anything)

                      6. Elite? *** does that word even mean anymore. (Used by everyone and it’s all smoke and mirrors)

                      7. College commitments here! (Nevermind the player spent 90% of their career at another club or that club was the last stop in club hopping)

                      8. A B C D C X Y Z letter licensing doesn’t equal quality. It equals taking a class. Period. If you can remember and regurgitate then you can get a letter license. Too many bad A and B licensed coaches.


                      Solution:


                      1. Find a coach who is engaged and gives a ****

                      2. Find a group of players who are engaged and give a ****.

                      3. Ignore the lies above and I guarantee you that the above will not matter and your kid will get what they are looking for.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        The amount of quality coaches in the pdx sw WA area is lacking.

                        The pay is awful and parents are terrible.

                        The lies are rampant however:

                        1. Pathway to pros

                        2. League acronyms will get you what you want

                        3. The further you travel the better you are?

                        4. Coach was a good player so that means they are a good coach.

                        5. Coach used to coach college soccer (as if that means anything)

                        6. Elite? *** does that word even mean anymore. (Used by everyone and it’s all smoke and mirrors)

                        7. College commitments here! (Nevermind the player spent 90% of their career at another club or that club was the last stop in club hopping)

                        8. A B C D C X Y Z letter licensing doesn’t equal quality. It equals taking a class. Period. If you can remember and regurgitate then you can get a letter license. Too many bad A and B licensed coaches.


                        Solution:


                        1. Find a coach who is engaged and gives a ****

                        2. Find a group of players who are engaged and give a ****.

                        3. Ignore the lies above and I guarantee you that the above will not matter and your kid will get what they are looking for.

                        My dd signed up to play at a club that was touting #7. Played in a #2 had a coach that had a high #8. We paid a lot of money to learn how much BS is being sold to people.

                        A lot of kids ended up quitting or were on their way out because they found out too. Oh if you hear that not playing is actually a good thing you can tell that coach to **** off.

                        Thanks CU.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                          My dd signed up to play at a club that was touting #7. Played in a #2 had a coach that had a high #8. We paid a lot of money to learn how much BS is being sold to people.

                          A lot of kids ended up quitting or were on their way out because they found out too. Oh if you hear that not playing is actually a good thing you can tell that coach to **** off.

                          Thanks CU.
                          Take here to Westside - they have all the answers.

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            Coaching is just one piece of the puzzle, without quality players it doesn't matter the 'quality' of the coaching. It's tough to get blood out of stone my friend. Jus an FYI some consolidation coupled with quality coaching has made Oregon nationally relevant in the past decades. Today it's about playing in your local backyard with your buddies and a coach who is willing to supervise the fun. It's all good they say.
                            Says the Westside honk, fondly remembering the glory years of the Metros. You just described the reason the Metros were successful...lack of options, not coaching.

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                              Says the Westside honk, fondly remembering the glory years of the Metros. You just described the reason the Metros were successful...lack of options, not coaching.
                              As someone who IS a westside honk, the Metros were "successful" for several reasons:

                              1) Coaching is part of it--they had a staff, back in the day, that other clubs couldn't match. Many of them are still there (Cony and John Bain, in particular), but overall the local coaching talent pool has gotten better.

                              2) As such, you are correct--talented boys are no longer told "if you are serious about soccer, you gotta go play for Westside". The primary destination club for boys is now the Timbers Academy (like it or not); and WT mainly functions as a regional club. It's catchment area is Washington County these days, with some kids coming from neighboring counties; there's no longer any reason for kids to commute from Camas or Hood River or Mt. Angel or Salem to play in Beaverton.

                              3) Traffic exacerbates the issue. Back in the day, commuting to practice was possible; nowadays, not so much.

                              4) The bar has been raised--people talk as though US soccer has gone backwards. It hasn't; but soccer elsewhere hasn't rested on its laurels. MLS is now a top-twelve league (probably) which eagerly imports foreign players; which means the caliber of its expectations are higher. In particular, it is less and less following the American football model of drafting players out of college. And while many Americans are finding success in Europe, none of them comes from a 97 zip code.

                              5) The explosion of choices is not just geographic, but coaching style as well. Don't like how Cony or Jaime treats your snowflake? Plenty of other clubs are "lower pressure" environments; and many kids do better there. (FC Portland, in particular, seems to live off of parents outraged by Westside's old-school approach). In the past; kids and families who wanted to reach for the stars really had no choice.

                              And actually, the proliferation of choice is probably good for the local soccer scene, even if it means the trophy case at 5th and Western isn't quite as full as it used to be.

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                                Says the Westside honk, fondly remembering the glory years of the Metros. You just described the reason the Metros were successful...lack of options, not coaching.
                                When something is the best and delivers, it’s called quality.

                                Don’t ever deride the relevant clubs and players that created a foundation for this generation of ‘too many options’ to improve on.

                                Today you have lots of ‘club’ options to choose from without any attraction to quality- just the use of a ‘brand’ acronym or the ease of use (no travel to train).

                                The Timbers DA option created in 2012 has marginalized all clubs and as such opened the floodgates for a proliferation of ‘clubs’ that are simply not of any substance or real quality, but they do have people willing to pay.

                                That’s the landscape today, hopefully someone rises up and leads this sea of medicority and useless club labels.

                                Comment

                                Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                                Auto-Saved
                                x
                                Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                                x
                                Working...
                                X