Bruno-what am I paying for?

[Unregistered]

Guys who have a min of C or B license, a coach who played at high level or at least was a high school stand out. A coach who has 10 years + experience, a coach who has a track record of developing players. These are the only coaches who should get paid. A kid who played at RIC with less than 5 years coaching experience and no real license should not be on a payroll. If you want to volunteer and coach and learn ..great but parents should not be passed on the expense in their sons or daughter tiution.
Don't call it a premier club if you can't meet these requirements. As far as JT not a fan for many reasons but at least he has paid his dues in experience with camps, clinics and years expetience

Ok, lets us your criteria. Let's select 2 coaches from Club A and Club B. The first coach has all the credentials you described. The second coach has no advance licenses but he is well know to be one of the best technical coach in the state. You have a son or daughter who is interested playing club soccer. Which coach will you choose?

[Unregistered]

Ok, lets us your criteria. Let's select 2 coaches from Club A and Club B. The first coach has all the credentials you described. The second coach has no advance licenses but he is well know to be one of the best technical coach in the state. You have a son or daughter who is interested playing club soccer. Which coach will you choose?

He or she will probably be a good Technical coach for the u1O to u13 . After u13 I need a coach who will have the technical and tactical knowledge of about 100 games under his or her belt. The reason is so I know that he or she has seen enough game like situations for tactical scenarios , different formations, dealing with refs, parents, DOC's , tournaments, playoff pressure etc,know how to teach my kid the principles of play and how they can be applied in a group setting .
These things only come from experience playing , coaching and sitting in a classroom where they learn game management ,formations, correct movement , roles and responsibilities of different positions etc.

[Unregistered]

He or she will probably be a good Technical coach for the u1O to u13 . After u13 I need a coach who will have the technical and tactical knowledge of about 100 games under his or her belt. The reason is so I know that he or she has seen enough game like situations for tactical scenarios , different formations, dealing with refs, parents, DOC's , tournaments, playoff pressure etc,know how to teach my kid the principles of play and how they can be applied in a group setting .
These things only come from experience playing , coaching and sitting in a classroom where they learn game management ,formations, correct movement , roles and responsibilities of different positions etc.

If that is the case your kid's goal should be to make the Stars of Mass ENCL or NE Revs Academy. Anything less is a failure. For me, I just want a coach who can teach my kid good technical skills, instill in him to think on his feet and use his creative talent to influence the game. He may not be the biggest or strongest but the most balance and gifted player with high soccer IQ. I for sure don't want a coach who is teaching my kid to play soccer based on what he/she learned in the classroom. I hope you know real game situations is different from what you learn in the book. We have too many of those in RI.

[Unregistered]

If that is the case your kid's goal should be to make the Stars of Mass ENCL or NE Revs Academy. Anything less is a failure. For me, I just want a coach who can teach my kid good technical skills, instill in him to think on his feet and use his creative talent to influence the game. He may not be the biggest or strongest but the most balance and gifted player with high soccer IQ. I for sure don't want a coach who is teaching my kid to play soccer based on what he/she learned in the classroom. I hope you know real game situations is different from what you learn in the book. We have too many of those in RI.

Up to U13, soccer is in an individual game played with teams. After u13, it is a team game played with individuals.

It's not an either/or when it comes to coaching, but it is a different skill set (or the emphasis within the range of coaching competencies) when you start coaching 11 v 11 with more of focus on winning (results) matches vice how individuals are mastering skills (matches are just another format to demonstrate skills under pressure).

You are "coaching" a lot more in results-oriented matches (and I don't mean the yelling constantly from the touchline coaching, but tactical changes, on the bench discussions with players, occasional guidance to players on the field, lots of halftime adjustments/discussion, etc.) - in the other, you're taking good notes on what to do in next training sessions, developing feedback for each individual player, and letting them play/pointing out positive aspects.

Again, not mutually exclusive to a single coach, but in the question you pose, it it's U12 and below, I go with the technical guy. If it's u13 and above, I go with the credential guy and hope like heck the club has a technical guy doing technical sessions or going around observing/helping player development, doing clinics, etc.

[Unregistered]

Up to U13, soccer is in an individual game played with teams. After u13, it is a team game played with individuals.

It's not an either/or when it comes to coaching, but it is a different skill set (or the emphasis within the range of coaching competencies) when you start coaching 11 v 11 with more of focus on winning (results) matches vice how individuals are mastering skills (matches are just another format to demonstrate skills under pressure).

You are "coaching" a lot more in results-oriented matches (and I don't mean the yelling constantly from the touchline coaching, but tactical changes, on the bench discussions with players, occasional guidance to players on the field, lots of halftime adjustments/discussion, etc.) - in the other, you're taking good notes on what to do in next training sessions, developing feedback for each individual player, and letting them play/pointing out positive aspects.

Again, not mutually exclusive to a single coach, but in the question you pose, it it's U12 and below, I go with the technical guy. If it's u13 and above, I go with the credential guy and hope like heck the club has a technical guy doing technical sessions or going around observing/helping player development, doing clinics, etc.

this sounds like bg talking

[Unregistered]

Up to U13, soccer is in an individual game played with teams. After u13, it is a team game played with individuals.

