There have been multiple requests made to re-post this article. I am honoring those requests because the points of emphasis contained within are worthy of being reviewed again.
I have been coaching various sports for nearly 30 years now. Sometimes I wonder why I have stuck with it but mostly I enjoy working with players. To be witness to individuals developing their talent and combining it with others to form a team can be a wonderful experience. There is a process to it all and it never seems to grow old.
As a coach I want to see consistency in performance from the players I work with. Since I demand consistency from them I believe they deserve consistency from me. When we are able to combine consistency with continuous and constant improvement, good things happen for everyone involved. Sometimes things work out better than others but generally progress is made, experienced gained, a little something about life is learned.
Sunday
Friday
Thursday
12 Games in 7 Days
By the end of this evening I will have watched 12 high school soccer matches in the last 7 days. The reasons vary from making follow up calls with teams I have conducted camp for, to watching players from my spring team play, to advanced scouting, to scouting for a recruiting service to watching my son and his cousins play. My wife, in true "Soccer Mom" spirit often accompanies me to these games.
The experience is generally an enjoyable one, but I do admit to becoming frustrated now and again as I watch a disorganized team sabotage its own efforts through disconcerted play. I watch as a team consistently gets strung out over 50 - 60 yards and is unable to support one another on attack or when defending. Great individual effort on teams like this, but very little collective team effort. Frustration sits in amongst players and coaches alike... and rightfully so.
I watched a recent high school match where the back line never advanced beyond 25 yards from their own goal. Not because they were bunkered in defending either. The rest of their team could often be found in the teams attacking third 50+ yards away yet here sat the backs in their defending third?
Another team never allowed their center backs closer than 10 yards from the center line. Wing defenders pushed up to the center line and a defensive mid was stationed centrally about the center line. The "attackers" often played 5 v 9 while the opponent kept one forward slightly withdrawn in front of the wing defenders / DM to patrol the 20-25 yard "hole" which she had to herself.
Then there is the ever popular "kick and run" method of attack that sees a speedy forward "played through" only to find herself 1 v 4 + GK and expected to score for her team. I am quite serious about this. Talk about playing on hope and a prayer or trying to catch lightning in a bottle!
It is discouraging and frustrating for me to watch this type of soccer at the high school level. I find myself attempting to discern the reasoning behind deploying resources in such a manner. Apparently wishing to be secure in the back is a motivating factor? Then I find myself wondering why increase the work load of the midfielders so significantly? Some of these teams are asking midfielders to control 50-60 yards without adequate support? Or the poor forward played through who finds her advance stopped by multiple defenders and has no one available to pass to to relieve pressure?
Trust
I sometimes think a reliance on the super star forward to quite literally do all the work sends the message that others are not trusted to play all facets of the game. Or that a defense held deep on its own side of the field is because the midfielders cannot be trusted to pressure the ball in front of them? Regardless of actual reason it seems trust, or lack thereof, is an over riding factor in the rather odd deployment of resources I am witnessing. Somewhere along the line these teams have forgotten:
Together
Everyone
Achieves
More!
The experience is generally an enjoyable one, but I do admit to becoming frustrated now and again as I watch a disorganized team sabotage its own efforts through disconcerted play. I watch as a team consistently gets strung out over 50 - 60 yards and is unable to support one another on attack or when defending. Great individual effort on teams like this, but very little collective team effort. Frustration sits in amongst players and coaches alike... and rightfully so.
I watched a recent high school match where the back line never advanced beyond 25 yards from their own goal. Not because they were bunkered in defending either. The rest of their team could often be found in the teams attacking third 50+ yards away yet here sat the backs in their defending third?
Another team never allowed their center backs closer than 10 yards from the center line. Wing defenders pushed up to the center line and a defensive mid was stationed centrally about the center line. The "attackers" often played 5 v 9 while the opponent kept one forward slightly withdrawn in front of the wing defenders / DM to patrol the 20-25 yard "hole" which she had to herself.
Then there is the ever popular "kick and run" method of attack that sees a speedy forward "played through" only to find herself 1 v 4 + GK and expected to score for her team. I am quite serious about this. Talk about playing on hope and a prayer or trying to catch lightning in a bottle!
