How to tell if a player is developing? Coaches please

[Slow Xavi]

It might be time to accept the inevitable. There are big weedout ages, one being 7th grade and another being 9th grade. Kids stay with it in 6th because thats all they know. They haven't experienced the new world that is middle school. By 7th, they see much more of the world and are comfortable telling you that they don't want to play anymore. Those that stick it out have a similar thing hit them in 9th grade. They realize that HS has so much more to offer and soccer takes up so much time. However, the good thing about HS is that if your kid has been dabbling in other sports, such as golf or tennis or ...., HS offers them the opportunity to play those sports competitively and they might replace soccer with something else. They probably won't play varsity in those sports if they haven't been playing them a lot at the younger ages, but they can play JV/JV2 and have fun. So far, we've been lucky. We've not had to push our kids much at soccer. The oldest is going top D1. The youngest just loves the game.

I think that is correct, but for parents it is the HS years that we may want our children to play sports the most (whether varsity or JV, Comp or Rec). General physical health, time and energy on something that is positive, etc.

If your children is talented and naturally motivated it may be easier to channel to sports at these ages; but as you rightly identified, not everyone's dd's is going to be on the d1 (or even college-soccer) path, so finding some sports to foster/support/encourage is crucial AND setting it up (to the extent we can contribute to the structure) to be a positive environment. Do like the idea of providing early exposure to other sports.

[Unregistered]

My Take

How can a coach tell if a player is developing? Do coaches care about individual development or is it more about team development? Seems like the benchmark for development is if a team wins or not. What are good and bad things to watch for with players?

Wow, could you ask a more loaded question that cuts right to the heart of things?

I will try to answer the original question as best I can, as both a coach and a parent. To directly answer these questions succinctly from my perspective:

A coach can tell if a player is developing by evaluating all of the individual players on an ongoing basis, using the following specific criteria, as advocated by the USSF and hopefully, the coach is being made to follow this format by the DOC as well; 1.Technical 2. Tactical. 3. Physical and 4. Psycho-social. Or as I originally learned it the TIPS model for 1. Technique 2. Insight 3. Personality and 4 Speed (of thought as well).

Any decent coach should care about individual development and it is my belief that the vast majority of coaches understand that the only way to truly develop a team is to concentrate on individual development. There is however a tremendous amount of pressure put on team wins by the parents and clubs, that is counter productive to individual development and even the most well intentioned coaches make short term decisions based on winning because of that pressure, myself included.

You are correct that team wins and losses is the only metric that most people use to judge coaches on and it is definitely an extremely poor way to judge YOUTH coaches. The only better way to judge coaches requires better education of those who are judging the coaches and giving them the tools to do so. More on this later.

Good and bad things to watch for with players? Technique, Insight, Personality and Speed. You need to understand what good development looks like in order to have any idea where to begin in evaluating and helping with the development of your child imo.

I spend an inordinate amount of time as a "coach" in attempting to educate my parents on WHY I am doing what I am doing in practice and games. I have consistently found that the better educated the parent becomes about proper development, the better and faster the player develops and the more joy they get from the game.

Here is a simple explanation of TIPS and this whole website, although old fashioned, is awesome http://www.bettersoccermorefun.com/dwtext/tips.htm

Here is the USSF curriculum, you don't have to read the whole thing, or get your coaching licenses, but I firmly believe every parent should know what the coaches, clubs and children should be doing, before investing the kind of money and time they do into this whole endeavor.

http://resources.ussoccer.com/n7v8b8...Curriculum.pdf

[Unregistered]

I think that is correct, but for parents it is the HS years that we may want our children to play sports the most (whether varsity or JV, Comp or Rec). General physical health, time and energy on something that is positive, etc.

If your children is talented and naturally motivated it may be easier to channel to sports at these ages; but as you rightly identified, not everyone's dd's is going to be on the d1 (or even college-soccer) path, so finding some sports to foster/support/encourage is crucial AND setting it up (to the extent we can contribute to the structure) to be a positive environment. Do like the idea of providing early exposure to other sports.

No doubt that sports in HS is important. I don't disagree. If you can get them into something, even rec level sports, that is good for them. From a physical fitness and health standpoint.

But sports are just one ****** for their passions and I don't put varsity sports as any more important than being on the debate team or being highly active in some other activity or club. They may find their ****** is playing trombone in jazz band and want to spend the hours they used to spend on soccer on practicing and playing in the band. Hey, it's all good. I don't care what the passion is, just have one.

