Why Effective Communication is Important.

Communication is a process through which information is exchanged between individuals or a group of individuals. In order for communication to be effective the thoughts, intentions and objectives must be conveyed in as accurate, clear and concise manner as possible. Communication can be considered effective or successful only when both the sender and the receiver understand the information exchanged in a like manner.

I recall an instance a few years back when an assistant coach of mine decided he wanted to be the head coach.  His message to me was that he wanted to be head coach of "a" team. What he really wanted was to be the head coach of  "our" team.  I knew, or at least strongly suspected, what his true intentions were but responded to the information he actually conveyed and offered to help find him a team for which he could be head coach.  His entire message was open to misinterpretation due to his choice of a single word.  There was an error in his message that led to frustration, distrust and relative disaster in terms of a team being split up.

When I first began coaching the Internet did not exist. When organizing a team there would be a lot of preliminary telephoning to relay information.  I learned to provide clear concise information on a limited basis when speaking on the phone.  I then followed up with written information passed along in a group setting. If the information was distributed to players instead of parents, I required a parental signature on a perforated piece attached to the paper holding the information be returned to me.  It was a bit cumbersome process on the whole, but effective and meaningful nonetheless.

With the advent of email, communication became much more efficient and timely.  I asked for "read receipts" and if I did not get one I followed up with a phone call. In effect, I trained non-responsive parents and players to respond as I wished them to insuring the messages I sent were at least received.

In a strange twist of fate the very tool that sped up effective communication has now come to hinder the process. There are available Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Hula and any number of other social media sites that can be used to convey information between parties. Most of these medias are limited in some fashion.  For example, 140 characters maximum on Twitter.

In recent months one of my sons was looking for a team to play for this spring.  Coincidentally, a number of players from a team he has guest played for in the past reached out to him via Twitter at about the same time.  I encouraged my son to explore the opportunity with the caveat of determining costs before fully accepting any offer to play.  It seems the teams head coach then began communicating directly with my son via Twitter as well.  Mutual interest was expressed in continuing to explore the possibility of my son joining the team.

This process began to drag on and despite both the coach and team manager having my email address from previous correspondence neither communicated directly with me by this means. I did initiate contact with both the coach and team manager in an attempt to establish written lines of communication. After a couple of months I had still not received written notification of actual final costs involved with my son joining the team.  Everything received concerning financial and time obligations came to me by third party either through my son or parents of other prospective players.  And the numbers I did finally begin to receive from the coach and or team mangager varied substantially from those provided by third parties.   It was only after declining the opportunity to join the team that more effective written communication began to take place.

There are many lessons to be learned from this most recent debacle.

1) Do not assume anything.  I expected to be communicated with in written form. That is, I expected an exchange of information via email.  The head coach, team manager, players and parents of this team evidently use Twitter as a primary means to communicate.  I did not know this. No one associated with the team "followed" me or asked me to "follow" them on Twitter. 

2) Know what you want to communicate.  I asked for specific and final costs for participating.  What I received were wide ranging estimates.  To date, I still do not know what the final costs owed to club / team would have been.

3) Know your audience and how to effectively communicate to them.  I asked for specific information to be provided in a written format (email).  Email has been the established means of communication between the head coach, the team administrator and myself for several years now.  This is how we communicated concerning league matters, directions and acquiring guest players. For whatever reason that form of communication suffered a serious breakdown.

4) Listen (or comprehend what is written) to the reply.   I looked for clues that my message had been comprehended. I saw nebulous signs of comprehension in the fact general estimates were provided without explanation as to why specifics were not given.  I tried again to communicate my desire and need for full disclosure of costs associated with participating in the club and on the team to no avail. Again, to this date I still do not know what these might have been.

5) Effective communication results in an agreement being reached that information shared has been received and understood.  The agreement might come in part or in whole. There might be full agreement and compliance or there might exist a general understanding or even a consensus understanding with specific details yet to be worked out. In these cases, effective communication might well result in a compromise.

6) Even ineffective communication, or no communication at all, will result in an agreement be it stated or implied. As it pertains to the situation being discussed here, because the two parties involved were unable to effectively communicate with one another an opportunity was lost and a friendship damaged, perhaps irreparably so.  This was the agreement reached because we could not find common ground in communicating with one another. I insisted on written communication so as to have a record.  There was reluctance to convey specific information to me which led to suspicions arising on my part.  The resulting impasse is the agreement by default that was reached.

Guidelines for Effective Communication

* Know who your target audience is and how they best receive or are most receptive to receiving information.

* Establish clear guidelines for how exchanges of information will be communicated.

* Know what you wish to communicate and be accurate, clear and concise in doing so.

* Communicate with clear and intended purpose. Stay focused on the information or the message you wish to convey.

* Know how to best communicate the desired information to your intended audience.

* Be proactive, or at least prompt, in communicating.

Effective Communication

Poor construct and poor delivery in  communication

 

can lead to

 

misinterpretations and misunderstandings.

 

Ineffective communication,

 

can turn well intentioned effort into

 

error, 

 

frustration,

 

distrust,

 

even disaster.

