Player development is a topic that applies to all age groups and levels of play.
But, let’s keep our eye on the big picture.
When the term player development is used, what is the general context it is usually being used in? What is it that’s being visualized?
I think you know.
We are thinking and talking about the top levels: The National Teams and MLS.
Those are the products with the highest visibility. And those are ultimately the reference points for the health of our player development pipeline.
I think we can all agree those products are 2nd or 3rd rate.
So naturally, people hypothesize as to why that is.
Culture comes up over and over again
We’ve touched on some of the culture stuff before, but there’s a hell of a lot more than meets the eye.
Today let’s consider the following simple, and consequently seductive, argument:
The average American player does not play or watch enough soccer.
Yeah … true.
And people support this with a variety of reasons: Football, Basketball, Baseball, Xbox, Play Stations, Internet, Academics, etc …
Ok, I’m fine with that.
Here’s The Problem
That whole argument is framed in the wrong context.
You see, at the highest levels we aren’t concerned with the average. We are concerned (or should be anyways) with the outliers, the 3-sigma players, the top 1%.
The question is whether that select pool is watching and playing ‘enough‘.
The answer is a resounding yes!
I”ll say it again coaches are FOOLS. They fool players, parents, and the fans into believing they are developing a product worth watching. They fool everyone that they are producing quality when in fact they are delivering GARBAGE.
“Oh, no we only hire coaches worse than the Director”
Sunil Gulati –“One of the most connected and intelligent men in American soccer,”
Who is he you ask?
“Can the U.S. Be a Soccer Nation? ”
Indian-American economics lecturer at Columbia University. His last glory days on the field came as a sweeper on Bucknell University’s JV soccer squad three decades ago. Now 50, Mr. Gulati has had a hand in every important soccer initiative in America for half his lifetime. He is president of the U.S. Soccer Federation, the governing body for the men’s and women’s teams. Where skeptics see a stillborn experiment post-1994, Mr. Gulati sees “an extraordinarily successful 25 year cycle” for U.S. soccer.
Many holes can be picked in his rosy picture. Except during the World Cup or on Spanish-language networks, Americans aren’t taking to professional soccer in great numbers. The MLS can’t fill many of its stadiums and television ratings are paltry. A women’s league, launched with bad economic timing last year, lost one of its eight original franchises. On the field, America has yet to produce a soccer phenom like England’s Wayne Rooney or Argentina’s Lionel Messi, two of the game’s best players today.
American teams are known for their fitness, teamwork and physical style of play. “Hopefully our training regimen gives us a bit of an advantage,” says Mr. Gulati.
The future for America’s side depends on its ability to develop world-class players. The common diagnosis is that soccer in the U.S. is a middle-class sport, played widely in suburban youth leagues starting in the 1970s. The best athletes, particularly from poorer areas, often aren’t attracted to or able to pursue the sport. “Soccer is very much a pay to play sport,” Mr. Gulati says. In soccer powers, promising poorer kids are plucked by the youth arms of professional teams, with cost no barrier.
One proposed cure is an outreach to the black and Hispanic communities.
Mr. Gulati says no other country has come this far, this fast. Born in Allahabad, India, he came to the U.S. at five and took to the game on Connecticut youth teams before dabbling in coaching. As a graduate student, he was asked to run a national camp for under-16 boys in 1984. It was a mess.
THE TRUTH IS SOCCER COACHES IN THE US ARE THE MESS.
Here’s the problem. Who decides which players make up the top 1%? ODP state coaches? Regional coaches? Development Academy?
My U14 son plays up on a local U16 team in La. He’s an impact player. (According to his coach.) Granted, on a national scale this u16 team is probably above average. But certainly not elite.
Using Gary’s criteria, he certainly appears to be a top level player. Rarely turns the ball over more than 3 times a game. Was a starter as a center mid on his state team last year. (Not doing ODP now.) He trains 5-6 days a week. Plays pickup with adults on weekends. (Mostly hispanics and expats.) He knows how to play possession. Connects 80% of his passes…again with very few turnovers. Sets up goals.
To be fair, we are not in a major hotbed with “big name” clubs. He has a December birthday, so the relative age effect comes into play when looking at his YNT prospects.
FC dallas is the closest MLS/DA club. But it’s still too far unless he is part of a true residency program.
There are probably 100-200 players nationwide in a similar situation. How do these players get “seen” and otherwise stay focused on maximizing their potential?
Please, someone enlighten me.
He only turns the ball over 3 times a game but then only connects 80% of his passes…how does that math add up? Unless he attempts very few passes?
I would suggest there are much more than 100-200 players around the country in a position similar to your son. The geography of Canada and USA is such that a vast number of talented kids will get missed even if we were doing things (identification) “the right way.” It’s an unfortunate reality.
Heck a 19 year old from Ontario signed last year with a Russian Premier League team, and is in and out of the first team and is a regular reserve team player in CM for them. He was never part of the Ontario provincial team let alone the Toronto FC academy – why? We can all assume it was for a variety of reasons. This is a player quite close to an MLS team that didn’t get a sniff and is now playing at a higher more technical level (and yet still can’t get more than some practices with the Canadian national team). It’s messed-up!
ThiKu,
He connects between 15-20 passes a game. Out of 19-25 ‘touches’. So, yes, given the nature of the game I’d say 3 or even 4 turnovers (playing outside mid mostly) is a very good statistic.
He also manages 3-4 tackles/dispossessions per game.
He is exceptional athletically. But he has both brains and technique. A simple player that often is overlooked. He’s not a ball wizard but certainly gets into the penalty area several times a game.
I see him ending up a holding/defensive mid or right back. He passes well, short and long range, has pace (for now at least) and is an exceptional 1v1 defender.
When is the last time we saw an American defender who was both exceptional technically and tactically? And win the ball!
Thanks for clarifying. Yes that’s 80%! My bad.
