Do parents really understand the fine line between development and results?

[Unregistered]

I first heard about this argument a few years ago on another similar forum. Several parents of players who were at the end of their club days were saying the same thing - If I could do it over again I would have my child play for a quality coach focused on developing the player and not focus so much on having the player on whichever team was the #1 team in the state at the moment. Many of the parents had players who had either stopped playing soccer altogether or found that they really did not have the skills to play at a higher level post high school. It was such a common theme at the time but it wasn't something I knew a lot about. A couple years later the team my daughter was on had a new coach that very clearly stated his philosophy was developing the individual player/team and not on winning (although it was expected that the wins would follow eventually. It was hard to swallow at the time and many parents argued about the philosphy as it was new to the club/team. However, over the course of the next couple years I have found that I am now a big advocate of development over wins as I have seen the pay-off for many of the individual players on the original team. If I had not read the parents regrets on a forum I may not have been won over by the philosophy when it presented itself.

[Unregistered]

I agree.

I first heard about this argument a few years ago on another similar forum. Several parents of players who were at the end of their club days were saying the same thing - If I could do it over again I would have my child play for a quality coach focused on developing the player and not focus so much on having the player on whichever team was the #1 team in the state at the moment. Many of the parents had players who had either stopped playing soccer altogether or found that they really did not have the skills to play at a higher level post high school. It was such a common theme at the time but it wasn't something I knew a lot about. A couple years later the team my daughter was on had a new coach that very clearly stated his philosophy was developing the individual player/team and not on winning (although it was expected that the wins would follow eventually. It was hard to swallow at the time and many parents argued about the philosphy as it was new to the club/team. However, over the course of the next couple years I have found that I am now a big advocate of development over wins as I have seen the pay-off for many of the individual players on the original team. If I had not read the parents regrets on a forum I may not have been won over by the philosophy when it presented itself.

If you put 100 players, parents, or coaches in a room and asked them the question: Which is best - player development or team wins, one or the other? Probably 98-99 of them would say development. I don't know any rational person educated about soccer that would say otherwise. There isn't any actual problem here. So why all the discussion? Some posters don't understand that you can have both player development and wins. They are not mutually exclusive. Parents seem to be saying that "my club develops and yours just focuses on winning". Not true. If your team doesn't win about half their games, how much development is really going on? Perhaps not much. If your team wins all its games by only playing the best players and playing boot ball so that the really fast forward can score, then is there any development here? Perhaps not much. It is a balance, not one over the other.

[Unregistered]

LOL. Love how you keep posting over and over again and pretend to be so many different people. My guess is your dd was a bigger and stronger then the rest of the girls at U12 so she scored a lot of goals. Once skill and technical abilty took over the game she was left behind. You need something to blame so you've decided the problem was the large roster and thats why she didnt develop. It's okay. We get it.

No pretending to be different people. It's always me. And if you only knew how wrong your statements are. Trust me, you've got your assessment completely ass backwards. Size is an issue, but strength and skills are definately not an issue. Oh boy, not in the least. No, I guarantee you we were not so stupid as to put her on a team of 18. No, we leave that to special people like you who enjoyed watching their daughters ride the pine and not get the playing time they needed. Let me guess, you're the guy who always buys the extended warranty, even on that $10 clock radio. They see you coming from a mile away. A salesman's dream.

[Unregistered]

I'm glad its you!

No pretending to be different people. It's always me. And if you only knew how wrong your statements are. Trust me, you've got your assessment completely ass backwards. Size is an issue, but strength and skills are definately not an issue. Oh boy, not in the least. No, I guarantee you we were not so stupid as to put her on a team of 18. No, we leave that to special people like you who enjoyed watching their daughters ride the pine and not get the playing time they needed. Let me guess, you're the guy who always buys the extended warranty, even on that $10 clock radio. They see you coming from a mile away. A salesman's dream.

I'm glad is just you. No flash mob of idiots, just one. Didn't put your daughter on a team of 18? Well, aren't you special. My daughter didn't ride the pines, you'll never know if your daughter would have because their were so few subs. Just how many were on the team, 11 or was it 12, just in case? You make drying paint seem interesting and intelligent.