It is discouraging and frustrating for me to watch this type of soccer at the high school level. I find myself attempting to discern the reasoning behind deploying resources in such a manner. Apparently wishing to be secure in the back is a motivating factor? Then I find myself wondering why increase the work load of the midfielders so significantly? Some of these teams are asking midfielders to control 50-60 yards without adequate support? Or the poor forward played through who finds her advance stopped by multiple defenders and has no one available to pass to to relieve pressure?
Trust
I sometimes think a reliance on the super star forward to quite literally do all the work sends the message that others are not trusted to play all facets of the game. Or that a defense held deep on its own side of the field is because the midfielders cannot be trusted to pressure the ball in front of them? Regardless of actual reason it seems trust, or lack thereof, is an over riding factor in the rather odd deployment of resources I am witnessing. Somewhere along the line these teams have forgotten:
Together
Everyone
Achieves
More!
Sunday
Coaching the Details of The Process
After conducting a recent training session I found myself approximately 15 minutes away from a high school scrimmage featuring 3 time defending Division II State Champion Dayton Carroll against Sidney so naturally that is where I headed next. I was not disappointed in Carroll's performance. A week into practice and they looked as if they were in mid-season form. Skill, size, speed, strength and tactical understanding were all in Carroll's favor, but that is not what really caught my eye.
Five minutes into the game I noticed how quiet the Dayton Carroll bench was. If I recall correctly there were 7 players and 3 coaches sitting on the benches and no one was talking. It looked like they were watching a professional golf match or perhaps a tennis match as they sat quietly observing the action.
At the 25 minute mark Carroll went up 2 - 0 and things remained pretty much the same on their bench. That was about to change. As the kickoff to restart the game was about to take place the Carroll head coach arose from his seat on the bench and began stalking the touchline. Not understanding what had him so agitated I found myself watching him as much as I was watching the game. I soon learned he was coaching the details of the process. He did not want his team to lose focus or let up. Yes, they had controlled run of play and were leading 2-0, but there was still over a half to play. I, myself, have often cautioned teams that the most dangerous score in soccer is 2-0. The message behind this is to not allow yourself to believe you have the game won. The team needs to keep doing what they have been doing in gaining the 2-0 advantage. Now, I witnessed that concept actually being coached to its fullest.
Carroll won possession soon after the kickoff to restart play and immediately began to switch the ball through their backs. The right center back (RCB) received the ball, looked up and played a ball diagonally forward into space down the right flank. Absolutely the correct read as the Sidney defense was slow in shifting over. They were moving on the completed pass as opposed to moving with the pass. The ball ended up being played too long and rolled out of bounds before the right wing midfielder (wing) could catch up with it. I am thinking "good read, but poor execution" in regards to the RCB and his pass. The Dayton Carroll coach saw it a bit differently. He admonished the wing for not having started wide enough. "If you had been heels to the touch line when the pass was made, you would have gotten to the ball!"
A simply brilliant observation.
Mind you. the wing was only 5 yards off the touch line when the pass was played, but the coach was 100% spot on in his observation and coaching point. If the wing had been on the touchline he would have had a much better / wider angle of pursuit to the ball. Great coaching point!
The head coach continued to make this type of observation and coaching point for the next 10 minutes until his team scored again to go up 3-0. He then spent the rest of the game on the bench watching his team play. I believe the final score was 6-1 in favor of Carroll with the result never in doubt. Many coaches would dismiss this scrimmage as being so lopsided neither team could learn much from it, but they would be dead wrong in this instance. At least as it concerns the Dayton Carroll team, their coach and ... me.
Carroll's coached actively "coached" for 10 minutes of an 80 minute match and his team came away with a lopsided win. Quality over quantity. I found myself thinking how well he had handled keeping his team focused on the details when they went up 2-0. I also found myself thinking how well he had used the scrimmage to prepare himself for the regular season. He was very cognizant of the game situation and on guard for the tiniest sign his players were not focused on the details of the process. The coaching points he made were outstanding. Even more impressive was the teaching manner he used in addressing and correcting the slips he saw. An outstanding job of in-the-game coaching that was even more impressive than his teams performance in a 6-1 win.