Just a tip – I coach 12 year olds. We are in the 2nd tier, and the first tier has 8 teams. We’re in about the top 10-20 teams in the province for our age on any given day. 2nd tier has about 12 teams. I challenge boys to complete 10 passes EACH per 15 minutes of play minimum – incl the GK. My players are neither technically nor athletically “gifted”. It’s about approach to the game and style of play. Usually about 2/3 of the XI team are able to achieve that. Obviously our opposition are in the 2nd tier or 3rd tier – we would have significant struggles in every area of the game against the first tier (to frame it for you, Whitecaps FC youth are top of the pyramid, then the Provincial team, then the “first tier” of clubs followed by my team in the “2nd tier.” And then there are 3rd-6th tier teams below. 1st tier teams feed the Whitecaps, and are heavily scouted over extended periods (ie, the entire season by first tier, provincial and Whitecaps staff).
If your son is of the technical level you profess challenge him to increase or even double those passing stats re: completion and increase the percantage of completed passes to 85% plus. I recognize he is playing against bigger kids, but if he is of the technical and physical level to justify that then the age shouldn’t be making a difference.
In my opinion an “exceptional” passing percentage is about 91-93% based on professionals such as Leon Britton of Swansea. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/swansea-city/9017511/Swanseas-Leon-Britton-has-better-passing-stats-than-Xavi.html
Great would be 85-90, good 80-85. so on and so forth. A very bad game is completing 10 or less passes (which you see in the English Premier League often! very sadly).
Example, just a fews ago, one of my better MF the other day missed three consecutive passes with no pressure from a CM position – against a bigger more athletic team (2 years older). The turnovers resulted in attempts on our goal of course (no goals against, thank goodness). I pulled him off. Spoke to him about the consequence of lost-focus and unforced errors. He returned to the field and connected 8-10 consecutive in about 5 minutes and created two counter attack scoring opps. He was able to verbalize the difference in his approach and the outcomes. Push your son to do that too. As you see it isn’t necessarily about practice but also about mentality.
Good points on the percentages.
However, what about the quality of passes i.e. crosses into the box or through balls? Obviously, playing a possession, slower buildup is going to be more conducive to higher pass completion. (Which is why the EPL #’s are probably much lower than Serie A, La Liga or even the Bundesliga.)
Centerbacks and even fullbacks should have a high pass comp rate. Usually they are under less pressure. Which player is of greater value? The simple but consistent player who keeps the ball? Or the player that creates 5, 6 or 10 chances per game?
So, how many quality crosses should say, an outside mid or outside back be putting in? In terms of numbers and a percentage?
My team has crossing, through-ball goals as well depending on what position the player is. Have targets/game for full backs as well. But they are beginners on full field (they’ve only been doing it 2 months now) so those are longer-term targets. For now it’s about possession and spacing.
Why do you define crosses/through balls as higher quality than maintaining possession? Those passes you mentioned (crosses/through balls) are only useful if they are successful (or if they lead to a defensive error that provides a corner kick/thrown-in…haha, or I guess the odd goal! duh).
Yes, MF/DF have higher pass rate than W/CF of course. The player that “creates” chances is generally not doing it alone, and needs the team to create space and maintain possession. But like I said – we have crossing/through-ball targets depending on position as well. Ie, the CB not looking for crossing opportunities but maybe we talk about how many headers he wins that then either fall to feet of teammate or opposition and what the result of both is.
This is correct I believe. The elite top 1% of US youth shifts abruptly at about age 13 when soccer betrays the big, fast, aggressive kids and rewards those with foot-skills. All of that investment in the U12s goes to waste because it is teaching the wrong things.
Again this is a culture war. US soccer has traditionally been “fresh air and exercise”, but in the world at large it is “war without arms”. At about age 13 it becomes apparent that soccer is indeed an incredibly sophisticated ball sport and the kids into it for fresh air and exercise go away and so does all the training with them. The kids with foot skills emerge, but by now they have been subjected to “B” teams, bad coaching, lack of peer credit, and general disinterest in what they are doing. Then all of a sudden the whole mood of the nation rides on their shoulders. I can’t blame Donovan for being an emotional wreck.
The good news is that the age where soccer converts from “fresh air and exercise” to “war without arms” is getting younger all the time. To quote Klinsmann, “I think we are a bit too naive”.
Jesran, agree with you totally. By age 13 most parents who have their kid in competitive programs have spent around $10K just on club fees and coaching. Add gas and travel expenses to games and costs might double to $20K. If you are trying to develop elite players then 99% of families are just wasting their money and in the process making youth soccer organizations along with Adidas/Nike …BILLIONS.
“Jürgen Klinsmann Hired To Protect Sunil Gulati’s Job”
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/784516-jrgen-klinsmann-hired-to-protect-sunil-gulatis-job
The Emporer wears no clothes!!!! So now Klinsmann has been hired to convince us all that Gulati is not naked? One day these will be considered the Dark Ages of American Soccer.
Two thoughts Gary,
You are right that the top 1% participate in tons of soccer activity. I choose my words carefully here. I honestly think they do NOT PLAY enough soccer. Most of their soccer exposure and activity is in structured, adult organized, paid for environments. I suspect you appreciate the difference. From watching your video I suspect a higher percentage of your players versus other teams actually “play” soccer when they are away from the practice pitch or scheduled league game. The two Cal men’s teams you have recently highlighted are good example here. Those two teams are not getting paid lots of money or earning college scholarships for their participation in these teams. I suspect most of these players will “play” soccer until they physically can’t. They will be the ones who show up anywhere there is a pick up game or opportunity to kick a ball simply because they love to play. I am not so sure that is true for many of the group that makes it into the 1%.
The point you seem to be highlighting in this post and a few other recent posts is that we need to question the quality of the coaching and system. My thought above isn’t in opposition to that point but rather an additional thought. My second thought ties more closely to your hinted at issue. Are we identifying the correct top 1%? The quality of coaching and development for the top 1% is definitely a concern. But I fear that based upon our system the youth with the highest potential to be great are getting left out of the upper echelon of the game because they either don’t have the money or don’t fit the “mold”. I don’t buy the excuses given about other sports taking the best athletes. If a little country like Holland can produce so many quality players then we have more than enough raw material to work with. Heck if we knew what we were doing we should be able to produce 10 or more teams that could compete with and regularly defeat the Netherlands of the world. Holland has only 16M people. Texas alone has 25M and California has 36M people. Even after other sports those two states have more raw material than Holland. And if yo look at Messi or Rooney or Christiano R or Xavi or Puyol, I don’t see any of them fitting the American Football or Basketball mold anyway. My point, soccer raw material is not the same raw material that the other major sports are looking for in raw material so there is less competition than some Americans claim. We are lacking the ability to first identify and then develop the raw material into great product. And as long as the system keeps overlooking the best material we will be limited in what can be produced as well.