It's not an either/or when it comes to coaching, but it is a different skill set (or the emphasis within the range of coaching competencies) when you start coaching 11 v 11 with more of focus on winning (results) matches vice how individuals are mastering skills (matches are just another format to demonstrate skills under pressure).

You are "coaching" a lot more in results-oriented matches (and I don't mean the yelling constantly from the touchline coaching, but tactical changes, on the bench discussions with players, occasional guidance to players on the field, lots of halftime adjustments/discussion, etc.) - in the other, you're taking good notes on what to do in next training sessions, developing feedback for each individual player, and letting them play/pointing out positive aspects.

Again, not mutually exclusive to a single coach, but in the question you pose, it it's U12 and below, I go with the technical guy. If it's u13 and above, I go with the credential guy and hope like heck the club has a technical guy doing technical sessions or going around observing/helping player development, doing clinics, etc.

Here lies the problem with American mentality/coaching philosophy. Technical training ends at U12. The reality is to develop true technical competency in a player probably ever end but U19 is peak age. This explain by American players have such a poor first touch because fundamental player development/training is often viewed discourage at U13 and above. Players who exhibit creativity often viewed as show boating and often are discourage. Have you notice American players even at the national level lack creativity and soccer IQ. From U13 on most American players are tought to player by robots.

[Unregistered]

Here lies the problem with American mentality/coaching philosophy. Technical training ends at U12. The reality is to develop true technical competency in a player probably ever end but U19 is peak age. This explain by American players have such a poor first touch because fundamental player development/training is often viewed discourage at U13 and above. Players who exhibit creativity often viewed as show boating and often are discourage. Have you notice American players even at the national level lack creativity and soccer IQ. From U13 on most American players are tought to player by robots.

I don't think this is what the previous poster was saying. I would run away from a club or coach who didn't run technical training sessions after u13. First touch, body position, correctly weighted passes all of the technical things should be focused on in training. Tactical things can be worked into training but technical things are always there.

[Unregistered]

I don't think this is what the previous poster was saying. I would run away from a club or coach who didn't run technical training sessions after u13. First touch, body position, correctly weighted passes all of the technical things should be focused on in training. Tactical things can be worked into training but technical things are always there.

Ok ...Say we are all in agreement that US soccer players are lacking technical skills compared to the rest of the world and we can safely assume that any good club coach should rely heavy on technique training . Who are the best technical trainers in RI? Not Mass just RI . We are talking about the club teams unless you really know an outstanding town coach who is just as good .
I will throw in my two cents first to get thing going AV at baside with the younger boys teams. Very technical ..alot of repetitive technical exercises with ball. Kids are usually on the smaller side but very good ball control.

[Unregistered]

Ok ...Say we are all in agreement that US soccer players are lacking technical skills compared to the rest of the world and we can safely assume that any good club coach should rely heavy on technique training . Who are the best technical trainers in RI? Not Mass just RI . We are talking about the club teams unless you really know an outstanding town coach who is just as good .
I will throw in my two cents first to get thing going AV at baside with the younger boys teams. Very technical ..alot of repetitive technical exercises with ball. Kids are usually on the smaller side but very good ball control.

Agreed. AV is by far the best technical trainer I have come across. At the town level SK from Capital have some of the most technical teams we played against.

[Unregistered]

Here lies the problem with American mentality/coaching philosophy. Technical training ends at U12. The reality is to develop true technical competency in a player probably ever end but U19 is peak age. This explain by American players have such a poor first touch because fundamental player development/training is often viewed discourage at U13 and above. Players who exhibit creativity often viewed as show boating and often are discourage. Have you notice American players even at the national level lack creativity and soccer IQ. From U13 on most American players are tought to player by robots.

I noticed the exact thing that you are talking about during the World Cup. The American women just didn't seem to have any of the skills that their opponents obviously possessed.

[Unregistered]

Here lies the problem with American mentality/coaching philosophy. Technical training ends at U12. The reality is to develop true technical competency in a player probably ever end but U19 is peak age. This explain by American players have such a poor first touch because fundamental player development/training is often viewed discourage at U13 and above. Players who exhibit creativity often viewed as show boating and often are discourage. Have you notice American players even at the national level lack creativity and soccer IQ. From U13 on most American players are tought to player by robots.

No, the "problem" if you want to call it such, is that the American model is different than the rest of the world at the macro level. The American model is an unbalanced, bifurcated system between a one of the poor step children of professional sports leagues (MLS) that is the destination for an incredibly small percentage of "elite" players and the large, relatively well funded college (NCAA) programs that is the destination for a much larger percentage of "elite" players (in the world of Dev Academies, but a small percentage of the overall youth pool).

So, while the rest of the world elite youth player systems can fund the identification and development of players because hitting on just a few in the big money Euro leagues is all it takes, the American system relies on local mentality business owners (even if some are well meaning) convincing pay for play parents to chase the more realistic (again at the elite level) dream of college soccer.