[Unregistered]

No pretending to be different people. It's always me. And if you only knew how wrong your statements are. Trust me, you've got your assessment completely ass backwards. Size is an issue, but strength and skills are definately not an issue. Oh boy, not in the least. No, I guarantee you we were not so stupid as to put her on a team of 18. No, we leave that to special people like you who enjoyed watching their daughters ride the pine and not get the playing time they needed. Let me guess, you're the guy who always buys the extended warranty, even on that $10 clock radio. They see you coming from a mile away. A salesman's dream.

You need to focus on development and not numbers. I've seen teams with 14 players and those 14 players are not getting better because their coach is not developing them. I've seen teams with 18 player were by the end of the season all the players had improved. Of course I've also seen it the other way around as well. What you need to realize is, it's about the coach, not the size of the roster.

You seem to have it set in your brain that just because a team has 18 on the roster means that no developing is going on and that child is doomed from the start. Not always the case. Open your mind a little. You're probably missing out on a lot.

[Unregistered]

Spot On

You need to focus on development and not numbers. I've seen teams with 14 players and those 14 players are not getting better because their coach is not developing them. I've seen teams with 18 player were by the end of the season all the players had improved. Of course I've also seen it the other way around as well. What you need to realize is, it's about the coach, not the size of the roster.

You seem to have it set in your brain that just because a team has 18 on the roster means that no developing is going on and that child is doomed from the start. Not always the case. Open your mind a little. You're probably missing out on a lot.

Most development is done in training. Games are the chance to test and see if that training is working. If your player is getting at least half a game when the game is meaningful, that's enough to put that training to the test. If carrying 18 means there are 4 or 5 players who are playing 25% or less, or not at all, those players should consider a move to a different team.

[Unregistered]

You need to focus on development and not numbers. I've seen teams with 14 players and those 14 players are not getting better because their coach is not developing them. I've seen teams with 18 player were by the end of the season all the players had improved. Of course I've also seen it the other way around as well. What you need to realize is, it's about the coach, not the size of the roster.

You seem to have it set in your brain that just because a team has 18 on the roster means that no developing is going on and that child is doomed from the start. Not always the case. Open your mind a little. You're probably missing out on a lot.

Yeah, real bright to put your kid with a bad coach, regardless of the number of players. Who would think that? Well, maybe you but no other parent would do that. Skills sessions are one on one. You think I am paying for that if the skills coach is bad? No way. It doesn't make sense. How dumb do you think everyone on this board is? Don't look in the mirror as you contemplate that question.

[Unregistered]

Now that we all agree that development is the most important and often leads to results. Is it possible to have a conversation about the great development coaches? There are few coaches that I could recommend at this time as the best development coach. My child is young.

[Unregistered]

If you put 100 players, parents, or coaches in a room and asked them the question: Which is best - player development or team wins, one or the other? Probably 98-99 of them would say development. I don't know any rational person educated about soccer that would say otherwise. There isn't any actual problem here. So why all the discussion? Some posters don't understand that you can have both player development and wins. They are not mutually exclusive. Parents seem to be saying that "my club develops and yours just focuses on winning". Not true. If your team doesn't win about half their games, how much development is really going on? Perhaps not much. If your team wins all its games by only playing the best players and playing boot ball so that the really fast forward can score, then is there any development here? Perhaps not much. It is a balance, not one over the other.

You will find this of interest. I was recently at a D1 college camp that involved half a dozen D1 programs. A couple of hundred high school age players attended. Part of the day included education - like nutrition, motivation, etc. I attended one of these sessions. There were about 30 players in the room and an equal number of parents. The lecturer asked the the group a question, "Is winning important?" The parents looked at each other and generally responded, "Yes," or "Definetely sometimes," "Really depends on the game and who you are playing." Surprisingly, every single player in the room responded that winning was not important, development was.

