Soccer IQ

[Unregistered]

Yes--many ingredients to soccer IQ, innate, learned, coached, observed. On coaching, I remember a little nugget from my early little league baseball days: A coach trying to teach me to play outfield said simply "Don't move until you know where the ball is going." Great reliable 'fallback' advice that comes back to me 40 years later when I'm playing beer league softball. There are lots of these little "reminders" that can help kids "fake it until they make it" with soccer. Some might call them "Coaching Cliches" but they are over-used for a reason: they work. Some of my favorite "fallbacks":
--Outside defenders need to tuck back into the near post when they get beat on wing--fast!
--Central defender needs to come cover the ball carrier who just beat the outside.
--Runs to the posts get goals.
--Move after you pass; move to receive a pass.

I'm sure real coaches have many of these nuggets that help players develop reliable, fool-proof patterns of play that they can lean on while they learn the improvisational stuff that can't be coached.
One note on watching youth soccer--watching "screwups" is a great way for "slow learners" to pick up on some basics that they just can't get from playing--and that the pro game moves too fast to understand. Case in point: We had a kid a few years ago who just couldn't understand basic offside rules. Good athlete, decent player, constantly whistled long after he should have known better. I made him walk behind the an AR at a u11 game and watch how the calls were made. Might have drove the ref crazy, but seeing obvious "youth screwups" broke down the rule for the kid and helped his soccer IQ.

[Unregistered]

Yes--many ingredients to soccer IQ, innate, learned, coached, observed. On coaching, I remember a little nugget from my early little league baseball days: A coach trying to teach me to play outfield said simply "Don't move until you know where the ball is going." Great reliable 'fallback' advice that comes back to me 40 years later when I'm playing beer league softball. There are lots of these little "reminders" that can help kids "fake it until they make it" with soccer. Some might call them "Coaching Cliches" but they are over-used for a reason: they work. Some of my favorite "fallbacks":
--Outside defenders need to tuck back into the near post when they get beat on wing--fast!
--Central defender needs to come cover the ball carrier who just beat the outside.
--Runs to the posts get goals.
--Move after you pass; move to receive a pass.

I'm sure real coaches have many of these nuggets that help players develop reliable, fool-proof patterns of play that they can lean on while they learn the improvisational stuff that can't be coached.
One note on watching youth soccer--watching "screwups" is a great way for "slow learners" to pick up on some basics that they just can't get from playing--and that the pro game moves too fast to understand. Case in point: We had a kid a few years ago who just couldn't understand basic offside rules. Good athlete, decent player, constantly whistled long after he should have known better. I made him walk behind the an AR at a u11 game and watch how the calls were made. Might have drove the ref crazy, but seeing obvious "youth screwups" broke down the rule for the kid and helped his soccer IQ.

Excellent posts by many, but I particularly appreciate this one.

Is there any better illustration of the point than seeing a kid dive in?

Show me young kids playing soccer and almost without exception when they are defending and relying on instinct they chase and chase and chase and boy do they dive in. Walk onto any pitch of 10 year olds and ask them what "goalside" or "ballside" is and see how many raise their hand. Show me older kids playing soccer and some still chase and chase and dive in. Ask those kids the same question. In this example coaching makes a huge difference in forming habits that become 2nd nature. So sure, innate abilities reflect in game intelligence, but good habits can be formed through good instruction and training that in time looks no different than being innate.

For the sake of conversation, what do you trust to correct and develop good individual defending technique most? The kid playing pickup? The kid watching EPL on the weekends? Or good training sessions, progressing from small sided games, addressing the individual defeending theme along the way?

[Unregistered]

Excellent posts by many, but I particularly appreciate this one.

Is there any better illustration of the point than seeing a kid dive in?

Show me young kids playing soccer and almost without exception when they are defending and relying on instinct they chase and chase and chase and boy do they dive in. Walk onto any pitch of 10 year olds and ask them what "goalside" or "ballside" is and see how many raise their hand. Show me older kids playing soccer and some still chase and chase and dive in. Ask those kids the same question. In this example coaching makes a huge difference in forming habits that become 2nd nature. So sure, innate abilities reflect in game intelligence, but good habits can be formed through good instruction and training that in time looks no different than being innate.