[Unregistered]

Wow, could you ask a more loaded question that cuts right to the heart of things?

I will try to answer the original question as best I can, as both a coach and a parent. To directly answer these questions succinctly from my perspective:

A coach can tell if a player is developing by evaluating all of the individual players on an ongoing basis, using the following specific criteria, as advocated by the USSF and hopefully, the coach is being made to follow this format by the DOC as well; 1.Technical 2. Tactical. 3. Physical and 4. Psycho-social. Or as I originally learned it the TIPS model for 1. Technique 2. Insight 3. Personality and 4 Speed (of thought as well).

Any decent coach should care about individual development and it is my belief that the vast majority of coaches understand that the only way to truly develop a team is to concentrate on individual development. There is however a tremendous amount of pressure put on team wins by the parents and clubs, that is counter productive to individual development and even the most well intentioned coaches make short term decisions based on winning because of that pressure, myself included.

You are correct that team wins and losses is the only metric that most people use to judge coaches on and it is definitely an extremely poor way to judge YOUTH coaches. The only better way to judge coaches requires better education of those who are judging the coaches and giving them the tools to do so. More on this later.

Good and bad things to watch for with players? Technique, Insight, Personality and Speed. You need to understand what good development looks like in order to have any idea where to begin in evaluating and helping with the development of your child imo.

I spend an inordinate amount of time as a "coach" in attempting to educate my parents on WHY I am doing what I am doing in practice and games. I have consistently found that the better educated the parent becomes about proper development, the better and faster the player develops and the more joy they get from the game.

Here is a simple explanation of TIPS and this whole website, although old fashioned, is awesome http://www.bettersoccermorefun.com/dwtext/tips.htm

Here is the USSF curriculum, you don't have to read the whole thing, or get your coaching licenses, but I firmly believe every parent should know what the coaches, clubs and children should be doing, before investing the kind of money and time they do into this whole endeavor.

http://resources.ussoccer.com/n7v8b8...Curriculum.pdf

Thank you for the information. Question - is there any way to build speed and reaction time if you play on a lower division team? Do strong players not develop on lower division teams with regards to speed and reaction? What can you do to help players develop to play under pressure?

[Unregistered]

Thank you for the information. Question - is there any way to build speed and reaction time if you play on a lower division team? Do strong players not develop on lower division teams with regards to speed and reaction? What can you do to help players develop to play under pressure?

Have the player train with an older team if you can. Play with or against better players as often as possible whether at practice, with another team, or in the park. That should help with all three of the questions you raise.

[Unregistered]

Thank you for the information. Question - is there any way to build speed and reaction time if you play on a lower division team? Do strong players not develop on lower division teams with regards to speed and reaction? What can you do to help players develop to play under pressure?

the way to develop speed and reaction is the same for developing technique. either go to the back yard or local field or gym, and train on your own. (sparq excercises can be found all over youtube.) or you could pay a trainer to do that for you. strong players will still develop on a lower team, at a similar rate, but possibly slower because the speed of thought involved, theoretically would not be as high. playing under pressure can only be approximated in any training environment, even on the A team, that's what games are for.

[Unregistered]

How can a coach tell if a player is developing? Do coaches care about individual development or is it more about team development? Seems like the benchmark for development is if a team wins or not. What are good and bad things to watch for with players?

Fascinating topic and great responses/conversation. The only thing I might throw in is as a parent we ought to ask ourselves why are we asking this question? Why are we paying for that additional training?

It is easy as parents with years more experience in this world than our kids to try to roadmap everything our kid does for them. But that takes away their right to live those detours.

If we are thinking scholarships, and all these other down the road things do we really end up doing what is best for our kid.

I have two players one in college and one in high school. A few years ago the younger was going through the same doldrums others have described on here. We sat down had a good conversation that ended with us giving him permission to quit if he wanted. Not only did he not quit, all of a sudden he took off, and has become a great player. He had felt he was playing soccer because we told him, and it was drudgery. He was blocked into the same position as big brother and felt like he was living in a shadow. Once he started playing "for himself" he changed positions, playing style, and is now one of the top players on an awesome team.

Sorry, a lot of words to say "make sure it is about the kid, not yourself." If you havn't saved money for their college, shame on you, don't force them to solve that problem. If your inner athlete was never recognized when you were young, don't force them to live your dreams for you.