 

 

 

Efficiency is doing things right;

 

effectiveness is doing the right things

The coach's foremost responsibility to the TEAM is...

In a world where professional and high profile sports dominate one might think guiding a team to wins is a coach's first priority.  In a bottom line economic sense this is probably true. However, I challenge this assumption in the context of the wider world of sports.  Here it is the coach's responsibility to properly prepare the team to put its collective best foot forward. 

Putting your best foot forward is not about winning every game.  It is not about playing mistake free soccer.  It is all about placing your team in position to give their best effort possible on a given day. Putting your best foot forward should be a steady march of improvement from day to day with recognition adversity will be encountered along the way. Positioning your team to put its best foot forward very much depends on how you teach them to react to adversity. Do you allow for excuses thereby empowering the adversity to determine your teams effort?  Or do you embrace adversity as an opportunity?

Properly identifying adversity is also an important aspect of allowing your team to put its best foot forward.  If your team will be facing a far superior opponent and you set the goal as upsetting them it will be difficult for your team to its best foot forward that day. If you identify obtainable in-game goals that could lead to an upset of a superior opponent chances of your team putting it's best foot forward increases against even the best of opponents.

In a sense, putting your best foot forward is about persevering along the road to success. Continuous Progress Improvement is a term that was used in schools when my sons were of that age. As coaches we are charged with preparing and positioning our team to constantly put their best foot forward and in doing so grow the program, the team and its individuals. 

Another way to look at this is to say we should never be satisfied.  Complacency is destructive to progress and greatly hinders the ability to put our best foot forward. Keeping a team hungry and focused can be a challenge and is a primary reason coaches work so hard to limit distractions, utilize team bonding exercises and preach "The TEAM!"  

Putting our best foot forward requires having a season-long plan for how to advance the team from it's starting point to a vision you have for them.  A firm hand on the rudder following a well charted course is paramount to helping your team put its best foot forward on a consistent basis. If you do not have a season-long plan but jump around from one topic to another attempting to fill each new leak in the dam your team is likely never to achieve full potential in any one area.  To put it another way, you are unlikely to establish a foundation strong enough to sustain real growth. 

The value of small-sided games is found in the details of the process.

I considered titling this article "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing" or something to that effect. The prompt for this article comes from a question recently posed to me; What are some good small sided games for teaching zonal defending?  I knew what the questioner wanted to hear, but I also knew what she needed to hear. 

Let's set the background before diving head first into the question.  The high school program I began with has been playing zonal defense for a couple of decades. They were the zonal defending pioneers in our area.  Great attention to the details within the process were stressed in those early days of defending zonally. At a time when Pressure, Cover, Balance were stressed as the pillars of defending we focused on Pressure and Cover.  Balance was a consideration for sure, but not emphasized as strongly.  There was implied necessity for balance and a general understanding of what it entailed through nomenclature such as (hockey) Stick and Arrow (head) whose descriptive qualities included both cover and balance positioning.

Small sided games seek to isolate specific game situations with a phase of play and train players decision-making abilities within that context. To this day, most of the zonal defending exercises and small sided games focus on pressure and cover with an implied consideration for balance. I stress this because when a team is just learning to defend zonally the breakdowns occur in two generally areas. One is balance. The other is secondary or high cover. 

As an old basketball coach I realized early on many players of the 1990's were well versed in on-the-ball man to man defense and cover,but balance was somewhat nebulous at best.  I began teaching the basketball concepts of back to goal Ball / You / Man and Man-and-a-half defending to soccer players.  This served to address overall defensive team shape including balancing the shape. This allowed our teams to define with purpose what the roles were within our zonal defending scheme. We added a better defined structure to the nomenclature of stick and arrow. 

That's all fine and dandy, but how does a team set about training to play in such a manner?

First and foremost the coach must define the defensive system the team will employ.  This goes much further than simply saying "we are going to defend zonally" and introducing any of the regular staple of drills and exercises for zonal defending one can find in books or on videos / YouTube. 

1) Select the shape or formation you wish to defend in.  Four in the back or three in the back are common.  There is a bit of a trend developing to play 5 in the back and I have even seen some alignments utilizing 2 in the back. 

2) Where on the pitch do you want to win the ball.  This can be "geographic" location and involve establishing a line of confrontation or it can be position / player specific within a teams shape and specific player positioning.

3) Design a small-sided game that focuses on the area where and the timing of when you wish to regain possession of the ball. These conditions will differ when focus is on regaining position in your attacking third as opposed to the middle third of the field to the defending third of the field.

4) Although utilizing a small-sided approach be sure to incorporate emphasis on team wide play related to the moment in lay you are directly coaching.

For instance, if I were training the outside backs to pressure in our zonal system while defending in the final third, I would utilize a small sided game with a strong focus on opponent flank play.  When an outside back moves to pressure the ball carrier what do we specifically task him with doing?

1) Stop or delay the advance of the ball.
2) Make the ball carrier predictable by channeling or forcing him in a certain direction.

Our general rule of thumb for the outside back is to force the ball carrier inside towards the help waiting in the form of a center back in  (hockey) Stick! positioning. There is "Balance" implied with the correct position of a second center back and / or remaining outside back.