Five minutes into the game I noticed how quiet the Dayton Carroll bench was. If I recall correctly there were 7 players and 3 coaches sitting on the benches and no one was talking. It looked like they were watching a professional golf match or perhaps a tennis match as they sat quietly observing the action.
At the 25 minute mark Carroll went up 2 - 0 and things remained pretty much the same on their bench. That was about to change. As the kickoff to restart the game was about to take place the Carroll head coach arose from his seat on the bench and began stalking the touchline. Not understanding what had him so agitated I found myself watching him as much as I was watching the game. I soon learned he was coaching the details of the process. He did not want his team to lose focus or let up. Yes, they had controlled run of play and were leading 2-0, but there was still over a half to play. I, myself, have often cautioned teams that the most dangerous score in soccer is 2-0. The message behind this is to not allow yourself to believe you have the game won. The team needs to keep doing what they have been doing in gaining the 2-0 advantage. Now, I witnessed that concept actually being coached to its fullest.
Carroll won possession soon after the kickoff to restart play and immediately began to switch the ball through their backs. The right center back (RCB) received the ball, looked up and played a ball diagonally forward into space down the right flank. Absolutely the correct read as the Sidney defense was slow in shifting over. They were moving on the completed pass as opposed to moving with the pass. The ball ended up being played too long and rolled out of bounds before the right wing midfielder (wing) could catch up with it. I am thinking "good read, but poor execution" in regards to the RCB and his pass. The Dayton Carroll coach saw it a bit differently. He admonished the wing for not having started wide enough. "If you had been heels to the touch line when the pass was made, you would have gotten to the ball!"
A simply brilliant observation.
Mind you. the wing was only 5 yards off the touch line when the pass was played, but the coach was 100% spot on in his observation and coaching point. If the wing had been on the touchline he would have had a much better / wider angle of pursuit to the ball. Great coaching point!
The head coach continued to make this type of observation and coaching point for the next 10 minutes until his team scored again to go up 3-0. He then spent the rest of the game on the bench watching his team play. I believe the final score was 6-1 in favor of Carroll with the result never in doubt. Many coaches would dismiss this scrimmage as being so lopsided neither team could learn much from it, but they would be dead wrong in this instance. At least as it concerns the Dayton Carroll team, their coach and ... me.
Carroll's coached actively "coached" for 10 minutes of an 80 minute match and his team came away with a lopsided win. Quality over quantity. I found myself thinking how well he had handled keeping his team focused on the details when they went up 2-0. I also found myself thinking how well he had used the scrimmage to prepare himself for the regular season. He was very cognizant of the game situation and on guard for the tiniest sign his players were not focused on the details of the process. The coaching points he made were outstanding. Even more impressive was the teaching manner he used in addressing and correcting the slips he saw. An outstanding job of in-the-game coaching that was even more impressive than his teams performance in a 6-1 win.
Friday
Unity
The members of successful teams share a vision, are focused on the same goals, strive with the same purpose to move in the same direction. In short, unity is a key characteristic of success.
If unity is so important, then why aren't all teams united?
Why are there so few great teams and so many average and dysfunctional teams?
I think the answer to these questions is actually quite simple. It takes a lot of work to foster a spirit of unity.
There are so many factors that can subvert unity - egos, negativity, politics, agendas, lack of or poor leadership, power struggles, selfishness - that it can be difficult to bring people together. All of these can drain the positive energy from and sabotage your team thereby preventing it from performing to its full potential.
Unity is not something that just happens. It takes a concerted and diligent effort on the part of leadership to ensure all team members are engaged in the process of building a united, winning team. Unity occurs when individuals work and play for one another. Clearly defined and accepted individual roles as part of the overall team concept are key to the team's overall vision and ultimately, its success.
Both positivity and negativity are contagious.
The key then is to grow positivity while weeding out negativity. Consider an average team as being one whose scales are balanced evenly between advantages and disadvantages. In order to become a good team there must be a purposeful effort to accumulate more advantages while shedding disadvantages thus swinging the scales of your team in favor of success.
A conscious recognition that criticism must come in a constructive, educational form is paramount. We must be willing to both teach and learn from one another. Effective communication is therefore a key to unity. An environment in which individuals encourage, enable and empower those around them instills confidence and trust in everyone.