For the sake of conversation, what do you trust to correct and develop good individual defending technique most? The kid playing pickup? The kid watching EPL on the weekends? Or good training sessions, progressing from small sided games, addressing the individual defeending theme along the way?

I recently reviewed video of a few of my child's HS and u17 games. The kids mostly seem to have very limited vision. Most are looking in their immediate vicinity, or to send it up top. I think kids could benefit from watching more games and really breaking them down. They also need to learn to critique in a way that contributes to improving their team.

[Unregistered]

The responsibility here falls partly on the parents, and, looking at the big picture, comes back to culture again. Not many 8-12 year old kids are going to get up on a Sat. morning and watch EPL by themselves, and this is the age group that needs to be watching the most in order to develop soccer IQ early on.

The best part of watching sports on TV for kids is watching it with someone to share in the excitement when something amazing happens or even to share in the criticism of players who make costly mistakes. Kids with parents who watch pro games with them and point out good or bad play are at a huge advantage. Parents who have no interest in soccer or feel they wouldn't be able to add any instructional value should still really be trying to sit down with their kid to watch a match every week. The kid can pick up enough on their own to make a difference, but without a parent sitting next to them, they'll probably watch junk TV instead.

And therein lies of our biggest opportunities: 8-12 yr olds everywhere in the world are attending matches, watching on tv where available and also kicking a ball around with their friends, emulating what they see.
Now here is the important part: THEY DO IT WITHOUT THE PARENTS.

As for mr. longwinded a few posts ago: teaching soccer to kids who don't watch the game is like teaching math without a textbook. Some will get it, most don't.
IQ is most certainly an innate blessing, as is the vision and skill to go along with it. The coach's job is to recognize who has that iq, foster and improve upon it. He cannot create it. EPL, La Liga, etc... players all gave higher soccer iq's than those playing in the MLS. It is one of the major differentials in the leagues.
I have coached all levels for years and only a few times been fortunate enough to have a player with the gift of a Mensa level soccer iq. It's why we struggle at the top level

[Unregistered]

Yes--many ingredients to soccer IQ, innate, learned, coached, observed. On coaching, I remember a little nugget from my early little league baseball days: A coach trying to teach me to play outfield said simply "Don't move until you know where the ball is going." Great reliable 'fallback' advice that comes back to me 40 years later when I'm playing beer league softball. There are lots of these little "reminders" that can help kids "fake it until they make it" with soccer. Some might call them "Coaching Cliches" but they are over-used for a reason: they work. Some of my favorite "fallbacks":
--Outside defenders need to tuck back into the near post when they get beat on wing--fast!
--Central defender needs to come cover the ball carrier who just beat the outside.
--Runs to the posts get goals.
--Move after you pass; move to receive a pass.

I'm sure real coaches have many of these nuggets that help players develop reliable, fool-proof patterns of play that they can lean on while they learn the improvisational stuff that can't be coached.
One note on watching youth soccer--watching "screwups" is a great way for "slow learners" to pick up on some basics that they just can't get from playing--and that the pro game moves too fast to understand. Case in point: We had a kid a few years ago who just couldn't understand basic offside rules. Good athlete, decent player, constantly whistled long after he should have known better. I made him walk behind the an AR at a u11 game and watch how the calls were made. Might have drove the ref crazy, but seeing obvious "youth screwups" broke down the rule for the kid and helped his soccer IQ.

Even fake coaches possess nuggets...

[Unregistered]

I recently reviewed video of a few of my child's HS and u17 games. The kids mostly seem to have very limited vision. Most are looking in their immediate vicinity, or to send it up top. I think kids could benefit from watching more games and really breaking them down. They also need to learn to critique in a way that contributes to improving their team.

Spot on. Often I'll watch a pro match with my kids, or waiting for a match to end at a tournament with my players and there is a lot to watch off the ball, heads on swivels seeing the entire field or zombies staring at the ball.

"Soccer IQ" is a lot of things, but it certainly includes what others described in earlier posts, vision and thinking, where cues are processed into movement and actions, anticipating as opposed to reacting.