For most coaches, this is where the thought process stops.

There are other considerations. 

For instance, if the midfielder assigned to provide high cover to the inside and in front of the center back providing coverage is not in place, forcing the ball inside might be an extremely dangerous thing to do in allowing the ball carrier to "load up" for a shot while moving centrally toward goal or allowing for a cross to the back post. 

So, if high cover is not available, then the ball should be forced outside. This presents an entirely different set of circumstances that must be dealt with. A tactical decision must be made on how to support the pressure defender (outside back) to the outside.  The easiest solution is bring the nearest center back further outside to be available in support or to double team.  However, in doing so this will stretch the back line and open areas in front of the goal.  So, a second tactical decision must be made on who will drop back into the back line to fill the gap in front of the goal or on the backside.

A good small-sided game to train the outside back will cover all these situations and more. It is why small side games or situational training remains an effective way of teaching the game to players. While the primary focus is on training the outside backs, the secondary considerations pertaining to nearest teammates and the team at large are just as important.  The point is simply if a small-sided game viewed in a book or on video / YouTube or perhaps witnessed at a coaching convention or course is just rolled out there for the kids to play it will at best only be marginally effective.  It is all the other details of the process that hold the true value of using small-sided games to train decision making in specific game situations.

How does one go about changing a culture of losing?

Over the years I have developed a loose set of guidelines I follow each time I take over a team. This is what I want to share with you today. I cannot claim it is foolproof, but I have had success with this method. Take it for what it is worth. Adapt it to fit your own personality and the needs of the program.

1) Identify the problem.

If you have experience in a successful program and have now taken on a struggling program you will be able to identify some areas that need to be addressed, but do not go it alone.  Ask people who have been around the program for their input and in doing so, remember not to shoot the messenger. You need their honesty to fully understand and appreciate the depth of the issues preventing the program from being successful. You may well need them to buy into the changes you will eventually decide to implement. Most especially, listen to the athletes who have been / are in the program.

2) Accept the situation you find yourself in.

The issues you face may not be of your making but they are yours now. Own them. In doing so you are accepting the responsibility to change it and will hold yourself accountable for doing so.

3) Seek solutions.

If all we've ever done is all we ever do then all we'll ever be is what we have always been.  In order to change the culture we will need to learn to approach things differently, expand our realm of thought.  It can help to have players and coaches self-evaluate the program by asking members to individually write their answers to 3 simple questions.

Note: there will be no wrong answers.

1) Describe the current status of the program.
2) Where do you want to help take the program?
3) What needs to change to get the program moving in the right direction?

What we are looking for is commonality. What can be agreed upon? Themes.

4) Begin to implement the necessary changes.

To be completely honest, this is where the stress begins.  You need to have buy-in and not everyone will. There will be resistance from some quarters. Typically resistance comes from those who have been dominant personalities in the old culture. They have enjoyed success. They now feel threatened by the changes you are about to institute.

Changes in approach.

I often bring a new "break" or team cheer to a program. Something geared to improve attitude by changing the way members see themselves and their teammates.

Prepare like ...........  Champions!
Play like ................  Champions!
Become .................  Champions!

Sometimes it is necessary to institute a standard for appearances to help facilitate an atmosphere of "team".  Everyone is required to wear the same color of t-shirt for practice. Maybe even have a team t-shirt for practice.  All shirts must be properly tucked it.  The idea here is, in order to act like a team we must look the part. If we want to be champions, we need to look like champions.

Attire is often one of the first places rebelling against change can be seen.  Purposely wearing inappropriate attire either to draw attention to themselves or to simply thumb their nose at proposed changes ... and the people instituting them.

Changes in the way a team practices / trains / prepares can also be instituted. Many times these are more readily accepted. Compromises sometimes must be made as we bridge the gap from old to new. I do not like static stretching at the beginning of practice. My teams use dynamic stretching. However, I am willing to compromise on stretching routines.

Change is about taking individuals and a team out of its established comfort zones and challenging them to learn new things, expand their way of thinking and playing. Sometimes we need to allow them to maintain part of their old comfort zone while we establish the foundations of a new one. Stretching is a rather easy area to compromise on.

5) Establish high (er) expectations and mutual responsibility and accountability.  All teams condition and train. It is the standards that they set and are held to in conditioning and training that separates the great teams from all others. People and teams tend to underachieve when no one asks them to do more than "just enough to get by".  Standards for dress, code of behavior, core values of the program we want to be - all of these can be used to raise expectations. Hold one another accountable - positive peer pressure enforcing individual responsibility to self and team. Establish the belief that we can be and will become more than we have been.

6) Troubled programs with a culture of losing are often overwhelmed by feelings of hopelessness and negativity.  Immediately begin a transition towards establishing a nurturing and positive atmosphere.  One of the first things I implement with new teams is the abolishment of saying "my bad" after a mistake is made.  Instead we say, "Next play!".