“overlooking the best material ”
You guys just DON”T GET IT!!!!!!!!!!
Every player is “raw material”. The tiny country of Holland and Spanish region of Catalonia produce the best players because Ajax and La Masia have GREAT TEACHERS.
IT IS NOT ABOUT SCOUTING, RECRUITING, IDENTIFYING.
Oscar, I think we are in agreement not disagreement. Our current system has the teacher select his players and then train them. You are right. No amount of recruiting or scouting will make our end product better if we lack the expertise or craftsmanship to get the most out of that player. But even if we hire Pep Guardiola as the National Team Coach he will only be able to take the team so far if he is not provided access to players with the right qualities. Some of those qualities are not being valued in our current system.
My point was that myopic selection standards are one of the symptoms of poor teachers. As you point out doing something about scouting, recruiting or identifying alone would only be treating a symptom and not the root cause.
Bad coaches are bad at both selecting and developing a well rounded team.
You guys are definitely in agreement — both are saying that we spend so much effort identifying the top 1% that we neglect to actually train any of our kids, top 1% (whatever that means) or not. Both of you, I think, are pushing on Gary’s point a bit.
That NY Times article on the Ajax academy made a similar point about Holland — that they have a “rising tide lifts all boats” mentality, focusing on improving the overall level of play and interest in soccer, knowing that great players will eventually emerge from an environment in which high-level soccer is enmeshed in daily life. I don’t know how true it is of Holland, but I certainly think we spend too much effort on competition, and not enough on actual PLAY, as opposed to structured “soccer activities”, as Wolfgang says. Here in soCal, I wouldn’t be surprised if top players spend more time in the car getting to and from their distant elite teams than they do actually playing.
In the mid-90’s my team from Canada here went down and played in the California Cup. In the finals we played Celtic. They beat us 3-0. You know what my coach said after the game (as if it’s a good thing)…”they beat you because they have committed players that travel 2 hours each direction to get to practice.” My thought was “you idiot, if they stayed at home and played more locally they could juggle or kick about for 1.5 hours and drive 30 minutes or less to practice.” I looked-up their squad of “elite athletes.” None went on to any kind of national team (maybe they went on to University??) .
It’s about more than just trying to get on some all-star team.
Wolfgang, like that name! Is that like Jose in German? 🙂
“Our current system has the teacher select his players and then train them.”
When does an elementary school teacher SELECT their students????
Youth players should just be developed PERIOD with no selection.
Guys please wake up and get out of the MATRIX!
Oscar – “When does an elementary school teacher SELECT their students????”
Well actually an elementary school does or at least should require students to have mastered the lower grade before advancing to the next. A soccer team or a class room will suffer when there are students at totally different levels in the same class room. The best school with the highest levels of learning are usually made up of students that are at a similar level, this allows the teacher to challenge the students appropriately. This is also why many of the inner city school struggle so much – they push kids through to the next level without learning the lower level. This also happens in soccer.
Alec, I do agree players on a team should be at the same level in order to achieve optimal player development, ie you can’t put 2nd graders in a 3rd grade class.
As a coach my focus is not to create “elite” players. Therefore I do not scout or recruit anyone. Quite honestly there are very few if any naturally talented players in my area. If there are some they are typically with a larger “professional” youth club. I don’t have the luxury to pick and chose so I must develop what few players are available. Many have never played soccer and most come directly from recreational programs.
We are able to compete with so called top clubs that cost 3-5 times. Just imagine what we could do if we had nature athletes that were IDENTIFIED, SCOUTED, and RECRUITED.
Again, we don’t have those options because those top players are already part of the youth soccer system I call the MATRIX.
I like this too Oscar.
But we need everything.
We need both great teachers AND the scouting, recruiting, identifying.
This is what I do not like.
“U16-U18Boys Academy and U13-U16 Pre-Academy Tryouts will be by invitation only”
INVITATION ONLY? Who invites you??? Some idot head coach or DOC that knows nothing about player development but just wants a team of All-Stars so they can win championships.
Hmmm…you’re BIG, STRONG, FAST…great join the team!!! 🙂
Sorry…you’re small, weak, slow…find another team 🙁
Oscar,
I do think identifying is important. Can’t make a diamond out of crap.
Kana, I don’t know about yours but my shit is hard as a diamond 🙂
Focus on 3sigma then and tell all the players and familes that 99% of them are wasting their money on CRAP.
Have you never seen Cristiano Ronaldo in non-soccer specific or other athletic training events? He could have played and competed at the highest level of just about any sport – basketball and football included if he grew-up in such an environment to learn the sport.
Watch this video. C. Ronaldo is a freak.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSL-gPMPVXI
The others – no they aren’t the type of athletes that would have thrived in bball or football etc.
I think this line of thinking hurts the discussion of soccer development more than it helps.
The conjecture that this or that athlete could have been at the highest level of any sport is reaching too far.
I like your thoughts here Wolfgang!
Very good points here, again this brings you back to the faulty player selection throughout the country. Which reverts way back to one of the first posts you on this blog http://blog.3four3.com/2009/08/24/elite-player-yes-or-no/ (Notice the connection between everything we talk about here! They are all related!) Obviously producing better players would be a nice thing, but at the same time it doesn’t matter if we can’t identify who the best players are anyways.
Yep!
You could be doing the greatest development of ‘truly elite’ talent in the world. But if you’re practicing here in the US, chances are your end product (the player), is not ultimately selected to be a professional or on the National Teams.
It’s the whole “if Iniesta were American” argument.
And it’s true.