My take on this - the players get it, probably because they have heard it from coaches and parents. But parents clearly bring a different perpective on this, they are paying the bills and winning justifies the expense and in their minds, confirms their child is making progress. I'd say this carries over to the coaching level as well. Development does take a back seat to winning in the majority of clubs.

[Unregistered]

Development v. Winning

You will find this of interest. I was recently at a D1 college camp that involved half a dozen D1 programs. A couple of hundred high school age players attended. Part of the day included education - like nutrition, motivation, etc. I attended one of these sessions. There were about 30 players in the room and an equal number of parents. The lecturer asked the the group a question, "Is winning important?" The parents looked at each other and generally responded, "Yes," or "Definetely sometimes," "Really depends on the game and who you are playing." Surprisingly, every single player in the room responded that winning was not important, development was.

My take on this - the players get it, probably because they have heard it from coaches and parents. But parents clearly bring a different perpective on this, they are paying the bills and winning justifies the expense and in their minds, confirms their child is making progress. I'd say this carries over to the coaching level as well. Development does take a back seat to winning in the majority of clubs.

This isn't an easy issue, but to me the most important thing is that winning be a part of development. Learning how to win, and to play hard to the end and not give up is a learned skill. It is all too easy to say "we're focused on development" or "we're the better team" or "we play better" after you lose. My coaching philosophy has been to move the kids around, get them all a lot of playing time and experience but also to put them in position that they have a fair chance to win in the end. Sometimes that's impossible and sometimes you win, sometimes you don't. Soccer can be a particularly cruel game; but that teaches lessons as well. The clubs and coaches that say we focus on development and don't care about winning are selling the kids short and selling the parents a bill of goods. Development and winning are not mutually exclusive.

[Unregistered]

This isn't an easy issue, but to me the most important thing is that winning be a part of development. Learning how to win, and to play hard to the end and not give up is a learned skill. It is all too easy to say "we're focused on development" or "we're the better team" or "we play better" after you lose. My coaching philosophy has been to move the kids around, get them all a lot of playing time and experience but also to put them in position that they have a fair chance to win in the end. Sometimes that's impossible and sometimes you win, sometimes you don't. Soccer can be a particularly cruel game; but that teaches lessons as well. The clubs and coaches that say we focus on development and don't care about winning are selling the kids short and selling the parents a bill of goods. Development and winning are not mutually exclusive.

Finally, someone said it. The key here is the last sentence, "Development and winning are not mutually exclusive." If your coach is developing players both technically and tactically the result of that would be more wins. I would just add one point to the above coach's ideas and hope this coach agrees with me...The key for me when I coach and watch other teams/coaches is whether or not the coach is sacrificing development over winning. If he/she is teaching boot-ball just to win a league game, this is an indicator (not an absolute) that should start to raise an eyebrow. But, again, if your DD is being developed in the game, not just technically, they will move towards (or continue to) winning.

One more item...unfortunately for all, most of our children will not play in the WC so soccer is an avenue to teach them life skills. Competition, team work and the other items that are taught on a soccer field are key skills for their success in life. Believe it or not, life does keep score, we need to teach them how to deal with these situations in a respectful manner and soccer does just that. Winning sometimes is more than technical and tactical skill, it is a mentality, a thought process and can sometimes be gained through desire (like life). Are these not also skills which should be taught?

[Unregistered]

unfortunatley

totally agree with everything you said, but you also mentioned that they are paying clients too. Back home is England thats not the model we play by and I have said before it should be the ability to play not pay. That way you get kids from many backgrounds playing by the pay method Pele, Maradonna, George Best,Zidane and many more players would have not made it to the heights they have. Look at all the African players coming through now they didnt get there by paying for it.

your point is well made though and I truly believe its development not results that will bring the game forward. And if you develop the kids right the results will come the competition will get better and you will still loose games but they will be hard fought and well played games and again the result wont matter because everyone will be talking about how great that game was

I agree the issues that paying to play creates and the model oversees, however, someone has to pay for it. Someone is paying for the coaches and the fields and everything even in England, it just isn't the parents. I do not see that happening over here at all. I would love it if it could, it just isn't realistic.