A bit extreme to say, but some kids' "Soccer IQ" is limited to thinking and then reacting only when they see the ball coming near them, everything before that is none of their business. This is a player who certainly lacked innate instincts, perhaps failed to adapt to coaching along the way...or perhaps never had coaching that thought reading the game mattered very much...or too much of both.

[Unregistered]

Spot on. Often I'll watch a pro match with my kids, or waiting for a match to end at a tournament with my players and there is a lot to watch off the ball, heads on swivels seeing the entire field or zombies staring at the ball.

"Soccer IQ" is a lot of things, but it certainly includes what others described in earlier posts, vision and thinking, where cues are processed into movement and actions, anticipating as opposed to reacting.

A bit extreme to say, but some kids' "Soccer IQ" is limited to thinking and then reacting only when they see the ball coming near them, everything before that is none of their business. This is a player who certainly lacked innate instincts, perhaps failed to adapt to coaching along the way...or perhaps never had coaching that thought reading the game mattered very much...or too much of both.

Johan Cruyff:

"When you play a match, it is statistically proven that players actually have the ball 3 minutes on average … So, the most important thing is: what do you do during those 87 minutes when you do not have the ball. That is what determines whether you’re a good player or not."

[Unregistered]

I recently reviewed video of a few of my child's HS and u17 games. The kids mostly seem to have very limited vision. Most are looking in their immediate vicinity, or to send it up top. I think kids could benefit from watching more games and really breaking them down. They also need to learn to critique in a way that contributes to improving their team.

Sadly our HS team videos most games and then the coach never spends any time reviewing the film with the players. Some kids will watch them on their own including my onw, (they get posted online) but I think plenty do not. Coach should mark a few spots and take some time every other week to review. It doesn't take that much time - take a rainy day and talk the players through some things! The only taping our clubs do is if parents are taping, but one of my kids' teams a parent posts all the games online which is great to watch and for kids to splice highlight reels.

[Unregistered]

Lots of group think about anticipation and moving off the ball. Soccer IQ includes decision making and cognitive ability. Simply put it is knowing what to do when (with or without the ball). Shoot, dribble, fake, pass, tackle, support all things that occur on the field. Not simply moving off the ball, but reading the situation correctly and acting/reacting in an effective way.

[Unregistered]

The coach's job is to recognize who has that iq, foster and improve upon it. He cannot create it.

Different Mr. Longwinded here...

I suppose I know what you mean by that, but I also think it's a bit contradictory. Let's take the Messi class out of the discussion. Let's just go with the high school varsity player whose parents have dropped a year or two of college tuition on their child's soccer development... Let's call them "average" soccer players. There are literally millions of those players in the US. There is no gene, someone has it or doesn't have it, separating the players in the pool we're talking about. It's not black or white, it's much more shades of gray.

I've seen too many big, strong, fast 9 year olds dropping hat tricks on Saturdays for the dad coach and the mom cheering on from the other touchline, both beaming with pride, and maybe they drop out of town soccer because it will "ruin" their kid's development, write a check for a flashy new kit, and then sit up top for the long ball behind. Sure, they still score those goals, but if they don't flame out within a year of getting to 11v11, they can't play anywhere on the field the longer they play. They don't have the skill or the mind for it. There are millions of those kids too.

Meanwhile, the kid who never got pigeonholed by their dad to be the star scoring goals, just kept playing, moved all over the field, had a ball at their feet on their own time, maybe never plays club, maybe loves to play and works hard for their time and manages to get time on varsity and even sees earns league all-star. How many are there of these kids? I'd argue not enough.

Neither of these kids (and the MILLIONS more like them) have a soccer future beyond high school or certainly college other than their own recreation, but the path highlights an issue that plays a huge part IMO, as much as kids not watching the game as a means to be passionate and learn, and that's the development experience too many kids have. By the time they reach 11v11 their opportunity to develop game intelligence is eroding. Just ask a kid where they play and you'll get answers of "offense" or "defense" (and for anyone that needs an explanation why that's terrible, well, here we are). For the elite (elite in a literal sense, not a marketing label), it's a miracle they navigate this mess...and obviously believe that not enough do (and it stands to reason that every best athlete in another sport was potentially lost in soccer for any number of reasons).