This argument works right now, the 3 sigma kids are mostly the children of latin american immigrants who watch and play tons of soccer. That isn’t going to last very long. Look at the age structure of the the Mexican population. The great Mexican immigration is over. We’ll have to start doing it with second and third generation, or more, kids. Sure those kids will have a somewhat greater affinity for soccer, but, from what I’ve seen in schools, the kids who grow up here are already getting more into the multi-sport U.S. culture. And, when they grow up, those kids will put just as much priority on college and well-rounded kids as everybody else in the U.S. People assimilate fast in the U.S. Better make development plans that don’t depend on a huge flow of recent immigrants.
It’s an interesting take Rivelino. Definitely worth thinking about.
With the advent of the internet and globalization, the world is changing so fast.
One facet is traditional higher education, and the concept of ‘well-rounded’. The perceived value of both is slowly eroding for a number of reasons. 10 years from now, the world is going to be very different.
These are actually all things I plan to write about, as they are directly related to soccer development.
Gary – graphs do not scare me! In order to counter my argument, we would need a graph depicting our top 1% and the amount of soccer they watched as youth players in comparison to other countries’ soccer players. Its an impossible task, I realize that, and I do not have that data either. I was just talking of my brief experience as a Maryland youth coach. Furthermore, I would bet a year’s worth of paychecks that our players watch far below the amount that the top 1% in Spain/Germany/Brazil have watched. Now people learn in different ways. Watching soccer would be considered ‘visual’ learning. All I am arguing is that our players, even the top 1%, lack a complete soccer education because they do not observe enough good soccer as kids. My argument can be applied to our coaches as well.
“All I am arguing is that our players, even the top 1%, lack a complete soccer education because they do not observe enough good soccer as kids.”
Chad, your logic is flawed.
If that were true creating great Doctors, Scientists, Engineers would require having “good” mentors to observe and watch as kids. Yes, it does help to have parents(family members) who were themselves Doctors, Scientists, Engineers but it is not a prerequisite. What is a requirement is the we have GREAT TEACHERS.
Great teachers can teach anything to anyone including soccer. Soccer education requires coaches that can actually teach soccer.
This is what you should say:
“All I am arguing is that our players, even the top 1%, lack a complete soccer education because they do not have good soccer teachers as kids.”
Carlos, I totally agree with you. However, I did say that “My argument can be applied to our coaches as well.” We can all agree to disagree and we can all agree that our system is broken.
I agree, the real problem is that no one has enough understand to know if they developing as a soccer player. Everyone is very intangible and ambiguous to parents and most coaches. Most parents/coaches just look at the scores and believe their child is developing if they are winning games.
I would compare U.S. soccer to a third world country’s economy. It many third world countries they send kids off to work in factories to make money when they are 5-10 ten years old. They believe this is great, because it produces a result – money. In the U.S. we teach kids to go after results (wins), but the skills they develop to get the results are so primitive that it pigeonholes them into one simplicity style of play. Getting results and wins are not the problem, it’s the means we use to reach those results. Example: a kid taking the initiative to run a lemonade stand as a kid might give them some great life lessons and produce a result, but working in a factor and not developing their mind will destroy them for life.
The key to transforming American soccer is – simulation of the soccer mind along with mastery of the proper techniques and skills. Every thing you teach a youth player has a long term effect on the way that player will think about the game. Coaches have to think like master architects and always, always think about long term objectives – not short term result. This requires the coach to checkout his ego at the door and to truly coach selflessly – for the good of the kids long term.
Hi Chad,
My intention with the normal distribution isn’t to scare, nor to somehow ‘show’ I’m ‘smart’. Who cares? What’s important is to refine ideas and hopefully stimulate discussion.
What’s also very interesting is the concept of “countering someone’s argument”. One can always conveniently take the position that if you can’t prove it ‘scientifically’, then my argument is just as valid as yours.
That’s a reason we have so much junk on the internet, and so many charlatans.
We even have parents who after 5 years of pre-pubescent soccer spectating, they feel themselves experts.
Definitely not saying this applies to you! We just need to be careful.
For me a lot of the “culture” issues boil down to this: how many people in the kid’s life are able to distinguish good play from bad? For a lot of kids here in the US, that number is extremely low, even zero.
I was talking to my parents yesterday about our frustrations with the play of the Sounders and MLS teams in general. They get Brazilian TV, so the occasional MLS game tends to suffer in comparison to a steady diet of Neymar and his compatriots. But there really is a stark difference in even the average roleplayer Brazilian player and their ability to read the game and the speed of their decision making with and without the ball compared to even the best MLS players.
I attribute that partly to the fact that as a even as a kid, you can’t get away with bad play. If you boot a ball randomly in the air, people are going to look at you like the moron you are, and you’re going to learn that’s not something you should do. The other big factor is the kids with real talent are identified early and trained by professionals from an extremely early age. If you’re not involved with a professional organization by the time you’re thirteen, you’re not destined to be pro.
All good stuff Carlos!
Again, I’ll add that the problem is not just at the youth level. MLS teams are not selecting ‘the best’. They are primarily selecting players that fit precisely what you’re describing.
Oh, I agree completely. I brought up the kids because in a developed soccer culture even other kids will correct bad play.
But yes, at the professional levels, players are being selected on different and better criteria than they are here, and it leads to a better standard of play and the development of a higher class of player. A huge difference is the selection of players who can rapidly analyze and react to the game. It’s definitely an underdeveloped skill here, and one if improved would massively improve the quality of outcomes the US would achieve.
Sorry to nit-pick man, I just can’t help myself. 🙂
The underdeveloped I’m pointing to are the MLS, USL, NASL coaches.
No worries. As a fan of an MLS team, I get plenty of first hand evidence supporting that view. And I’d add to your list everyone at the USSF, obviously.
Gary, I see what you’re trying to say, but let me offer a specific example as a rebuttal. Chris Wondolowski is tearing up MLS, and was recently pulled into JK’s squad for upcoming friendlies and presumably qualifiers.