The only real question is how hard your team is willing to work on establishing a positive, nurturing environment in pursuit of unity. The effort put forth towards establishing unity is every bit as important as the work put in on technical and tactical skills... and sometimes more so.
Thursday
Tuesday
Tottenham Hotspurs apparently have a new coach? This video has been making the rounds and is definitely worth a look.
Monday
I will be training a U12 team this fall.
I was recently asked to train a U12 Boys team this fall. The team, as described to me, is a Division 3 team so I am not expecting the next Neymar or Messi to show up. I'm a bit leery about dropping down in age from older teens to 11 year olds if only because I have not worked with such young players in 4 or 5 years. I am sure it will be culture shock for these young players since my coaching style is likely far different than what they have been exposed to thus far.
I will challenge this team with training exercises and games some would say are better suited to a good U14 or U15 team. They will initially struggle some, but they will also eventually "get it" and do so at a much earlier age than many of their peers playing on higher division teams.
Why take this approach?
First of all, as a coach of high school and older aged club teams I am tired of receiving players who are ball oriented instead of game oriented in their approach to the game. The common pattern of play with youth players in this country is to stand around waiting to be passed to, receive the ball and then trying to figure out what to do with it. I have found it can take a season or two to reprogram players to prepare to play the ball. I have a group of 11 year olds that will learn to prepare to play the ball and therefore play at a much faster pace than many of the teams they will encounter.
Secondly, and of just as much importance, is the fact there is simply no reason not to teach them to play the game properly. I have been told before that young players are incapable of understanding the intricacies and complexities of the grown up game, but I am reminded of Johan Cruyff's quote about playing the game simply being the hardest thing to do. I understand what he meant, but I also question why it must be so difficult. If young players are taught from the beginning how to play simply, why should be such a struggle to do so when they are older?
Playing simply is all about being prepared to play. Before the ball is received the player needs to have a plan for his next play. If a player wants the ball, he must move to be in the passers vision early. I am going to ask these young players to think about the game differently than other coaches have asked them to.
Will it work?
Well, I used this approach with my son's teams coming through the youth ranks. Their high school teams went on to play in state regional championships.. Several were named POY for their league and District POY. A half dozen went on to be 1st team all-state players. I think it will work and especially so since I have improved not only what I coach, but how I coach.
It's not a magic formula. I 'm not predicting immediate success and an undefeated season for these kids.
I will challenge this team with training exercises and games some would say are better suited to a good U14 or U15 team. They will initially struggle some, but they will also eventually "get it" and do so at a much earlier age than many of their peers playing on higher division teams.
Why take this approach?
First of all, as a coach of high school and older aged club teams I am tired of receiving players who are ball oriented instead of game oriented in their approach to the game. The common pattern of play with youth players in this country is to stand around waiting to be passed to, receive the ball and then trying to figure out what to do with it. I have found it can take a season or two to reprogram players to prepare to play the ball. I have a group of 11 year olds that will learn to prepare to play the ball and therefore play at a much faster pace than many of the teams they will encounter.
Secondly, and of just as much importance, is the fact there is simply no reason not to teach them to play the game properly. I have been told before that young players are incapable of understanding the intricacies and complexities of the grown up game, but I am reminded of Johan Cruyff's quote about playing the game simply being the hardest thing to do. I understand what he meant, but I also question why it must be so difficult. If young players are taught from the beginning how to play simply, why should be such a struggle to do so when they are older?
Playing simply is all about being prepared to play. Before the ball is received the player needs to have a plan for his next play. If a player wants the ball, he must move to be in the passers vision early. I am going to ask these young players to think about the game differently than other coaches have asked them to.
Will it work?
Well, I used this approach with my son's teams coming through the youth ranks. Their high school teams went on to play in state regional championships.. Several were named POY for their league and District POY. A half dozen went on to be 1st team all-state players. I think it will work and especially so since I have improved not only what I coach, but how I coach.
It's not a magic formula. I 'm not predicting immediate success and an undefeated season for these kids.
Sunday
"You haven't taught it until they've learned."
John Wooden
As I reminisce about this summer's camp season the above quote of legendary basketball coach John Wooden has often been on my mind. In a team environment one will find not all players learn in the manner. Something I have discovered over the years is that not all teams learn in the same manner either.