[Unregistered]

Fascinating topic and great responses/conversation. The only thing I might throw in is as a parent we ought to ask ourselves why are we asking this question? Why are we paying for that additional training?

It is easy as parents with years more experience in this world than our kids to try to roadmap everything our kid does for them. But that takes away their right to live those detours.

If we are thinking scholarships, and all these other down the road things do we really end up doing what is best for our kid.

I have two players one in college and one in high school. A few years ago the younger was going through the same doldrums others have described on here. We sat down had a good conversation that ended with us giving him permission to quit if he wanted. Not only did he not quit, all of a sudden he took off, and has become a great player. He had felt he was playing soccer because we told him, and it was drudgery. He was blocked into the same position as big brother and felt like he was living in a shadow. Once he started playing "for himself" he changed positions, playing style, and is now one of the top players on an awesome team.

Sorry, a lot of words to say "make sure it is about the kid, not yourself." If you havn't saved money for their college, shame on you, don't force them to solve that problem. If your inner athlete was never recognized when you were young, don't force them to live your dreams for you.

Agree on not forcing a kid to play. I think one big barrier is not knowing how to measure development. Paying for a trainer is not bad. If your kid was struggling in school or attended a poor school district then most parents would seek out extra support or try to get them into a stronger school. A trainer is extra support to help. If a kid desires to get better then why not support that?

Question to the coaches- can you tell at U12/13 who the good players will be at U18?

[Unregistered]

Agree on not forcing a kid to play. I think one big barrier is not knowing how to measure development. Paying for a trainer is not bad. If your kid was struggling in school or attended a poor school district then most parents would seek out extra support or try to get them into a stronger school. A trainer is extra support to help. If a kid desires to get better then why not support that?

Question to the coaches- can you tell at U12/13 who the good players will be at U18?

I think the answer to that is a very clear "not really". At best you can tell which 11 year olds might be good when they're older but you're as likely to be wrong as right. Too many things can change between 11 and 17...

Unfortunately, I feel like we're in a vicious circle right now. We try to identify the "best" at a very young age and then drive them mercilessly until most of them quit soccer altogether before they even get to HS age. And then, because so many quit in their mid-teens, we've pushed the "competitive" side of the game (with leagues, state cups, regionals events, national events, huge tournaments, etc.) down to ever younger ages so that we as parents feel that we are getting something out of all the investment (both time and money). All this competition then causes more kids to quit earlier and also requires that the "best" be identified even earlier yet. Some states, like WA, now even have U8 "Premier" divisions in their leagues. Where does it end? Identifying talent in pre-school and then having everyone quit soccer before middle school?

I honestly think that we need to de-emphasize the competitive nature of the game until maybe U13 or U14. Below that there should be smaller sided games (like 9v9) with no standings or championships. There should also be no more than 1 game per weekend and no more than 1 game per day during tournaments (unless the games are shortened significantly). Focus on training, spend the time in the early years actually working on ball control skills (with the help of things like iSoccer to actually measure progress), instead of always using practices just to prepare for the next game. Then, when they get to U13, finally start to sort the kids into levels of play and begin the "competitive" phase of their youth career. Even U13 through U18 is 6 long years for this "competitive" phasse, there isn't really a need to make it 10 or 12 years.

[Unregistered]

I think the answer to that is a very clear "not really". At best you can tell which 11 year olds might be good when they're older but you're as likely to be wrong as right. Too many things can change between 11 and 17...

Unfortunately, I feel like we're in a vicious circle right now. We try to identify the "best" at a very young age and then drive them mercilessly until most of them quit soccer altogether before they even get to HS age. And then, because so many quit in their mid-teens, we've pushed the "competitive" side of the game (with leagues, state cups, regionals events, national events, huge tournaments, etc.) down to ever younger ages so that we as parents feel that we are getting something out of all the investment (both time and money). All this competition then causes more kids to quit earlier and also requires that the "best" be identified even earlier yet. Some states, like WA, now even have U8 "Premier" divisions in their leagues. Where does it end? Identifying talent in pre-school and then having everyone quit soccer before middle school?

I honestly think that we need to de-emphasize the competitive nature of the game until maybe U13 or U14. Below that there should be smaller sided games (like 9v9) with no standings or championships. There should also be no more than 1 game per weekend and no more than 1 game per day during tournaments (unless the games are shortened significantly). Focus on training, spend the time in the early years actually working on ball control skills (with the help of things like iSoccer to actually measure progress), instead of always using practices just to prepare for the next game. Then, when they get to U13, finally start to sort the kids into levels of play and begin the "competitive" phase of their youth career. Even U13 through U18 is 6 long years for this "competitive" phasse, there isn't really a need to make it 10 or 12 years.