Mistakes are negatives. "My bad" reinforces the idea that a negative has occurred. Now we have two negatives in a row and a trend beginning.  Break the chain of negativity at the earliest opportunity to do so. You make a mistake on the pitch and chances are everyone knows it anyway. No need to own up to it. It is not the first nor the last you will make. What is important is to stay focused on the task at hand, the game. "Next play!" tells us to move on. To play in the present instead of dwelling on the past.

Encourage one another.
Help one another.
Coach one another.

Any criticism must be constructive in nature.  A lesson must be received and accepted when criticism is given. The tone of voice and wording of the message must not be harsh, critical, negative.

7) Changing personnel may be necessary.

In (1) above I discussed the necessity of learning from those that have been in the program in order to discover what issues are present that have prevented the program from achieving to potential. In (3) above I discussed how some individuals may be resistant and reluctant to change. It may become necessary to dismiss staff or even cut players in order to move forward.

When people who do not buy in cannot be removed from the program or at the very least be pushed to the background, progress will stall until they are lost to attrition or retirement. In today's instant gratification environment the "problem people" can and unfortunately do at times outlast the coach / change of culture.

*** Changing a culture is a process with buy-in as a critical ingredient. Those involved must recognize change is needed and be willing to embrace change. Sometimes, as bad as a culture might be, those in and around the program just are not ready to change it.  You must attempt to make this determination as part of (1) above. 

Position #6 The Holding or Defensive Midfielder

When I first began coaching soccer 20 years ago I learned the basics of a 4-3-3 formation from the local high school coach.  I conscientiously took copious notes and recently came across them while searching for other documents. Times have certainly changed. The high school program still has the same coach but their formation has gone from 4-3-3 to 4-4-2 and back to 4-3-3 over those 20 years.  The word Libero lept off the page at me along with brief comments about needing to put your best player in the center of the formation and therefore the center of the field.

Now, I know today that libero refers to a sweeper and I identify the position with German great Franz Beckenbauer. Back in the day I thought of the libero as more of the stopper or holding midfielder in the 4-3-3 tasked with disrupting the opponents attack and rhythm of play. The advent of the modern offside rule has seen man marking systems give way to zonal defending and hybrid systems. The sweeper position of Beckenbauer's era is all but gone with the role of the libero shifting to the defensive or holding midfielder.

In today's game the backs in zonal systems share the workload of Beckenbauer's libero in covering deep for one another. It actually is the holding mid or defensive mid that is tasked with a proactive sweeping of opposition breakthroughs as they patrol in front of center backs "protecting" against the generation of through balls on the ground or in the air as well as against long shots being taken. In this sense they are free or libero.

In bringing together players from multiple high schools and differing systems one challenge I face is in defining positions in a manner all can understand. Understandably every coach and system have their own terminology. I suppose I compound the problem even as I attempt to simplify things for the players on my club team.  For our purposes the holding midfielder is designated as position #6 and tasked as follows:

The primary responsibilities of the holding midfielder are to protect the center defenders and to be the link between the backs and the attackers. He will serve as a pivot when the team wants to switch the point of attack. 

This player will remain central most of the time. He must read the movement of his attackers recognizing when his centralized support role is redundant thereby opening opportunity for him to move into the attack himself. 

When the goalkeeper is in possession of the ball they must present the initial penetration option.  Because this option presents itself centrally he must realize it is more often than not a decoy option, a very important decoy option as he occupies defenders allowing other options to be open. 

More importantly the Holding Midfielder becomes a prominent option to the player who receives the goalkeeper’s distributions.  He must always make himself available and present himself for the ball.  

The Holding Midfielders first option is always to look to make a penetrating pass or facilitate a penetrating combination pass sequence playing a teammate forward. 
    

The second option is to switch the field of attack. The Holding Midfielder is both an anchor and a pivot player. It may help to consider him as a linking player. Consider the pivot player role as one that links wide players on one side of the field to wide players on the other side of the field. 

The third option is to play the ball back to a supporting player, either a defender or the goalkeeper.

Clearly, just as it was in Beckenbauer's day, the position calls for one of the teams best overall players.  It demands the ball hawking presence of football's  "free safety" or baseball's "center fielder" be combined with the traditional facilitator responsibility of basketball's "point guard". It is a demanding role to be sure requiring an ability to read the game from both defensive and attacking perspectives. In many regards the Holding Midfielder is the linchpin of our system.  As such organization and communication skills are critical to effective play in this role.

Sun Tzu's Keys to Effective Soccer.

"Invincibility lies in the defense."   Today's translation is "Defense wins Championships."  If you doubt me look no further than the New England Patriots Super Bowl win.  It was a defensive stand at the goal line that won them the game.

"The possibility of victory lies in the attack."  Today's translation is "Offense wins games."  Look again to New England's Super Bowl win for confirmation as the Tom Brady offense made winning the game a possibility.

Now, let's address soccer.

"For should the enemy strengthen his van, he will weaken his rear;"  This has been very much on my mind as I have watched recent matches involving the USMNT. The team has played very direct soccer often utilizing the long ball in counter attacking to play in a forward.  The whole premise of the attack seems to be of a blitzkrieg mentality. 