I am a student of the game. My soccer library consists of over 100 books, hundreds of magazines, over 250 videos and mountains of notes I have taken while attending camps, clinics, symposiums and even from my own practices and games. My wife is very tolerant of my studies. LOL. When I find something that I really like I latch onto to it and use it over and over be it a coaching phrase, terminology, a warm up, small sided game or game related activity. A recent example of this is the phrase "making offers" that refers to players making purposeful off the ball movement in order to receive a pass. I truly am an old dog learning new tricks!
At a team camp a couple of weeks ago I was going through my standard coaching methodology using tried exercises in an effort to improve a tams speed of play. First day went well as did the morning session of day two. The afternoon session of day two we hit a brick wall and hit it hard. I had utilized a type of non-directional transition game to reinforce the concept of organizing early and taking advantage of an opponent before they got set up. It was working beautifully, in part because we were playing in a large area with adequate time / space available. When I attempted to use the same theme of transition in a directional, smaller and therefore faster paced environment is when we hit the wall. Everything we had worked on, strove for and had begun to have success with was abandoned as the players reverted to old habits. An exercise that had worked well with my own teams and for other team camps just wasn't going to get 'r dun this time. I knew I was going to have to change things up for the next days sessions.
On the way home that afternoon I thought about the wonderful success we had had the first 3 sessions of the week and pondered why things fell apart during that 4th session. I had made a comment to their head coach that I would have to approach things differently in the next session and would think on that before returning the next day. I defined the problem as how to move the team from success with non-positional, non-directional play towards playing in a more game like environment. Lucky for me, I am a member of an email group of coaches from around the country that exchanges ideas on all things soccer. On of the members had the perfect exercise to segue from non-directional play to directional play with purpose. He calls it Possession with Positions. It is brilliant variation on some standard attacking exercises I had previously used but never fully embraced... likely because I never fully appreciated how they might be employed. Here was my colleague teaching me a new approach to an old coach tool.
The next day I returned to the foundational work we had previously done with the team before quickly progressing to Possession with Positions. Voila! It all came together in rather quick order. A different approach for a different team. It was that simple.
As I traveled home afterwards the question I asked of myself is how to recognize the need to adjust my teaching approach before hitting the wall as we had in this camp? I found myself admitting there were red flags in the early sessions to indicated the exercise I employed that eventually broke things down would not work with this group. Primarily, one of the better players and dominant personalities was never going to "buy in" or play the practice game as it was intended to be played. My mind was drawn back to helping one of my sons solve a math homework problem. We got the right answer and I'm feeling pretty good about things only to have my son return from school the next day and informing me we did it wrong. What? The answer wasn't correct? Oh, the answer was correct, but we had solved it wrong. ???? Evidently they were teaching "new math" and I helped him solve it the old school way. That was the case with the transition game in question here. They were solving the problem, just not as I had intended or wished for them to. Thus the need for a different approach.
A few days later I watched the team compete in a pre-season tournament. To my delight, and I think that of the team and their coaches, much of what we worked on was in evidence in their play. They looked quite good in their play and went on the championship game. John Wooden's quote came to mind as it was apparent I had some success in teaching them because they were enjoying success with what they had learned!
Saturday
Coach, what is your vision for your team?
I have been conducting camps and clinics for close to a decade. I love "teaching" and interacting with young players on the pitch. I much prefer this to "coaching" on game day although I do enjoy that as well. I view matches as the test for what we have done during training. The two must go hand in hand but if I had to choose one, it would be to train. This is undoubtedly why I enjoy conducting camps and clinics.
During one of my recent weeks of camp I could not help but wonder why the team and its program had struggled so in recent years. The turn out for camp was outstanding, nearly 40 participants. There were enough talented players to field a quality varsity team. The kids generally seemed to like one another although in a group that size perfect harmony is difficult to achieve. When I looked at this group I saw potential. I saw a team capable of winning 10+ games of a 16 game schedule. Of course, it matters little what my vision was for the team. What counts is their coach's vision for the team.