You know, I agree with much of this post and it is very good. There is something else to consider, and I have seen this in many of the kids at U10-12 playing competitively:

They love to compete against each other. They love to compete against others. They love tournaments and games and rankings. It is not just the parents or coaches.

Maybe that is the "american" way, but you don't want to minimize something that is important to our culture. Competition is what drives some people to be the best at what they do. It is that competition that separates us from Socialism and Communism. Not in sports, per say, but in culture. The thought that if you push yourself to be the best, you can be successful in anything you do. If you think kids at the ages of 10, 11, 12, don't understand or know that already, you are fooling yourself. Why don't we just eliminate grades in school util HS? Any type of placement or testing until kids are ready? That just is not how life works.

I honestly think you would find less kids playing at those younger ages and dropping because of the lack of competition just as much as the "overburden" of it.

[Unregistered]

You know, I agree with much of this post and it is very good. There is something else to consider, and I have seen this in many of the kids at U10-12 playing competitively:

They love to compete against each other. They love to compete against others. They love tournaments and games and rankings. It is not just the parents or coaches.

Maybe that is the "american" way, but you don't want to minimize something that is important to our culture. Competition is what drives some people to be the best at what they do. It is that competition that separates us from Socialism and Communism. Not in sports, per say, but in culture. The thought that if you push yourself to be the best, you can be successful in anything you do. If you think kids at the ages of 10, 11, 12, don't understand or know that already, you are fooling yourself. Why don't we just eliminate grades in school util HS? Any type of placement or testing until kids are ready? That just is not how life works.

I honestly think you would find less kids playing at those younger ages and dropping because of the lack of competition just as much as the "overburden" of it.

less competitive matches per week, makes every match that much more competitive. ask the NFL. (although they keep trying to add that extra game.) maybe more kids would leave, MAYBE more kids would just play for fun. hard to say.

what we do know is that what we have been doing since the 90's hasn't been all that great.

[Unregistered]

Yes!!!

You know, I agree with much of this post and it is very good. There is something else to consider, and I have seen this in many of the kids at U10-12 playing competitively:

They love to compete against each other. They love to compete against others. They love tournaments and games and rankings. It is not just the parents or coaches.

Maybe that is the "american" way, but you don't want to minimize something that is important to our culture. Competition is what drives some people to be the best at what they do. It is that competition that separates us from Socialism and Communism. Not in sports, per say, but in culture. The thought that if you push yourself to be the best, you can be successful in anything you do. If you think kids at the ages of 10, 11, 12, don't understand or know that already, you are fooling yourself. Why don't we just eliminate grades in school util HS? Any type of placement or testing until kids are ready? That just is not how life works.

I honestly think you would find less kids playing at those younger ages and dropping because of the lack of competition just as much as the "overburden" of it.

Well said!!

[Unregistered]

Sorry for the novel, TLDR; Small sided games!

Thank you for the information. Question - is there any way to build speed and reaction time if you play on a lower division team? Do strong players not develop on lower division teams with regards to speed and reaction? What can you do to help players develop to play under pressure?

I am the person that wrote the post you originally quoted. The other responses to your question, basically about having your player play more and against better competition, and/or play up against older players are fine and that could certainly help, but I will try to add a little more from my perspective as a coach.

First off I would need a better understanding of the age to be really specific, if the player is U14 or below than any sort of SPARQ type training without a ball is a waste of time imo and beyond that it is only of marginal help in my experience. I am a soccer trainer, not a track coach, so I don't teach running.

When we talk about speed in the TIPS model we are more than anything talking about soccer specific speed what is summed up in this Johan Cruyff quote: "Speed is often confused with insight. When I start running earlier than the others, I appear faster."

Using your technique, to execute the solution you have come up with, using your insight and and whatever raw physical tools you possess, as quickly and efficiently as possible, is how I think of speed. This does not discount raw straight line speed, because it can be a devastating bonus, but in my experience you either have it or you don't and it isn't nearly as important as it is cracked up to be.

So, improving your speed and reaction time; best way to do it is hours and hours of small sided games. Hopefully you can do that under the supervision of a qualified person who can utilize guided discovery, to pause the play occasionally, in order to provide insight and help solve soccer problems and optimally demonstrate proper technique. Small sided provides the most soccer problems to solve, in the least amount of time, with the player engaged at all times. It is hands down the best bang for the buck.