Do you remember a couple months ago, I believe it was Wondo (presumably part of our 1%?) who, when he first was exposed to JK, remarked that he couldn’t believe how little he (himself) had been doing in the way of training, preparation, immersion into the sport, etc…He stated flat-out that he had no idea what it meant to be a true professional until he met JK. I could be wrong on the player, but at the very least it was someone else that was a valued MLS player and part of our national team picture.
If one of the shining examples of our 1% can admit to not truly pushing themselves, of being ignorant of the finer points of the sport, then I remain unconvinced that our 1% watch the game enough, play the game enough, practice the game enough.
Simply, it’s not enough.
But that’s exactly the point:
He is not part of that group.
Ok, I think I got it now. 🙂
Hmm. I am conflicted by your view on development and I will explain why through example…
I live in BC, Canada and see a flawed model. Here the Whitecaps and our governing soccer body (BCSA) decide at a very early age who gets into Provincial teams, National Teams and of course becomes a saleable asset for the Whitecaps themselves. Those 3 bodies could not be further away in terms of their development model when compared to what I am doing. I don’t think the best players are being brought forward in our system. In fact, we have progressed no further than a short-short-long model of play.
I have 2 players that I coach during the regular season and who you will see in July when a local academy from Richmond, BC comes to play against the team in the 12 minute video. Those players are 2 of the more technically advanced players which is something I work on with all the players throughout the year. Now that being said, the bigger of the 2 boys has the Whitecaps drooling already. The other boy is much smaller and a play maker with both a brilliant touch and vision. I am lucky to coach such wonderful kids and with different qualities. Oh and to be completely clear I do not coach them at all during the spring or summer.
Now all that being said, I have had to close the door on ‘club staff coaches’ for fear that they will undo the teachings of a Spanish style or at least introduce contrary tactics and techniques. Many times I hear from the parents of the team I coach that our players struggle at the weekly academy as they expect other academy players to do certain things like move into the correct spaces or maintain possession or recover the ball through high pressure. They cannot do what they do not know. I have to be extremely protective of the team, its players and its entire being.
I have had to turn down players who are almost man sized but extremely lazy in order to maintain the right environment and chemistry. It is very difficult to say to no to a technical director and there is a lot of pressure to do what they say if you want to coach at the higher levels.
Now onto the outliers – the concept is sort of true; when the person was born has been shown to go with achievement. On the other side of the coin is that if we are providing the correct teaching and not giving into the pressures of short term and conventional thinking, players who are born later in the year will also be fine, fine players.
Oh and the ‘average Canadian’ player also does not do enough. Just to emphasize my overall points, neither do the ‘elite’ ones on our national teams and so on. Lastly, the coaching here is stuck on the predetermined concept that the English, Irish and Scottish are the only people that could possibly know anything about how the game should be played at higher level.
Women’s Olympic Qualifiers anyone?
I am from BC and have a very different view. My club is led by (Technical Director) by an ex-England international, ex-Premier League player (before it was called Premier League) and he doesn’t subscribe to the short-short-long at all. He is looking at technical development only, and only when two are equal technically does he put athleticism as the deciding factor.
James – TSS is going down to play in California this year? News to me. Colin Elmes would surely be a big fan of this blog! Unless it’s the Tulis academy that is going down to Cali – but they’d be big fans of this blog too.
Like James though I do see teams looking to play short-short-long or simply play to the big man because they aren’t creative enough to break down defences. I am not some wonderful coach who can claim my players do any different. But I certainly encourage possession and who-why to do so. Fortunately we don’t have a big/fast centre forward so we have no choice but to play to feet – not that through balls are a bad thing.
James is right – Canadian kids, elite or otherwise, do not do enough to push themselves to reach the next level. And that includes them not watching enough on TV.
To be fair, it seems to me the Whitecaps are selecting the right players, having been part of a Whitecaps identification process (I am not a Whitecaps coach). The BC team generally selects good players, but does miss the smaller more technical ones very often (I am thinking of the current phase 2 u16 BC team for sure).
ThiKu,
I respect your POV though I do not agree about the Provincial teams.
I see the new Premier League fostering a culture for development alright – the development of poor attitudes, self aggrandizement and worst of all, poor play and poor technique. Many of the same coaches as before but now they are paid more for their ‘efforts’.
Re: the BC PTP – I thought you suggested they weren’t selecting the right players? I was basically agreeing with you. I can think of a few very technical lads who can’t get a look and they are in the BC PL.
I have only guest-coached one BCSPL game. Otherwise I am not involved so my perspective is minimal. The game I was at the boys I coached had a great, humble attitude. Both teams tried to play. But I gotta be honest, “the development of poor attitudes, self aggrandizement” was what I saw of the opposition. No humility from coaches or players and in the end that team imploded and we got a draw when we really didn’t have half the technique they did but ended up the much stronger in the game. But I won’t suggest either team had poor technique or play.
When I read comments like this what I feel that person is saying is “players in MSL are better technical players.” This simply isn’t true. I’ve been a part and around numerous BCSPL teams and trials (not in a coaching capacity) and the better technical players are in the league. There are always exceptions. What the problem is this region simply hasn’t done enough to develop elite technical players. The reason? I don’t know. Maybe coaches aren’t good enough (myself included) to develop international level players. Maybe the players themselves aren’t driven enough to practice every day on their own time, learning new skills, learning from mistakes, eating/sleeping right, watching games on TV and generally just enjoying the game. It’s not so simple to just say “the players and coaches aren’t good enough.” It’s a combination of factors.
My biggest pet peeve in USA is lack of player identification and then development of players who have 3-sigma potential.
When and who develops is critical. Having an eye for 11 – 14 year olds who possess 3-sigma potential is something USA hasn’t fully grasped. Using Barca model of identifying them young and surrounding them with right coaches and environment to nurture 3-sigma potential is something we haven’t replicated. IMG doesn’t come close! Neither does USDA.
But once identified, where does a 13-year old Eden Hazard, Xavi, Neymar, or Wilshere go in USA to develop? Is ODP, US National Team or USDA even close to what even a 3rd level European academy can offer? USDA provides half what European or South American academies offer in terms of culture, coaching, experience, opportunity. I say that even if you include MLS academies.