In this regard, the camps I conduct often involve training coaches as well as training players. It is not my intention to place myself on a pedestal or define myself as some type of coaching guru for coaches. Not at all. It's more a fresh set of eyes to an existing situation. I don't have all that answers and quite frankly I sometimes don't even know the questions. However, one of the advantages of bringing someone in to conduct team camp for you is the different perspective the clinician will bring.
I must admit,when I see a program struggle on the pitch yet have 40 players attend camp it makes me curious as to why they have not had a winning season in years. Forty players is more than enough to field a Varsity and JV team with a few left over. Something seemed amiss and, of course, I wanted to know how to put it right.
What I quickly learned was this group lacked a team identity. The players knew little of the programs past and had given little thought as to their own legacy to the program. Very good coaching staff who were as befuddled as I was about what they perceived to be a lack of motivation or drive to succeed. An assistant coach had heard me address another team on the process of building a winning program. My mantra of first learning how to work, then how to compete and finally how to win had struck a chord with him so he lobbied to bring me in.
The topic for the week was to be learning to move / play as a team, but it quickly came to include learning how to work smarter. Working smart includes defining and knowing roles, sharing the load and trusting your teammates - the building blocks of moving and playing as a team.
I used the first days sessions to evaluate the program, its current team and individual players. At the end of the day I asked the head coach for his vision for his team. He threw out some generic ideas about playing together in pursuit of a common goal, establishing a winning tradition and making a run in the tournament. I prompted him to tell me how he envisioned his team accomplishing these goals. It took awhile to elicit the type of information I was seeking, but it eventually came forth.
One of the first red flags to emerge occurred early on the first day as I asked the players about the formation and systems of play they used. From what I could make out the team changed formations and how they sought to play nearly on a game to game basis. 4-4-2 with a diamond back line one game and a 3-5-3 with a flat back in the next game. Apparently they even changed at halftime of games going from a 4-4-2 to a 4-3-3. There was mention of a 4-1-3-2, a 4-2-3-1, a 4-5-1 and a 4-6. You name the formation and system of play and they seemingly had tried it.
As I discussed what the coaches vision for the team was with the coaching staff it seemed what they wanted to do was play a 4-4-2 with a zonal defense or a 4-3-3 with a zonal defense. When asked why they changed formation and system of play so frequently the answer was very much result oriented. Apparently whatever they tried didn't seem to work (or work for long) and so they kept experimenting hoping to catch lightning in a bottle. As we continued to talk the head coach made the comment, "We need to pick a formation and system and just stick with it." B-I-N-G-O !
The head coach and his staff knew the answer, but were so vested in results and so close to the situation they lost sight of the process. That first evening, they reached a quick consensus to go with the 4-4-2 zonal approach. When attacking they wanted to fast counter and when that wasn't available, be able to possess and probe. Pretty much my vision for my own teams. The next morning we sold it to the team and asked them to buy in. We explained that there would be rough spots and lots of mistakes as they explored and learned the system of play. The focus had to be on where they would be
a week from then, at the start of the season, at mid season and finally where they were at the end of the season.... that would be their legacy to the program.
This is the point where I borrowed from University of Michigan football coach Brady Hoke. Coach Hoke starts every practice, classroom session and game day with what has become the Wolverines mantra.
Good morning! With the team responding Good morning!
Team? 134!
National Champions? 11!
Big Ten Titles? 42!
And so on through Heisman winners, All-Americans and so forth. He once explained the importance of knowing that you not only represent yourselves, but everyone who wore the colors before you and will wear the colors after you. My modification to this greeting and response is as follows:
Good morning! Good morning!
Team! Whatever year of the program we are in.
Train like.... Champions!
Play like......Champions!
Become ......Champions!
School name .... Mascots Name!
I chose this format because many of the high school teams I work with are newer teams and or teams that do not have a list of championships, all-state players to call upon. They are striving to establish a foundation so they can win championships, place players on all-League and all-state teams.
On the first day of a camp the responses are self-conscious and on the quiet side. By the end of camp the responses are clear, loud and done with conviction. Their confidence with this cheer grows in direct proportion to the growth of their confidence on the pitch. The two go hand in hand. The cheer addresses mental and emotional aspects that transfer to the field of play. In many cases it serves to unite a team that otherwise seems to lack togetherness. It serves to provide a commonality that becomes the cornerstone to build a team culture upon. Some teams discard it as soon as camp is over and that is fine as I intend it to be a starting point. Other teams carry it with them out of camp and make it a part of their regular routine. I have heard that one team has even had t-shirts made with this cheer on them. Pretty cool!
