Exciting News for Grand Lake United.

Fielding spring club teams from the West central Ohio area has always been a struggle. More so in some age groups than others.  This is why I am extremely pleased to announce we will be fielding two teams in the U18 /19 age group!

Our U17 team last spring had a very successful season going undefeated in the MVYSA league, winning our division at the Pacesetters Tournament and winning the Creek Classic. I have no doubt that the success of this team spurred interest within players looking to become a part of our success. The looming World Cup and the United States successful qualifying for it has generated some excitement as well.  There's a bit more going on here though.  The young men who comprise the team have been tremendous recruiters for our program and these teams.  That only happens when teammates genuinely like and care about one another. This is a tight knit group confident in themselves and in their teammates. 

I have seen this type of growth before in high school programs, at the college level and in amateur sports.  It is the result of leadership within the player ranks. When the core group of players have "it" the opportunity for special exists.  I have considered the best course of action for a coach when this occurs is to simply not get in the way so as to mess it up.

Yes, there will be some issues about assignments to the two teams.  That is a good thing in my estimation.  Everyone should want to play soccer with their friends and strive to be a member of what they perceive to be the best team.  I understand that.  Assignments to the teams will be one of the larger roles I play with this... program.  I can offer no guarantee of getting it 100% right.  I can only avow to do my very best in the context of Program, TEAM, Individual Player and prioritized in that order.

I would like to say I will coach both teams exactly the same but that will not be the case. Our core fundamentals will be the same with each team. Our systems of play will be similar, but we will play to the strengths of each team and the individuals who comprise the teams.  Our formations may or may not be the same or similar.  We will work to discover what works best for each team.

I'm excited.  It looks like we will have 36-40 players to comprise these two teams. That is a tremendous player pool for our semi-rural area.  An extraordinary number of players, in fact.  I aim is to provide each of them with a quality playing experience in the 2014 spring season.   Wish us Good Luck and keep us in your thoughts and prayers as we embark together on this venture.  And of course, I will keep you updated throughout the process!

One of the tougher aspects of coaching.

Coaches in general often think they can "coach up" anyone and make them a contributing member of a team.  In most cases the object of their attention is the would be star with a horrible attitude.  This is not always the case though.  I myself am in the midst of trying to figure out how to coach up a young man who is good kid and loyal to our team.  Yet over the last 3 springs he has fallen behind his teammates in his development.

Players all develop at different rates but rarely does the disparity grow to this extent. "Mark" is basically the same player he was three seasons ago.  Individual player rankings of our team from years ago would have found Mark middle of the pack. Now, Mark is the last player on a 19 man roster.

I have the power to cut Mark from the team, but have been reluctant to do so for a number of reasons.  Family friend, attends the same high school as my son, he's very athletic and in a way he needs soccer and perhaps more specifically, this team.  This is one I am loath to give up on and so I continue to try.

One of the tougher aspects of coaching is recognizing when to let go of a favorite player.  I know Mark cannot compete with his current teammates. He lacks game vision to an extraordinary degree. This is undoubtedly related to the fact he learns differently than most.  I feel I have failed Mark as I have not discovered a way to properly teach him.  It is not that Mark is incapable of learning - he is a bright intelligent young man.  He's just not catching on as his teammates have and continue to do.

Keeping him with this team would be a disservice to his teammates especially if there is an expectation on Mark's part that he would receive playing time commensurate with that of his teammates.  Mark is the weak link on the pitch when he's in the game.

Now, in fairness, Mark is playing up an age group with this team.  When that decision was first made 4 years ago, this was appropriate for Mark.  As time has passed and his teammates have left him behind, this team is no longer appropriate for Mark to be on.  His teammates have been patient, understanding and helpful. Many have tried to mentor him and help him develop his game further with the same frustrating results I have had.  Mark's teammates appreciate he does not belong with this team and it's beginning to show as Mark continues to struggle with his play.