USSF needs a better system to identify players at 12 and no later than 14 who have 3-sigma potential and then have sufficient programs to further develop them to 3-sigma potential. Pool needs to be deeper, cast wider net. How can 2 or 3 1.5 hour practices a week compare to 5x a week in professional club academy? How does ODP / Pro + replicate that? Does the tiny national pool starting at U14 truly identify the players with 3-sigma potential?
This is more an infrastructure problem vice culture. Europe and South American have that infrastructure. We don’t!
The current US system of player development will create a handful of 3-sigma players every 10-years. Which is why we only have one Donovan and no know successor on horizon. We will never have 6-sigma type players (e.g., Ronaldo, Messi, Kaka, Rooney, Iniesta, Xavi). Why? We don’t identify them early enough, the youth system too focused at winning, don’t have right coaches or program to nurture them, there aren’t the opportunities (MLS needs to get better and pay more) and resources (e.g., money) to sustain the high octane development to produce 6-sigma players.
More readable version with paragraph breaks:
My biggest pet peeve in USA is lack of player identification and then development of players who have 3-sigma potential.
When and who develops is critical. Having an eye for 11 – 14 year olds who possess 3-sigma potential is something USA hasn’t fully grasped. Using Barca model of identifying them young and surrounding them with right coaches and environment to nurture 3-sigma potential is something we haven’t replicated. IMG doesn’t come close! Neither does USDA.
But once identified, where does a 13-year old Eden Hazard, Xavi, Neymar, or Wilshere go in USA to develop? Is ODP, US National Team or USDA even close to what even a 3rd level European academy can offer? USDA provides half what European or South American academies offer in terms of culture, coaching, experience, opportunity. I say that even if you include MLS academies.
USSF needs a better system to identify players at 12 and no later than 14 who have 3-sigma potential and then have sufficient programs to further develop them to 3-sigma potential. Pool needs to be deeper, cast wider net. How can 2 or 3 1.5 hour practices a week compare to 5x a week in professional club academy? How does ODP / Pro + replicate that? Does the tiny national pool starting at U14 truly identify the players with 3-sigma potential?
This is more an infrastructure problem vice culture. Europe and South American have that infrastructure. We don’t!
The current US system of player development will create a handful of 3-sigma players every 10-years. Which is why we only have one Donovan and no know successor on horizon. We will never have 6-sigma type players (e.g., Ronaldo, Messi, Kaka, Rooney, Iniesta, Xavi). Why? We don’t identify them early enough, the youth system too focused at winning, don’t have right coaches or program to nurture them, there aren’t the opportunities (MLS needs to get better and pay more) and resources (e.g., money) to sustain the high octane development to produce 6-sigma players.
The reality is, you CAN’T identify the top players (or ones with national team/pro potential) at age 13.
It’s pure speculation before puberty anyway. I think having ynt’s before the age of at least 16 is pretty stupid to begin with. Inevitably what happens is the bigger, physically mature players are the ones chosen…and continually pushed through the system!
After all, who wants to buck the system? I would agree a wider net needs to be cast. Which is how it’s done abroad. Any kid with any outlying chance of ‘making it’ is picked up and put into an academy system.
The ideal scenario would be for ussf to set up ‘districts’ and bring the top players in. At ussf expense. By 14 or 15, these players would be put into residency programs. (Much like the French model with Clairefontaine.) Players could go home on weekends and play with their local clubs.
I just don’t think we can rely on the individual clubs (or even MLS) to do it correctly. They’ve proven they are incompetent.
But this would require a huge ‘investment’ on the part of ussf. I’m not holding my breath.
We shouldn’t even have ynt’s below the age of 16. We always tend to select the wrong players at 13. (Physical maturity.)
No one can predict at that age where a kid will end up. Not even La Masia! Cast a wider net? Absolutely f’ing right! How it’s done everywhere else. Any kid with any potential is put into an academy.
We can’t depend on the DA, MLS to handle this. USSF really needs to take over. Set up a system similar to what France has. (Clairefontaine.) The individual clubs aren’t set up for development.
With the aforementioned system in place here, we wouldn’t have to worry about club interference.
“It’s pure speculation before puberty anyway” — Exactly.
Don’t have tryouts before age 14 just developed every players that wants it.
USSF needs to DIE so someone else like Kleibans can take over.
Oscar / Hall97 — I respect your opinion but disagree about identifying kids at or before U14. Clubs like Barca and Ajax do it. Sure it’s a gamble, but so do is identifying an 18-year old super star. The 18-year old may be more polished, but still speculation.
Everyone matures differently physically and mentally. What I’m saying is cast wider net by starting at roughly 12. Somewhere between 12 – 16 is where to catch the 3-sigma types. Kids are more malleable / teachable up to about 16. After 16 it ‘s increasingly difficult to meaningfully impact their full potential as they are more formed. Get them in proper system with proper coaching by this timeline and the probability is much higher they turn into 3-sigma players.
USA needs regional residency IMG type programs. San Diego is a hot bed of soccer but no representing MLS team. The next Eden Hazard could be in San Diego but stuck with USDA. I think a combination of MLS / USSF needs to invest in something liek a Clairefontaine to increase number of Donovan’s from 1 in 20-years to somethign more frequent.
While USDA and USSF under Klinsmann is moving things in right direction, I humbly believe the biggest problem is infrastructure as I speak to in my post above. We have kids with hidden talent. Just need coaching and a system to bring it out.
Kana, USDA not that really is crap. Meat full of pink slime!
Back to my comment about our development infrastructure issue. I give it Inadequate or 4 on scale of 1 – 10.
Would USA produce a Neymar, Hazard, Pato, Aguero, Villa, or Balotelli? No! Why? Because we have inadequate system.
We produce vast numbers of Marvelle Wynne types. He’s our “likely value” in the normal distribution. We have one Dempsey and one Donovan who push the 2nd standard deviation above the mean. You could argue they are in 3rd standard deviation, but on a world stage I think they don’t. But definitely cream of crop in USA where the observations that make up our normal distribution are below similar curve in Europe or South America.