And to even get those, you need a pyramid scheme that keeps thousands playing in a system that appeals to our American culture of competition and winning -- not a system that quickly weeds out the vast majority to get a very tiny fraction to chase something that for most ends up being a (subsidized) journey of unfulfilled dreams and broken promises.

I'm not up on these things, but someone I doubt development clubs in Europe travel thousands of miles with their U12-U17 prospects to play "showcase" tournaments...then again, how many of those elite international club academy players go to college and professions other than soccer?

And college soccer..well, let's just say - between the invasion of English coaches starting a few decades ago and the fact I doubt a college AD was ever convinced to keep a perpetually losing coach because "despite losing, we play more creatively and possessed the ball more than our opponents - the emphasis is on short term winning tactics. it is what it is.

and of course high school soccer is a necessary element to keep the model working (the limited exceptions in DA notwithstanding)..

It works on the girls side..where no real pro league and just enough endorsement and ESPN type gigs means our college system gives the US a huge advantage at the national and Olympic level.

On the boys side..If MLS gets enough momentum (and stops importing low wage talent from SA/Africa that undercuts its own DA) to approach the NHL (prep school and then junior hockey) or even a semblance of MLB (farm system and signing bonuses that make skipping or dropping out of college a viable option).. OR..if Euro clubs see enough potential in the US to set up shops in the talent rich areas and bring their model..or USSF could get beyond its limited vision and use its money to create a multiple pathways for elite players (and let's face it, ODP has not been the answer!).. then maybe our national team will be among the elite and US players will be populating top international leagues...

but, whether it's a "problem" or not..well, you tend to get what your systems incentivize

[Unregistered]

No, the "problem" if you want to call it such, is that the American model is different than the rest of the world at the macro level. The American model is an unbalanced, bifurcated system between a one of the poor step children of professional sports leagues (MLS) that is the destination for an incredibly small percentage of "elite" players and the large, relatively well funded college (NCAA) programs that is the destination for a much larger percentage of "elite" players (in the world of Dev Academies, but a small percentage of the overall youth pool).

So, while the rest of the world elite youth player systems can fund the identification and development of players because hitting on just a few in the big money Euro leagues is all it takes, the American system relies on local mentality business owners (even if some are well meaning) convincing pay for play parents to chase the more realistic (again at the elite level) dream of college soccer.

And to even get those, you need a pyramid scheme that keeps thousands playing in a system that appeals to our American culture of competition and winning -- not a system that quickly weeds out the vast majority to get a very tiny fraction to chase something that for most ends up being a (subsidized) journey of unfulfilled dreams and broken promises.

I'm not up on these things, but someone I doubt development clubs in Europe travel thousands of miles with their U12-U17 prospects to play "showcase" tournaments...then again, how many of those elite international club academy players go to college and professions other than soccer?

And college soccer..well, let's just say - between the invasion of English coaches starting a few decades ago and the fact I doubt a college AD was ever convinced to keep a perpetually losing coach because "despite losing, we play more creatively and possessed the ball more than our opponents - the emphasis is on short term winning tactics. it is what it is.

and of course high school soccer is a necessary element to keep the model working (the limited exceptions in DA notwithstanding)..

It works on the girls side..where no real pro league and just enough endorsement and ESPN type gigs means our college system gives the US a huge advantage at the national and Olympic level.

On the boys side..If MLS gets enough momentum (and stops importing low wage talent from SA/Africa that undercuts its own DA) to approach the NHL (prep school and then junior hockey) or even a semblance of MLB (farm system and signing bonuses that make skipping or dropping out of college a viable option).. OR..if Euro clubs see enough potential in the US to set up shops in the talent rich areas and bring their model..or USSF could get beyond its limited vision and use its money to create a multiple pathways for elite players (and let's face it, ODP has not been the answer!).. then maybe our national team will be among the elite and US players will be populating top international leagues...

but, whether it's a "problem" or not..well, you tend to get what your systems incentivize

It is alot simpler than that. The American culture is a football coach centric system. At the u little the focus is on position and spacing. Someone mention AV and SK in a previous post. These coaches get players african,Latino asian whose parents have raised them to control the ball and to keep it. Technical profiency is seen as more important than winning. The American non soccer volunteer coaching base kills the u6 and u8 by focusing on position,winning and proper spacing. Take a walk one day at wwis and you will see different town programs and their coaches ..they have 1 hour of practice time and they waste3/4 talking about where the kid should be. They place kids into positions at u8. The Latino and European decent players are actually very good in our country. Google u17 mnt most of these players are already playing or scouted by Mexican and European pro teams.

[Unregistered]

Someone should call him out on it. He makes a lot of money off of youth soccer. It would be nice to know if his resume if legit or not.

I've looked and haven't found anything. JT may have fabricated his "professional" playing experience, which is a big black mark for the club IMO.

[Unregistered]

I've looked and haven't found anything. JT may have fabricated his "professional" playing experience, which is a big black mark for the club IMO.

Did you check the Lasa league website?

[Unregistered]

Did you check the Lasa league website?

No need ,we all know who played Lasa and who didn't.