This also applies to how Michael Bradley is being deployed.  Because of his incredible fitness level, Jurgeon Klinsman has chosen to play Bradley in an advanced attacking midfielder role.  It is not coincidence the USMNT defending has suffered without Bradley in his customary holding defensive mid role.

What I have also noticed is the gaps between the forward line and that of the rest of the team that occurs when the USMNT attacks in this manner. It's no secret the US back line has struggled mightily in recent matches. Sun Tzu's words ring clear here - the rear of the US formation is weakened by the direct dump and run play of its attack.

"should he strengthen his rear, he will weaken his van;"

The trendy formation for years was the 4-4-2.  The USWNT played a 4-4-2 against France this past weekend... and lost 0-2 to a talented French side. While the defense was solid except or a two minute span in the second half missing from the US play was the accustomed counter attacks and build ups to probing attacks that have defined USWNT soccer for years.

"should he strengthen his left, he will weaken his right; should he strengthen his right, he will weaken his left."   Remember the commentators for the USWNT match with France commenting how Carly Lloyd had been switched from the right to the left side of the formation? Ostensibly this was to strength the defense against France's Elodie Thomis who was giving the USA's Lori Chalupny fits.  In moving to strengthen the left side, the US weakened its attacking right side. 

Both our USMNT and USWNT have been caught in reactive modes to the perceived strengths of their opponents.  Yet, this is not entirely about playing to your own strengths.  Rather, this is about forcing your opponents to respect the possibility of attack coming from any point along the front.

If he sends reinforcements everywhere, he will everywhere be weak.  Numerical weakness comes from having to prepare against possible attacks;"

This is what the USWNT succumbed to against France.  It is also what the USMNT has been battling in recent friendlies.  And, if you will remember, this is what I have written about concerning our Grand Lake United teams success last spring and summer.  One coach commented to me,  "We played you 3 times this season and watched you several more. Your team is impossible to scout.  It's a different player having a big game every time we watch. You generate goals differently every time we watch."

"numerical strength, from compelling our adversary to make these preparations against us."

I also referenced playing a team in a tournament shortly after having faced them in a league match. Our foreign exchange student had wrecked their defense in scoring a hat trick and leading us to victory in the league game.  We knew he would be double teamed by the opponent in the tournament. So, I didn't even start Calo against them. We scored early and were up 2-0 before Calo ever took the field. I left the early goal scorers in the game when I sent Calo on.  Think of the conundrum facing the opponents at this point. 

It's not a great secret that successful soccer revolves around creating numbers up situations both when attacking and when defending. If you strengthen your ability to be numbers up in all phases of play, you can diminish an opponents ability to do so and chances are good the run of the game will be in your favor. 

Great truth in soccer and life

 

 - Panic causes tunnel vision.

Calm and poise allow us to better assess the situation

 

 and see options for success.

Pyramid of Success

I have seen several versions of this including one a coaching colleague, Paul Lee, shared with me on Hudl from the high school program he coaches in. I like the concept of using a pyramid as it emphasizes the necessity of a strong foundation required to build upon. This is the version I have adapted from Paul's for use with camps, clinics and teams I work with. To be honest, it is still evolving.  What might yours look like?

 

 

Success

Passion         Humility

Teamwork     Commitment     Trust

Courage         Intensity       Discipline       Perseverance

Enthusiasm     Respect      Belief     Confidence     Intelligent Effort

 

 

 

Conditioning and Training

Every team conditions and trains

 

It's not that you do these things

 

It's the standards your adhere to

 

while doing these things.

What do I look for in a player?

It wasn't very long ago that I was asked to observe tryouts for a U18 team of a club. I have known the coach of the team for a long time.  We are friendly rivals on the pitch and friends in real life.  The facts of the matter are, my team has gotten the best of his team more often than not and he wanted to learn more about what I look for in players. Before I agreed to observe his tryouts I felt it necessary to make two points; 1) what works for me might not work for him and 2) I don't always get it right.  With that being understood I agreed to observe their tryouts.

When I arrived at the site there were cones everywhere I looked and I know I rolled my eyes.  I wondered if "cone boy" was here for the tryouts too?  Let me explain.  The club I had been associated with for years had hired a trainer to work with some of its teams. I never met the gentleman, but would see him on occasion at the pitches. He really liked to use cones in his training. One day we counted how many he had placed out in preparation for that days training - nearly 300!  He was instantly crowned "cone boy" by some of our players.  Nothing derisive or negative intended. It was just an observation of a lot of cones being used.

A first glance at the tryout area saw 4 or 5 different spaces with cones laid out for the evaluation of technical and physical abilities. By now I was at least inwardly shaking my head.  We greeted one another and introductions were made with other coaches in attendance.  My role was defined as an observer of the tryouts.  When I asked for clarification on what I was there to observe there was a moment of hesitation. I jumped in and asked if I were to watch the tryout process or was I there to watch the athletes trying out?  It came about that I was there to do both in the sense I could watch the process and perhaps help make personnel decisions on the last few spots. 

Well, alright then.