Personal training and/or small group sessions outside of regular team practices can be terrific if you have the $, but are not necessary imo. I would start by talking to your coach and any other contacts at your club about further training opportunities whether that is with the A team, an older team, or even a younger A team does not really matter, just more opportunities to train is the idea. I don't ever do personal training with any kid I coach and think it is absolutely unethical, so if you are going to do it, find someone outside the team and preferably the club.

I would also play futsal through the winter, not indoor. I would also advocate the player getting into and excited about practicing on their own and with you as the parent, try competing with them through something like https://playisoccer.com/

This all bleeds into another discussion that is ongoing in this thread and really comes before questions about training methods, or additional training, which is does the kid want to get better, or does the parent? Should you push your kids and if so, to what degree?

I can give all kinds of advice on what to do, but it all takes more time and costs more money and really is only effective if the PLAYER is interested and engaged in the process. A kid that loves the game and wants to get better, is going to develop better just juggling in the basement on his own, than a kid who is doing personal training with an expensive coach only because her parents are making her.

As both a parent and a coach I am absolutely certain that the parent should never push the child. The coach can and should. The parent though needs to be engaged and supportive of the process and needs to be actively interested in the players development. I think you should be totally understanding of failures and frustrations, never discuss specifics in the car ride home and should essentially be waiting at every opportunity where they are interested, with a soccer ball for them to play with, a camp to go to, watching on TV or tickets to a game, if they show interest that moment.

When I see parents being hard on their kids, I am hard with the parents. I ask them why they only show up to games and not practices, where they can see the work we are doing so they can work on it at home with their player? I ask them what they have been working on to educate themselves about the game so they can be a better soccer parent, are they playing in the back yard with Johnnie or Suzy? Have they taken their kid to a Timbers game? Did they read that outline I sent on training the age group their child is and what were their thoughts on it?

Invariably the parents I see who are hardest on their kids are the ones who are the least engaged with them and the game. Those parents who have played, or are trying to learn along with their child, or have older children playing, are invariably the most understanding with their kids and realize it is a marathon not a sprint.

[Unregistered]

?

less competitive matches per week, makes every match that much more competitive. ask the NFL. (although they keep trying to add that extra game.) maybe more kids would leave, MAYBE more kids would just play for fun. hard to say.

what we do know is that what we have been doing since the 90's hasn't been all that great.

Why is what we are doing not working? If you look at soccer and its level of interest in the USA it seems to me anyway that we compete pretty well.
Our women are usually ranked #1, and you can count on them to be in the final game of most major championships.
Our men almost always make the tournament in world cup.
Not bad for a country that doesnt count soccer as one of its marquee sports. As soccer grows our expectations for the men and the results will get better.

[Unregistered]

You know, I agree with much of this post and it is very good. There is something else to consider, and I have seen this in many of the kids at U10-12 playing competitively:

They love to compete against each other. They love to compete against others. They love tournaments and games and rankings. It is not just the parents or coaches.

Maybe that is the "american" way, but you don't want to minimize something that is important to our culture. Competition is what drives some people to be the best at what they do. It is that competition that separates us from Socialism and Communism. Not in sports, per say, but in culture. The thought that if you push yourself to be the best, you can be successful in anything you do. If you think kids at the ages of 10, 11, 12, don't understand or know that already, you are fooling yourself. Why don't we just eliminate grades in school util HS? Any type of placement or testing until kids are ready? That just is not how life works.

I honestly think you would find less kids playing at those younger ages and dropping because of the lack of competition just as much as the "overburden" of it.

You are right and you are wrong. The kids want to compete, no doubt about it and it should be encouraged.

We need to be MORE competitive and we are in fact less competitive than our European counterparts, that you want to deride as socialists and communists.

We need to be far more competitive about individual player development and a lot less competitive about teams, which is really at the heart of this thread.

Our clubs and teams at a premier level should be a constant competition of the INDIVIDUALS to get better and improve and compete against one another to be better. The team results should be less important.

In fact I would say all the team mentality BS is the socialist perspective and is not the American way. The America I know and love and the concept of capitalism that I espouse is about individualism and free will and personal responsibility for your actions and reward for your endeavors.

The individual players at clubs and on teams should be being graded and trained and nurtured to improve on an individual basis and if we did that we would have much more competitive teams later on when they are older and it matters.