They develop and play on different level. Different learning curve shifted well above what we have.
G. Rossi, who is USA’s top native born talent – has said he would never be player he is if he stayed in USA. Parma and Manchester United helped nurture him.
USA doesn’t have the industrial knowledge, the know how to produce top talent. Dempsey plays on average EPL team. Does he have talent to play for Arsenal or Chelsea? No! Donovan plays for Galaxy (need I say more) and never made Bayer Leverkusen, which is an average Bundesliga team.
We will know how well our youth system is when USMNT can pick most of its players from top European teams (Chelsea, Man U., Arsenal, Barca, Madrid, Milan, Inter, and so on . . . ). Most South American and European teams can claim this. Korea and Japan have handful of players on top teams (Inter, Man. U. Dortmund, and so on). USMNT still pulling from second tier European teams.
American kids don’t lack footballing DNA; we lack the know how . . . the catalyst to bring it out . . . nurture it. We need a European level footballing know how and education but getting MLS, USDA, and college soccer.
Other than moving to Europe, our most promising kids are stuck in a B-movie soccer plot. Passion and culture are great, but nothing without the underlying development infrastructure.
Kana, to a significant extent culture is crucial in building infrastructure. Where are you going to find the people with the knowhow to build the institutions? They need to come from somewhere. If you have a culture of people who truly understand the sport and can distinguish the important things from the distractions, then they can build the infrastructure that will produce top players.
In Brazil, almost everyone has a sense of good versus bad play. So when they see that six-year-old showing exceptional skills, they think maybe he’s worth showing to the local club. And the youth director at the local club is a trained pro, with an even more developed sense, who can tell if the kid is worth taking a chance on. And at each step thereafter is another pro with a developed sense, who makes a determination if the kid is still worth taking a chance on. The end products of such a system are generally highly competent at a minimum, and the cream of the crop are truly exceptional.
How important, and at what age, does competition come into play? Seems like a rhetorical question, but it isn’t. Overseas academies don’t stress results, but by their nature are highly competitive training environments. Ajax youth teams compete against other Eredevisie youth teams, don’t they?
Same with Manchester United, Arsenal, Barcelona, bayern, et. al.
Here, most top youth players are “held back” to play on their same age group teams in order to achieve results. Funny how you read interviews with big club DOC’s and they agree a top 16 yr old should play u18. Yet, you rarely see it happen.
Most top young pros are usually blooded with first team games between 17-19. Although it depends on position. Strikers/attacking mids seem to peak sooner than defenders. I have read that recent trends indicate players are debuting around 20-21.
^this is actually a HUGE issue. Teams here don’t promote the youngsters into “adult” or more senior youth teams often enough. There are a lot of factors when doing so, especially before age 15-16. Although a 13 year old might physically dominate his age group, mentally they might be shredded playing against 15 year olds – for example. But once a kid hits 15 or 16, if they are a serious player they should be regularly involved with 18+ year old quality players or they are destined to stagnate.
The problem here is the only worthwhile age 18+ teams for this to happen on are PDL teams they are only a few short months. Otherwise it is Whitecaps or nothing. Huge huge issue here. So you can promote a 16 year old to play with 18 year olds or whatever, but then what? Can’t “loan” them to university teams and the university teams don’t enter men’s leagues as “teams” usually. Some of the university guys might go to a men’s team and they might have their university coach (maybe), but even still they are just in a run of the mill men’s league.
My U16 son has played for ODP (Region II). He wants to go as far as he can but realizes High School, USDA, and college don’t compare to being in a European academy. Even lower division clubs.
We’ve travelled to Europe many times and played tournaments there. Have lots of family in Italy. In talking with them, I think it comes down to combined corporate knowledge (level of sophistication) of coaching and opportunity. But I think the biggest difference is by U16, any kid good enough to play pro has been identified and being developed by some professional team’s academy.
A U16 USA prodigy (second coming of Messi) has what? Practice with YNT handful of times doesn’t compare to full-time at a professional academy. Same goes for ODP/Pro+. USDA is full-time, but doesn’t compare to Europe or South America in terms of coaching, level of competition, and immersion in footballing culture.
Where USA misses the train is about U15 and above. Many countries finish high school around 16. Footballers get into an academy and do that full-time at various levels. If good enough, they advance.
Compare that to USA where top players aren’t exposed to professional environment until about 22 or 23. Too late for international footballing market. The European and South American academy systems are designed to feed the international market. USA system is modeled to feed college.
The well rounded argument is false hope if the goal is to produce elite player on world stage. The mixture needs to be full-time football at elite level to achieve that goal. If you want to pursue white collar job, college is way to go. Unfortunately for USA, you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
International football requires different model than college. Why is that so hard to understand?!?!
USSF needs to work on U16 and above if they are serious about competing with rest of world. Something Klinsman talked to when appointed USMNT coach.
I think it is possible to pursue a college degree AND pursue a professional football career at the same time. Granted, it has to be done part-time and on a nontraditional scale. Parents tend to look at it as an either/or proposition. Their ignorance stems from their own experiences with collegiate athletics. (Which work fine for the entrenched American sports.)
College soccer in and of itself is not the huge kiss of death many think it is. That said, there needs to be sweeping changes on training time and length of season. The age of 18-21 in most top leagues is still academy/reserve football for most ‘pros’ anyway. (Granted the difference is the training time.)
But yeah, given the choice, I would advise a young player to opt for a pro club over playing college ball.
I think in the end, a player either “gets it” or he doesn’t. We can talk all day about player development, “possession”, etc. But the top players are a combination of technical, tactical AND exceptional athletically. You have to have the right combination of the 3 to make it.
At local/grassroots level I have seen incredible technique…but horrible decisionmaking. I’ve seen exceptional athletes who have the first touch of an elephant. It’s very very rare to see a technical, intelligent AND athletic American player. You may get one but you sure as hell aren’t going to see all 3!
One huge step is to start grouping youth players based on ability..with age a distant consideration.
USSF…pay attention to Mexico. Maybe you should learn from what the U23 team did to Holland. The old center of player development has shifted to south of the border.
