The purpose of this site is not to be another trove of drills and exercises, but to foster different thought processes in youth coaches and parents. Partly due to the nature of other American sports that tend to be more rigid in their approach, too much of youth soccer is dominated by a coach-led mindset that takes freedom away from young players. How can a player creatively come up with a solution if he is told exactly what to do on the field of play? How can he learn?
In 2000, Germany failed to make it out of the group stage of the European Championships. Recognizing that the path to improvement lay in a re-evaluation of how German youth were being trained, this led to the implementation of significant changes to the German development structure – ensuring that young players with ability were identified and trained so that they could win as professional players (and not at u10). Let’s consider what the current German National Team Coach now looks for in a player (emphasis mine):
- Joachim Low
This begs the question: So what do coaches in America look for in a player?
Well, under the pay-to-play model inherent in the U.S., parents expect “results” (read: wins) at the youngest ages. Accordingly they pay coaches an inordinate amount of money so that their son or daughter plays on a “winning” team. The manner by which these “wins” are achieved is not important to the parents – and this is the crux of the problem. Paid coaches know that they can win games at the youth levels by playing bigger, stronger, more athletic kids. This early success allows them to keep their teams together for the next several years but results in a style of play that is essentially kick and chase – and does little for players’ overall technical development.
The smaller, skilled player – or regardless of size – the more cerebral player – or the late bloomer – can’t find a home in this environment, and is often left behind. Rather than disregarding game results at young ages, paid coaches are essentially forced to ignore a significant population of players because they don’t fit the athletic profile at a certain age, and subsequently don’t get the appropriate level of training and competition required to make them better players as they grow. Consequently, the current structure of American youth soccer leaves too much potential by the wayside, and as a result it is actually inhibiting the real improvement of the National Team.
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
- Albert Einstein
The U.S. is a big country. We can’t just copy what other countries have done – but we can acknowledge what we’re doing wrong. Following their performance in 2000, the Germans took stock of what they were doing and implemented changes to their development system. The U.S. needs to do the same – and many will want to replicate the German model. In terms of the future, however, those charged with youth development in America need to make it plainly understood to parents that results do not matter at the youth level. While the structure of our development system – and simply the sheer size of the country – are real problems, the true challenge is actually parent psyche. Right now parents marvel at youth teams that win games – without taking notice of how they win. Americans still put too much emphasis on the victory achieved by physical, athletic dominance. By the teenage years, this advantage dissipates significantly.
You lost the game? OK, but how often were you able to play out of the back?
Perhaps the most important improvement the U.S. can make is not related to the actual infrastructure of our youth system, with its disparate clubs and league systems. The crucial ingredient is the need to change the mindset of all those associated with youth development. At youth levels, the goal of the coaches, players, and parents must not be limited to single game results, but focused instead towards specific development objectives. This simple change completely alters the dynamic. You lost the game? OK, but how often were you able to play out of the back? That is the score I am interested in. Coaches can break down challenges like this into technical and tactical components (receive the ball on the half turn – on the back foot, did you check your shoulders?, etc.).
Specific game or season objectives need to become the focus. This change means the specific game result means little (as it should given a real development timeline of over ten years), but the coach-given challenges become all important in terms of long-term development. Over time, these cumulative challenges (which should address physical, tactical, physical, and psycho-social components) help determine what a young player will ultimately become.
Please feel free to comment.