SERIOUS QUESTION: What portion of coaches actually like or believe in moving players around on the field before their 1st or 2nd year playing 11v11? Whatever portion don't, they're playing a huge role in extinguishing game intelligence that COULD have been cultivated and developed.

So IMO any debate about whether coaching "creates it" is a non-starter, both of those words are too abstract. Whatever "it" is, it isn't a single thing; game intelligence, soccer IQ or whatever you want to call it is a collection of things, and coaches might not "create" any of them, but they can have a huge impact on development, technical and tactical, and maximizing players potential...or killing all of it.

Interesting soccer discussion, almost seems foreign to TS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9yo7x3bJaA

[Unregistered]

Lots of group think about anticipation and moving off the ball. Soccer IQ includes decision making and cognitive ability. Simply put it is knowing what to do when (with or without the ball). Shoot, dribble, fake, pass, tackle, support all things that occur on the field. Not simply moving off the ball, but reading the situation correctly and acting/reacting in an effective way.

Lots of group think? Sounds like a straw man.

Just curious, did anyone actually suggest, much less argue (by saying "off the ball" or otherwise) that Soccer IQ wasn't all of what you state that it is? Would anyone disagree with what you've stated that it is?

Or maybe they just illustrated by way of an example? And from that you inferred, blessing us group-thinkers with your erudite betterness?

[Unregistered]

Sadly our HS team videos most games and then the coach never spends any time reviewing the film with the players. Some kids will watch them on their own including my onw, (they get posted online) but I think plenty do not. Coach should mark a few spots and take some time every other week to review. It doesn't take that much time - take a rainy day and talk the players through some things! The only taping our clubs do is if parents are taping, but one of my kids' teams a parent posts all the games online which is great to watch and for kids to splice highlight reels.

You'd probably be shocked at how many players don't want to do that, regardless of how talented or committed they are by anyone's standards, even if they're forced to.

We're having a "Soccer IQ" conversation because we have no "soccer culture."

[Unregistered]

Johan Cruyff:

"When you play a match, it is statistically proven that players actually have the ball 3 minutes on average … So, the most important thing is: what do you do during those 87 minutes when you do not have the ball. That is what determines whether you’re a good player or not."

Sounds like group think.

[Unregistered]

"SERIOUS QUESTION: What portion of coaches actually like or believe in moving players around on the field before their 1st or 2nd year playing 11v11? Whatever portion don't, they're playing a huge role in extinguishing game intelligence that COULD have been cultivated and developed."

When "results matter", coaches don't like putting kids at positions other than their "best" position. Obviously. Less obvious is what I've noticed from watching my kids' teams: If the team is having a "really good" year win-wise, kids get stuck in one position: "Why mess with success?" is the reasoning. If the team is having a "really bad" year, kids get stuck in one position: "We need to get these boys a win" is the reasoning. (Strangely, not, "Hey, lets take a risk and mix things up and see if we can change things.") It is those rare and perfect "3 wins, 3 losses, 3 ties" seasons that give coaches the freedom to do the right thing and move kids out of their "best" positions.

[Unregistered]

When "results matter", coaches don't like putting kids at positions other than their "best" position. Obviously. Less obvious is what I've noticed from watching my kids' teams: If the team is having a "really good" year win-wise, kids get stuck in one position: "Why mess with success?" is the reasoning. If the team is having a "really bad" year, kids get stuck in one position: "We need to get these boys a win" is the reasoning. (Strangely, not, "Hey, lets take a risk and mix things up and see if we can change things.") It is those rare and perfect "3 wins, 3 losses, 3 ties" seasons that give coaches the freedom to do the right thing and move kids out of their "best" positions.

Nailed it. Coach winning trumps the coach developing players TO THEIR FULLEST. So it's a rare find IMO when you can watch a coach of players, 8th grade or younger for sure, and see someone who is making decisions for the team that put individual development of ALL the players first. That's the ugly truth that many parents don't recognize until it's too late, whether they are the parent of however many players on the team are pawns to serve the team. Sometimes they're all pawns, everything is about that match and the win and no one matters as much.