The huge flaw in logic is that we need European coaches and players in the USA. Let’s get back to the truth instead of talking nonsense in all these posts.
Brazil U23 team beating down on USMNT. Let’s see if Mexico can challenge these KIDS.
Guys read John Cartwright views, great read.
UK has the same issues, we have not had a truly world class player since Gazza.
the article below is about UK footy, but it could be the USA.
The impatience that is so prevalent in football in this country is due to low playing ability; impatience is a ‘camouflage’ for poor skills and limited tactical knowledge; resulting in FEAR in every corner of the game!
Impatience radiates through all sections of football in this country. From the top down to junior levels, the sad demands for simplistic performances that avoid difficult decisions and actions has created ‘robotic’ reactions and stifled performances and this mediocrity is then perceived as satisfactory by most associated with the game here.
Skill acquisition creates confidence and confidence is the ‘armour’ that protects the playing of the game from being reduced to simplistic monotony. Individual skill, gradually nurtured and embellished to gel with team-play, is the ‘holy grail’ for all coaches, junior to senior, to seek and develop.
A football team should consist of skilful individuals in every position—even goalkeepers. Fear of mistakes is lessened when each player is comfortable on the ball and has the ability to combine effectively with team-mates. Impatience when pressurized is not something that should contort the playing style of individual or team as it does here today; Barcelona are the present day example of individual flare and team style as opposed to the ‘huff and puff’ recognized as the English game.
We have seen several attempts to improve the playing style here over the last few years, Arsenal – Wigan – and Swansea, have shown the ‘guts’ to make changes to the historical game-style ‘expected’ to be played here. Each have had their problems when trying to ‘re-educate’ Directors, Staff, Players, Media and Fans. The ‘up-and-at-`em’ culture that persists throughout our game is incredibly difficult to overcome and the clubs’ who try to introduce more sophistication find the transition almost impossible. Winning is the key. Whilst results are positive all sections of the football public will accept a more subtle approach to the playing of the game. However, should results fall away, impatience returns with a venom and the fear from beyond the field of play is soon transferred onto it!
The problem of lack of individual playing ability is the main concern with clubs’ trying to ‘fast-track’ from ‘direct play’ to a ‘keep-ball’ style. Lack of talent in the country has forced the game into what we mostly see now and attempting to ‘force’ a more sophisticated playing style onto ‘unprepared’ players is unlikely to succeed. Playing with more concern about possession is fine as long as the players are able to produce the skills – especially when opponents pressurize those questionable and unreliable skills!!
To play possession football requires all players to be highly capable performers on and off the ball. The players who tend to have more time and space to begin attacking play – are back players. We have rarely conceived the idea that our back players should be equally good starters of attacking play but merely good stoppers of it! So right at the beginning of the ‘keep-ball performance’ we find players without the playing quality to provide the ‘opening prelude’. Opposing teams’ recognize this weakness and make it difficult for limited skills to flourish – this causes panic especially when nervous back players are caught close to their own goal.
Football of the quality we see from abroad has been ‘downloaded’ over many years to players as they have developed – not forced in a few months! Skill quality in all positions is maximised abroad whereas here we have substituted ability for athleticism. Yes, athleticism etc. is an important ingredient in top sporting ability, but we have sacrificed skill to the ‘god of power and pugilism’. Tactical variations that are necessary to offset the problem of pressurization in games is virtually non-existent due to the inability of our players to modify and adapt the ‘installed roboticism’ they have acquired from day one of their football upbringing.
It has become painfully obvious that the playing quality we see today here, even with the ‘imported mercenaries’, is falling further and further behind other leading football nations. The impatience ‘infecting’ our game is not just seen on the fields of play, but in Boardrooms, amongst Committee’s and Selectors etc. at all levels, who see winning as a priority without noting that….. ‘all fame is fleeting’ and that ‘patience is a virtue’.
Thanks for that and I will look up Mr. Cartwright.
Re: English world class players – Gazza yep for sure. Certainly. Wonderful player. I think you are forgetting Matt Le Tissier. Despite his ability only a few appearances for England (and despite his scoring records). Most figure and maintain it was fear from the coaches who didn’t know how to use him.
But you are either forgetting or ignoring Paul Scholes. Remarked by the world’s best as being “The Best Midfielder of our time.” Such platitudes from Zizou and Xavi. To name 2 of many.
I’d also say Rooney is of the same technical levels as Le Tissier. Always remarked as the only English player good enough for Barca or Real Madrid currently.
And although he is Welsh, you have to include Ryan Giggs in the world class level over his career. He played England school boys and has been developed in Man United from age…..12?
I posted about college system being biggest problem with US soccer. So it was good feeling when I came across article on Toronto FC establishing the first European style academy. It’s available on Shin Guardian website. http://theshinguardian.com/2012/06/04/birth-of-the-flagship-an-excursion-through-toronto-fcs-kia-academy-and-training-ground/
Key part of article follows:
MLS too has come to realize that the college system–which has served the league well in these first seventeen seasons–is not the optimal pathway to develop professional players ready to contribute at younger ages. Education is always good, but sometimes to reach the peak of one’s vocation sacrifices must be made.
To become a full-fledged professional in one’s early twenties is to leave the conversion and commitment too late.
Too many hours are spent away from the proper environs to harness the skills and focus required to transition to the highest level. There is simply not enough time on the pitch, in what is becoming a more and more competitive league schedule, to allow players of such advanced age the liberty to acclimatize slowly.
As such the future is in the academies; the goal: to produce truly home-grown players, refined in a professional environment with the best resources, training, and guidance. A proper football education; one that combines the accumulated knowledge of generations of expertise from home and abroad with the highest standards of technology, medicine, and nutrition to generate players ready to step into the league well before they would come of age in existing systems.
We all generally complain about youth soccer development. But what developement at what age? USA compars fairly well to other countries at younger ages. Kids in pro academy setup are better off. But where the void of emptiness begins is college, or about U16 – U18. That’s the problem! Poor coaching at younger ages IS a problem, but secondary to the college to pro system.