As coaches we know there is always that one player who, because their level of play is lacking, breakdown every exercise.  They are the one who always loses possession of the ball for their team often by self-inflicting pressure.  They are the one that opponents always seek to isolate and take advantage of because they lack self-discipline and will repeatedly stab or dive in effectively eliminating themselves from play.  Mark has become that player on this team.

Thankfully, there is another option for Mark. We will field a "B" team this next season.  Previous attempts to move Mark down to his own age group have been met with emotional responses. This is not unexpected, but the degree to which it manifested itself was.  Mark and his family essentially gave me an ultimatum that he either plays with our team or he won't be playing at all.  I am hopeful the idea of still playing up but doing so on the "B" team will be palatable to Mark and his family.  He needs to play and will not get that chance with the "A" team. With the "B" team he should play the majority of each match.

If Mark and his family are not agreeable to this, I will have to accept the challenge of their ultimatum and cut him from the team.  Even if that means he will not play soccer at all.  What it comes down to is the necessity of doing what is best for the team with an understanding that no one person is more important than the collective team. 

I am making one last attempt to bring Mark up to speed with this team.  If it is unsuccessful, I will move him to the "B" team and continue working with him in that setting.  I will need to take a step back from where that group from where the "A" team is now.  I am hopeful "re-taking" a season of soccer lessons will be enough to help Mark develop his game further.  As a coach, this is my "Hail Mary" attempt to reach Mark.  I pray that it works.

Play is the highest form of research.

"Play is the highest form of research."

 

- Albert Einstein

 

There is a message here for coaches.  A coach must possess knowledge of evaluation methods as well as an ability to apply them in a practical manner.  Perhaps the most fundamental key to coaching is evaluating individual and collective play. With proper evaluation of player and team performance a coach can use his library of knowledge about the game to formulate individual and team seasonal plans to improve performance. The king consideration in all of this is the players learning experiences presented as problem solving opportunities within their play. Play is the research that leads to better performance. 

Analyzing Team Play / Problem Solving in Soccer

 If you go to any Internet soccer forum or message board you will find a frequent topic of discussion is conversion rates on shots taken at goal. This is one of the areas I am most often asked to address in the team camps I conduct. There seems to a general consensus in thought that a magical drill or practice exercise exists that can improve a teams ability to score goals. Of course, this just isn't true.  In fact, the reasons a team struggles to finish can often times be a lot more complicated than one might suspect. Before coming up with appropriate exercises to address a teams struggles to score I have to figure out why they are struggling to score.

A friend contacted me after the 2012 high school season lamenting his team generated 22 shots on goal for the entire season. On the other hand, they had converted on 21 of those chances!

For our purposes here we will use the official FIFA definition for shots on goal:  A shot on goal sees the struck ball travel within the frame of the goal and results either in a goal being scored or a save being made.  So, if the shot strikes post or bar and bounces out, this is not considered a shot on goal. And, of course, any shot high or wide of the goal is not considered a shot on goal.

The  coach referenced above is a former college goalkeeper and knows the correct definition of a shot on goal. So I was really curious as to how a team could convert on 21 of 22 chances. That is one of the most confounding statistics I have ever heard of. No wonder he was interested in getting his team to take more shots on goal!

The question I had to answer was, why only 22 shots on goal over the course of 17 games?

The first hint I got was the coach telling me his team refused to shoot from distance. They insisted on being at nearly point blank range before attempting a shot.  Aha! That explains the tremendous conversion rate. It also provided a vital clue in terms of questioning why they only took 22 shots on goal. My suspicion was a lack of striking skill and this was confirmed during my first session with the team. They didn't take more shots or shots from greater range because they could not execute the required skill to do so. Now, I knew where to begin addressing the issue of generating more shots.

As I said earlier, it's not always so simple to diagnose why a team struggles in a certain facet of play. The team my son plays on this fall is struggling to score goals. They generate enough shots on goal but struggle to finish. They strike the ball well and can shoot from distance. So, why do they struggle to finish?

I believe there are a number of reasons all inter-related.