There is a motivation that stems from this cheer that serves as a link between the coaches vision and the players dedication to the work required to bring that vision to life. It is a gimmick to bring a different mental and emotional approach to the team. The cheer is different from there normal routine and therefore signifies change just as much of the work we do on the pitch with them is different than what they are accustomed to. I stress if all they ever do is all they have ever done, how can they expect to change the culture and results they have always had?
A coaches vision for how his team should play is kind of like that as well. If your vision is out of focus or constantly changing, doesn't it stand to reason that your team will struggle to play as you want them to? Define your vision. Determine where your team is in the process so you have a starting point. Outline steps your team and program can strive to take towards your vision. Stay focused n the vision and the process required to achieve your vision. Do not allow yourself or your team to become impatient or bored with the process. It will take time, but it will be worth it!
During one of my recent weeks of camp I could not help but wonder why the team and its program had struggled so in recent years. The turn out for camp was outstanding, nearly 40 participants. There were enough talented players to field a quality varsity team. The kids generally seemed to like one another although in a group that size perfect harmony is difficult to achieve. When I looked at this group I saw potential. I saw a team capable of winning 10+ games of a 16 game schedule. Of course, it matters little what my vision was for the team. What counts is their coach's vision for the team.
In this regard, the camps I conduct often involve training coaches as well as training players. It is not my intention to place myself on a pedestal or define myself as some type of coaching guru for coaches. Not at all. It's more a fresh set of eyes to an existing situation. I don't have all that answers and quite frankly I sometimes don't even know the questions. However, one of the advantages of bringing someone in to conduct team camp for you is the different perspective the clinician will bring.
I must admit,when I see a program struggle on the pitch yet have 40 players attend camp it makes me curious as to why they have not had a winning season in years. Forty players is more than enough to field a Varsity and JV team with a few left over. Something seemed amiss and, of course, I wanted to know how to put it right.
What I quickly learned was this group lacked a team identity. The players knew little of the programs past and had given little thought as to their own legacy to the program. Very good coaching staff who were as befuddled as I was about what they perceived to be a lack of motivation or drive to succeed. An assistant coach had heard me address another team on the process of building a winning program. My mantra of first learning how to work, then how to compete and finally how to win had struck a chord with him so he lobbied to bring me in.
The topic for the week was to be learning to move / play as a team, but it quickly came to include learning how to work smarter. Working smart includes defining and knowing roles, sharing the load and trusting your teammates - the building blocks of moving and playing as a team.
I used the first days sessions to evaluate the program, its current team and individual players. At the end of the day I asked the head coach for his vision for his team. He threw out some generic ideas about playing together in pursuit of a common goal, establishing a winning tradition and making a run in the tournament. I prompted him to tell me how he envisioned his team accomplishing these goals. It took awhile to elicit the type of information I was seeking, but it eventually came forth.
One of the first red flags to emerge occurred early on the first day as I asked the players about the formation and systems of play they used. From what I could make out the team changed formations and how they sought to play nearly on a game to game basis. 4-4-2 with a diamond back line one game and a 3-5-3 with a flat back in the next game. Apparently they even changed at halftime of games going from a 4-4-2 to a 4-3-3. There was mention of a 4-1-3-2, a 4-2-3-1, a 4-5-1 and a 4-6. You name the formation and system of play and they seemingly had tried it.
As I discussed what the coaches vision for the team was with the coaching staff it seemed what they wanted to do was play a 4-4-2 with a zonal defense or a 4-3-3 with a zonal defense. When asked why they changed formation and system of play so frequently the answer was very much result oriented. Apparently whatever they tried didn't seem to work (or work for long) and so they kept experimenting hoping to catch lightning in a bottle. As we continued to talk the head coach made the comment, "We need to pick a formation and system and just stick with it." B-I-N-G-O !