There were 6 stations set up for the tryout process

1) 40 yard dash
2) 20 meter shuttle
3) Running with the ball over a course of 50 yards
4) Cuts and Turns over a 40 yard slalom course
5) Juggling
6) Striking the ball on goal

I dutifully watched the players perform at each station while carrying around a clipboard with a pen tucked in my pocket.  An hour and a half later the tryout was apparently done as they called the young men in for a final chat. After the athletes were dismissed the coaches gathered and began comparing notes.  I listened as timed results were rattled off, number of successfully consecutive juggles completed were accounted for and consistency of strikes on net were discussed.  There were a few athletes that stood out as the "best" and a few others that were quickly eliminated from consideration for having the worst times.  It came down to making a decision from amongst 7 boys for the final 3 spots on the team.  This is when they turned to me.

I told the group of 6 coaches there that I had nothing to add and handed in my devoid of any notes clipboard.  The looks among that group of men were priceless. They ran the gamut - shocked, snickering, angry, disbelief, curious.  I knew someone would inquire about my reply and when they did my response was simple.

"You tested for technical ability and athleticism. You have those results on your clip boards. You did not test for tactical understanding or psychology, unless observing how the athletes handled your dog and pony show qualifies as a measure of their mental toughness."

After things calmed down a bit I explained there are four areas that should be evaluated.

Technical
Tactical
Physical
Psychological

These experienced coaches knew this. What they didn't know was how to run a proper tryout. Eventually I was asked how I conduct tryouts. They wanted to know what activities I used and what I looked for in a soccer player.  I referred them back to the 4 areas listed directly above this paragraph and commented that while all are inter-related the one I prioritize is the Tactical consideration.  This is the one area their tryout completely failed to address.  The players never played the game during the tryout.

The tryouts I observed that day identified the Big, Strong, Fast athletes present. 

What a tryout like this misses entirely is the fact pace of play is far more about decision making ability on and off the ball than it is about pure physical speed. Soccer is a thinking man's game.

At my suggestion, everyone who had tried out that day was invited back to a second tryout session held a few days later. This time dynamic stretching was performed in groups and then sides were chosen for small-sided play before we ended with full 11 v 11 play.  I asked the coaches (5 of the original 6 were present at the second tryout session) to observe who was leading dynamic stretching. Which players were cutting corners or not finishing a stretch completely.  In small sided play we watched the order players were chosen for teams in. Then we watched for the players who most consistently lost possession of the ball. When teams were selected once again, we observed where the players who constantly lost possession of the ball were chosen.  We looked for how a player prepared to play the ball. We looked for players who played with an economy and efficiency of touches. Did a player receive with hips open to the field whenever possible?  Was a pass made to the proper foot or proper space? Was a player capable of playing 1 touch or 2 touch soccer? Did a player take multiple touches when 1 or 2 touches would have sufficed?  Is the player a disciplined 1 v 1 defender or do they constantly stab at or dive in on the ball? As a defender did they work to make the attack predictable.

The above paragraph is all about on-the-ball abilities.  How a player combines mental decision-making abilities with technical abilities. 

Here's a secret that's really not a secret at all.  A typical player will have possession of the ball for approximately 3% of a match. What is the player doing the other 97% of the time? 

So we also watched players when they did not have the ball. Were they ball watchers or were the game watchers?  A ball watcher typically plays one-decision soccer. They tend to be focused on the ball and oblivious to the greater game at large.  When they obtain possession of the ball is when they begin to decide what they will do with it next. Maybe. They might be so focused on being first to the ball that even gaining possession of the ball is a secondary consideration.

Game watchers tend to be "ahead of the game" and capable of playing one-touch or two-touch soccer in most instances because they play "multiple-decision" soccer.  They know their next play before their first touch on the ball. A game-watchers successful pace of play readily stands out. They appear faster in a physical sense than perhaps they tested to be. 

And movement off the ball or support is not relegated to attacking play. When attacking does a player move to create numbers up situations in his teams favor? Does the player without the ball move to create space for a teammate or recognize and move into available space?  Defensively does a player move into proper support position in relation to the on-the-ball defender?  Does the off-the-ball defender seek to balance the defensive shape? We looked for quality of communication both of the verbal sense and physically. Who directed traffic and did they do so from a ball watchers perspective or that of a game watcher?

We also observed mental toughness.  When a player encountered adversity on the pitch, how did he respond?  I do not want to see a kid hang his head and call out "my bad."  I want the kid who stays in the game and when next he encounters a similar situation has a different solution ready to handle it.  I want the kid, who when he loses possession of the ball immediately assesses the situation and deploys himself in the best possible manner to help his team regain possession. Perhaps that is immediately contesting the ball to win it back or perhaps it entails getting back behind the ball and into a support position as quickly as possible. Either way, I want immediate and decisive action over hanging heads and jogging.  The quality of the decision will expose whether the player was ball watching or game watching in deciding how to act.

The second session concluded after nearly 2 hours of playing the game.  The players were dismissed and the coaches gathered to discuss what they had observed.  Not surprisingly a couple of the better athletes did not grade out nearly as highly as they did after the first session while a couple of the "worst" athletes received surprisingly high grades on their tactical abilities.  In the end, when the coaches asked my opinion on filling the last few roster spots I was able to comment on individual players and communicate to them my opinions based on having seen players actually playing the game they were trying out to play. 