1) Play in the final third is too slow. The team is fast enough in the initial stages of attack, but are slow in moving the ball once in the attacking third. Especially slow in moving the ball to the feet of an open shooter in front of the face of the goal.

2) There is a reluctance to take an isolated defender to goal in 1 v 1 situations. Wingers carrying the ball into the attacking third only to stop their advance instead of cutting in on the defender, getting their shoulder ahead of the defender to eliminate him from play and going strong at goal.
.
3) This is directly related to #2 above: The team plays too much on the flanks. It is good to break through on the flanks but the ball must be carried inside or passed inside at the earliest possible moment. The team in question is slow to do this resulting in many of their shots being taken from the wedge (Corner, corner, post) or wider. These are poor angles to shoot from as the opposing goalkeeper need only defend 4 yards of goal or less leaving little room for error on the placement of the shot.

4) Poor utilization of space in the attacking third.  This is one of the most common problems I encounter when working with teams. Teams either fill the space they want to play in far too soon or do so far too late. Both are occurring with this team. 

For instance, when a wing does take on a defender 1 v 1 and a cross is forthcoming I often see teammates running abreast of the wing and at the same pace as the wing carrying the ball.  It is a flat line of 3-5 attackers. What we should see are the three elements of the game represented -  Penetration, Depth and Width.  A lone attacker pushing defenders back upon their goal to free up space in front of them to be played in.  Other attackers trailing the play centrally waiting for the cross to be played and  timing their runs onto it. With a late trailer hanging back to play rebounds or a poorly crossed ball. And an attacker making the Corner, Corner Post run from the weak side. In this manner the goal is properly framed to play the cross from a variety of angles.

In other instances the timing of crosses is off. They come far too soon as central attackers have yet to arrive in position to play the ball. Sometimes the CF and AM's are pulled wide and other times they are either slow getting to the face of the goal or the crosses come much too soon. This team has crossed the ball fairly well, but all too often the timing is off with central attackers being slow to arrive or worse yet no one present to finish.

5) Taking too long to get a shot off.  There seems to be a need on the part of some players to set up the perfect shot.There is an absence of toe pokes and volleys.  A lack of understanding that it matters not how the ball goes in, just so that it goes in... legally, of course.

Okay, now that the problem and the reasons for it have been identified how can it be solved?

In my opinion, the main point to be addressed is how the attacking players link together in the attacking third. The team plays a standard 4-3-3 with a DM and 2 AM's in the midfield triangle. In theory, this should present as a wing player with the ball supported by an outside back leaving a CF and 2 AM's centrally and the weak side wing on the back side of the play. 

Again, in my opinion, this years team does not have the right personnel to play this version of the 4-3-3. There does not appear to be a defensive mid capable of distributing the ball to all four channels. There are passes to space in the outside channels but far too few passes to feet in the inside channels.  The CF and AM's are bunching up and actually helping the defense by cluttering the very space the attack should be looking to open up and use to score goals from.

I would suggest tweaking the standard 4-3-3 to be played as a 4 - 2- 3- 1. This is simply inverting the midfield triangle to having two DM's and one attacking mid.

The reason for doing this is quite simple. The team has an abundance of wing players but is short on inside players. The team also has two terrific passers to man those DM mid positions, provide support for the attack and make forward runs. Neither is a true defensive mid, however.  Another option might be to pair them as AM's. That hasn't been tried yet either. Both are dynamic, creative players that could play make with and off of one another.

With two DM's one supports wide behind the ball and the other remains central. Weak side width support is then the responsibility of the weak side outside back. The CF and AM must work in conjunction with one another in the attacking third, somewhat like forwards in a 2 forward set.

Still attacking with 7 players, but now linking them differently and playing more to their strengths.

The overriding consideration in instances like this is "If all you ever do, is all you've ever done, all you'll ever get is what you have always had."  

Change.

In the team camp this summer the focus changed from generating more chances to the technical skills required to execute on the chances they were generating. In the second case here the idea is to maintain the quantity of chances, but change the quality of chances being generated.