The head coach and his staff knew the answer, but were so vested in results and so close to the situation they lost sight of the process. That first evening, they reached a quick consensus to go with the 4-4-2 zonal approach. When attacking they wanted to fast counter and when that wasn't available, be able to possess and probe. Pretty much my vision for my own teams. The next morning we sold it to the team and asked them to buy in. We explained that there would be rough spots and lots of mistakes as they explored and learned the system of play. The focus had to be on where they would be
a week from then, at the start of the season, at mid season and finally where they were at the end of the season.... that would be their legacy to the program.
This is the point where I borrowed from University of Michigan football coach Brady Hoke. Coach Hoke starts every practice, classroom session and game day with what has become the Wolverines mantra.
Good morning! With the team responding Good morning!
Team? 134!
National Champions? 11!
Big Ten Titles? 42!
And so on through Heisman winners, All-Americans and so forth. He once explained the importance of knowing that you not only represent yourselves, but everyone who wore the colors before you and will wear the colors after you. My modification to this greeting and response is as follows:
Good morning! Good morning!
Team! Whatever year of the program we are in.
Train like.... Champions!
Play like......Champions!
Become ......Champions!
School name .... Mascots Name!
I chose this format because many of the high school teams I work with are newer teams and or teams that do not have a list of championships, all-state players to call upon. They are striving to establish a foundation so they can win championships, place players on all-League and all-state teams.
On the first day of a camp the responses are self-conscious and on the quiet side. By the end of camp the responses are clear, loud and done with conviction. Their confidence with this cheer grows in direct proportion to the growth of their confidence on the pitch. The two go hand in hand. The cheer addresses mental and emotional aspects that transfer to the field of play. In many cases it serves to unite a team that otherwise seems to lack togetherness. It serves to provide a commonality that becomes the cornerstone to build a team culture upon. Some teams discard it as soon as camp is over and that is fine as I intend it to be a starting point. Other teams carry it with them out of camp and make it a part of their regular routine. I have heard that one team has even had t-shirts made with this cheer on them. Pretty cool!
There is a motivation that stems from this cheer that serves as a link between the coaches vision and the players dedication to the work required to bring that vision to life. It is a gimmick to bring a different mental and emotional approach to the team. The cheer is different from there normal routine and therefore signifies change just as much of the work we do on the pitch with them is different than what they are accustomed to. I stress if all they ever do is all they have ever done, how can they expect to change the culture and results they have always had?
A coaches vision for how his team should play is kind of like that as well. If your vision is out of focus or constantly changing, doesn't it stand to reason that your team will struggle to play as you want them to? Define your vision. Determine where your team is in the process so you have a starting point. Outline steps your team and program can strive to take towards your vision. Stay focused n the vision and the process required to achieve your vision. Do not allow yourself or your team to become impatient or bored with the process. It will take time, but it will be worth it!
Friday
Talent Evaluation.
Summer camp season is coming to a close and high school season began yesterday here in Ohio. Talent evaluation is very much on my mind this week. At every camp I conducted I found that I valued certain players differently than the coach I was conducting camp for did. Beauty is indeed in the eyes of the beholder.
As I prepared for a camp that was to focus on striker play and finishing a coach sent me an email detailing the virtues of two players that would be attending. I believe one was a sophomore and the other a freshmen. The abilities of these players were lauded as the coach proclaimed they would be his starting forwards this fall. There was a third player from his team, a senior. After the first session I was wondering about the coaches reasoning as the senior put on a show. The senior demonstrated a strong work ethic, great attitude and the ability to strike powerfuly and accurately with either foot. The senior also possessed a strikers mentality - worked hard off the ball and was always thinking about scoring the ball. The younger players were certainly solid players but not on the level of the senior, in my opinion.
As I prepared for a camp that was to focus on striker play and finishing a coach sent me an email detailing the virtues of two players that would be attending. I believe one was a sophomore and the other a freshmen. The abilities of these players were lauded as the coach proclaimed they would be his starting forwards this fall. There was a third player from his team, a senior. After the first session I was wondering about the coaches reasoning as the senior put on a show. The senior demonstrated a strong work ethic, great attitude and the ability to strike powerfuly and accurately with either foot. The senior also possessed a strikers mentality - worked hard off the ball and was always thinking about scoring the ball. The younger players were certainly solid players but not on the level of the senior, in my opinion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)