What do I look for in a player?

I want game watchers who place the team above themselves and demonstrate mental toughness in overcoming adversity.

Then I look to technique and physical ability.

All the technique in the world is rendered inadequate if the decision-making process is shoddy. Skill without tactical understanding of how to apply it slows the pace of the game to a crawl and results in self-inflicted pressure.  I want speed!  I want pace of play!  And that starts with communicative game watchers and multiple-decision players. 

Meddling

Many ideas for articles come from you, the readers of this blog.  I have had quite a spate of conversations in recent days about people meddling in athletic programs.  I have always found it curious how one particular topic seems to come to the fore during a specific time frame. I have no sound idea for why meddling is the prominent topic these last couple of weeks. Nevertheless, it is and so I will share a few general thoughts on the subject.

Just this morning, I read a rather lengthy article about the Cleveland Browns of the NFL.  Yes, I am a Brown's fan.  Sigh.  Lack of continuity has plagued the Browns for years now. Constant turnover in the front office, the personnel department, coaching staff and on the roster has sabotaged any effort to put a respectable product on the field since the franchise returned to the NFL.  It starts at the top with owners meddling, or micro-managing every aspect of the franchise.  In Cleveland's case, owner Jimmy Haslam is responsible for keeping Josh Gordon in Cleveland and bringing Johnny Manziel to Cleveland over the objections of the people he hired to run the personnel department. Front office meddles in personnel and personnel meddles in coaching in what can be described as a trickle down deluge of disastrous proportions. 

Click here for the article on the Browns mess

High school soccer is plagued by teacher unions demanding their members receive preference for coaching positions regardless of merit.  As it was explained to me years ago by a sympathetic athletic director, "there is no so such thing as more qualified" when weighing potential coaching candidates. Greater weight is attached to a teacher seeking coaching employment than to a non-teacher seeking the same position.  "If Bill Belichick applied for the head football coach position I would still have to give the job to a teacher, if the teacher had any qualifications at all."  I myself recently ran afoul of such a scenario. I was told I was the best candidate for the job, but the position went to someone who just graduated from college and is a permanent substitute for the district and would probably be hired into a full time position for next fall when the season would begin.   I understand. I knew going in to the interview process that I would not be getting that coaching position. As soon as the athletic director mentioned "union" I knew it was over. Such is the meddling nature of teacher unions in athletics. I went through the process anyway for the experience and practice. I have my eye on another position I "think" may come open.

A coaching colleague had to withstand an attempt to overthrow him in mid-season last fall.  I kid you not, the school posted the head coach soccer position after the season started. He withstood that challenge and went on to complete the season, but one of the persons seeking his job turned out to be an assistant coach. Talk about awkward.  I have recently learned the position will be re-posted as a teacher employed by the school district has expressed interest in being the head coach,

I listened to another person vent about the "team mom" who flirted with and all but seduced a male coach to ensure her son would be captain of the team and win the desired post season awards so he could include mention of these on his college applications.  A scene right out of a Hollywood movie, you say?  I might have agreed had I not witnessed similar situations from both a coaching and a parental perspective. 

Referees are not immune to meddling either.  I saw a high school basketball referee years ago whose attitude was that the game was all about him and everyone was there to see him. He announced before the game that he was one his way to officiating college basketball and then it was on to the NBA. Each and every call he made (and there were many) was done with attitude and flair! Demonstrative doesn't begin to describe his approach.  He was going for charismatic, but as anyone who has officiated will tell you the two don't mix at all.

One of the my more memorable predicaments occurred when I was hired by an athletic director to clean up a program beset by meddlesome parents. Everything went well, until the athletic director himself was run off by meddlesome parents and the new athletic director turned out to be one of those meddlesome parents.  It got to the point where I was instructed who to play by the new athletic director despite the athletic director admittedly having next to no knowledge about soccer. 

There was also the time for no apparent reason a superintendent fought tooth and nail against fielding a junior varsity squad. Every objection presented by the superintendent was successfully dealt with. In the end, all that was left was the cost of providing numerals to the athletes depicting graduating year that could be applied to their letterman jackets.  About $15.00 total. I offered to pay for the numerals. Now, finances were not the actual reason for the reluctance to field a JV team. The superintendent backed herself into a corner by meddling in a growing and successful program. In the end there was a need to save face and no way to do so gracefully.

A coaching mentor once related to me a similar situation he found himself in many years ago. The then athletic director instructed him not to play a black athlete at quarterback. He had to play a white athlete at quarterback. The black athlete was clearly superior in every regard, but that did not matter. As in my case, if the coach wished to continue coaching he had to abide by his bosses (the athletic director) orders. The white kid played quarterback. The coach left after the season

I have seen club teams quite literally torn apart by such meddling.  A power hungry assistant coach attempts to overthrow the current coach. When that fails the assistant recruits everyone who will go with him to a new team.  Or a parent unhappy with the team her son is assigned to within a club attempts to overthrow the decision makers and start a new club / team that will accommodate her son.

I once had an administrator refuse to pay me over a dispute he had with a players family.  I had absolutely no leverage with either party in the situation. It finally brewed over the next season when in mid-season the administrator stated the player could no longer play. The administrator went so far as stating to me that he would be coming to the next match and confiscating the players card to prevent him from taking the field. And this was the goalkeeper he was going to ban from playing! 

I am also reminded of certain players through the years who were disruptive when they did not get to play the position they wanted to or did not receive the playing time they wanted. One player, frustrated with what he perceived as a lack of playing time stripped his uniform off behind the bench and put his street clothes on with over 20 minutes remaining on the clock of a high school match. A second example saw a player badger the coaching staff non-stop in pursuit of his own agenda.  Or in the case of Johnny Manziel and Josh Gordon of the aforementioned Cleveland Browns players will drink or do drugs, be late to practices and games and in other ways be generally irresponsible and indifferent to their responsibility to themselves, their teammates and coaches

Another common occurrence involves the parent on the sidelines who thinks (s)he knows more than the coach and isn't afraid to share his knowledge with anyone within earshot.  I have first hand experience with this as a parent / assistant coach and as a head coach.  Mary was an absolute nightmare in berating any player she viewed as a threat to her sons position on the team.  Ed was worse as he struggled to deal with his daughters injury ruining her senior season and whatever dreams he had of her going on to play in college.

I find it extremely difficult to sit in the stands at a soccer match as a parent / fan with people who know me. I get asked questions about interpreting the Laws of the Game, coaching decisions, tactics and strategies, how an athlete can improve his chances for playing time and any number of other game related topics.  Some people (Mary and Ed as examples) gleefully embrace the attention and are oblivious to finding themselves sitting alone as everyone moves away from them.  As for me, I prefer not to sit in the stands.  My wife enjoys my company and seeks my commentary not realizing the awkward position she sometimes puts me in.  I much prefer to sit or stand by myself as many have witnessed for I want no part of being seen as meddlesome.  Even so, I was accused of being meddlesome this past season. My transgression was cheering positive reinforcement to players.  I am quite serious. The coach took offense to my voice being heard cheering on the efforts of players other than my son. So, I modified my behavior to cheer only for my son... which did not go unnoticed by other parents. I acquiesced to the coach's wishes in an effort to protect my son from the coach seeking retribution or revenge. It didn't work. I knew it would not. My cheering positive plays the team made or directing those cheers to my son solely could not address the coach's insecurity and frustrations in the first place. The coach felt threatened by my presence although I had recommended him for the position, vouched for him as a coach and campaigned to the athletic director on his behalf. In the end there was a coach meddling with a parent cheering positively for the team? 

Where's the motivation in that?

And that's where all this is leading.

I grew up on "The team. The Team. THE TEAM!"

My actions whether as a player, a coach, an assistant coach or parent have always been guided by the philosophy shared by Bo Schembechler in the above video. It's all about what is best for THE TEAM.  In all the instances of real or perceived meddling related above, the team became of secondary importance. Selfishness and individuality were the motivation of owners, front office, personnel departments, teacher unions, athletic directors, administrators, coaches, assistant coaches, referees, parents and yes, players too. And in every case when the focus shifted from the team to the individual the quality of the experience went down for not only the meddler and his or her target, but everyone around them.

It's all about the team, bout the team.

No meddlers.

 

Knowledge is limited to what has already been learned.

Imagination is unlimited learning potential.

Mistakes bridge the gap between imagination and knowledge.

Yelling at players during games.

I have written on this subject before, but was asked to do so again. Hey, I like to honor all reasonable requests!

With it being the middle of winter I am largely limited to watching basketball to feed my sports addiction.  I need not your sympathy for basketball was my first love and remains dear to my heart. At a recent high school basketball game I observed a coach berate a player for a mistake made and mumbled under my breathe that he was wrong for doing so.  I was overheard by someone sitting near by and an impromptu discussion on the subject of yelling at players took place and led to the request to once againshare my thoughts on the subject.  I've decided to do in bullet point style this time.

* No one is perfect. Everyone makes a plethora of mistakes each day. It's how we handle them that matters most.

* In an athletic contest, chances are pretty good the person who just made a mistake realizes it without you having to point it out to them.

* Yelling at or chastising a player for making a mistake is in and of itself a mistake as it continues a chain of negativity. And it can be particularly demoralizing if done in front of the team - the players teammates, peers and friends.

* No use dwelling on or belaboring a mistake. Put it behind you immediately and continue playing the game.  Break the chain of negativity immediately and move on to the Next Play!

* This is the biggie insofar as coaching is concerned;  if a player or team is not performing as you wish them to it is because you failed to properly prepare them to do so. Do not yell at players because you failed them - that makes no sense at all and only serves to make you look like a fool.

Obstacles or opportunities?  Mistakes will happen.  The quality of life, the quality of performance in an athletic contest, will be determined by how you handle mistakes.  If we treat a mistake as an obstacle to our success that is exactly what it will become.  If we approach each mistake, each failure, as an opportunity to learn our path to success will be shortened.

Do not yell or scream at players for mistakes made.  Teach from mistakes.