Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi Ryan,
Ideally, the outside backs could be higher up the field.
But it always comes down to everyone’s specific situation, that’s why answering these types of questions is not a simple thing.
When I watch our team’s play, of course there’s a whole bunch of things I’d like to have improved, the problem lies in the following question:
Are they ready for this extra layer of training?
Maybe, but maybe not.
On paper it seems so simple, and seems like it can’t hurt. But it CAN hurt!
And our reasoning is this: “The more you try to do, the worse things get.” And by worse, I mean player understanding and execution of the core fundamentals (our framework). And then it’s like everything starts falling apart.
Now, of course you can tweak & modify the framework however you see fit. It’s just that for us, we evolve the players from this base and a very slow pace. (Probably just a couple new things per year.)
Going back to your specific points on the LB & RB pushing higher when in possession:
* This is something we actively instruct them to do during match play (if they don’t recognize when to do it themselves).
* Including the GK, I guess that depends on two things:
- Is he sufficiently technical
- Where is the possession being held
* As for the D-mid dropping between the CBs, sure that’s something that can be done. Most of the time, we would like our 6 to find space and receive behind the opponent’s front line and their midfield.
Since we’re talking about youth, for me it all goes back to establishing a simple, but rock solid possession-based framework. From that framework, players can express themselves. And then from ‘mastery’ of that framework, the coach can layer in more details as he sees fit.
Let me know how it goes Ryan!
-
This reply was modified 10 years, 6 months ago by
Gary.
Notable difference Scott!
Video is such a powerful tool.
Keep filming & documenting so we can all see the progression!Hi Alec,
Absolutely have a Plan B.
When the conditions are such that you know FOR SURE that plan A is not going to work, you don’t stick to plan A.
Environmental conditions can be such a case.The problem is we must all be careful to not fall for the trap (the safety) of plan B too easily.
There’s that “coaching is an art” thing again. 🙂It’s hard to properly judge and walk the tightrope between Plan A and Plan B.
I think we all get better at the what, and how much, to sacrifice, under what conditions, with experience. It’s a never-ending struggle though.Hi Andrew,
5 subs, no reentry
Here’s the match report:
http://ussda.demosphere.com/MatchReports/60852305/4333940.htmlGood observations, and absolutely this team’s got a looooong way to go!
There’s so much context to share regarding this team, but I think the primary thing to focus on here is that this is what the product can look like after several months of Brian executing the methodology.Hi Paul,
One question was in regards to the opponent, were they instructed by their coach to stop chasing the ball during your team’s build up or was it simply them getting tired?
Generally, both situations happen. 1) Opponent instructed to sit back and/or 2) Team that’s been chasing gets exhausted in the 2nd half, and they stop chasing.
This game in particular, we’ve been told that coach will regularly sit back. I’m sure the players were instructed on where to put their line of confrontation.
Obvious what I need to do more of is again running the activities at nauseum and insisting on speed of play that is at a level that basically creates a lose/lose situation for the opponent.
Yes! 🙂
-
This reply was modified 10 years, 7 months ago by
Brian will be there.
I’m absolutely devastated that I’m still stuck with the day job.We’re trying to find a way to get those matches filmed. Do you know of anyone with that expertise over there? We need quality filming.
You should definitely go though!!
I promise you it will be the greatest show you’ll ever see from a U13 team!Sweet!
Thanks for sharing Mark!
Since we’ve never coached U8, I’m really curious what playing out of the back looks like. If you get to that point and have video, I would love to see it.
All cleaned up for you Ryan…
We’ll be doing podcasts here and will surely touch on the subject.
I think I’m with everyone’s responses here.
An exaggerated example:
If you’re up against a vastly superior opponent who can effectively press you, then it’s retarded to continue instructing your back line to “play out of the back” for the whole game.Of course it will be up to the coach to judge in real time what the conditions are, and if it necessitates a deviation from the core identity.
But for just that one match, or phases of that match.It’s important, however, to not be so quick to hit the ejection seat.
We must also be brave and give the players/team appropriate opportunity to execute under difficult circumstances. The art comes with identifying when that bravery turns into stupidity (pardon the expression).Hi Hans.
It’s a great, but very very very tough, question.
Ideally, I’d like to have you next to me while we go scouting … and I’d talk to you about what I see over the course of watching matches. Even that is still tough.But for now, here’s some free-flowing thoughts …
Usually we inherit a team, so whatever players are already there, is what we work with. And even though no player knows what the heck they’re doing, that’s ok since the execution of our curriculum starts to mold them.
As we put them through the paces of the core curriculum, and as they play games throughout the season, we see who’s capable of executing at the level we want in a specific position, who’s not, and the reasons behind that.
Desired “player characteristics”?
To first order, we look for all the conventional four: Technical, Tactical, Physical, Psychological.
They’re all important, but the first 3 are what draw us to a player. We can work the 4th.
Actually, at the earlier ages such as yours, tactical may also take a back seat (as that’s our job).So, are they sufficiently Technical & Physical for the level we’re operating at? That’s question #1.
If so, then you have our attention.After that, it’s refinement and molding according to what we want to see in specific positions.
This is the general context of Brian’s interview; “player characteristics” specific to a position.
So what do we look for? Generally speaking, players that can express the qualities of world class players in position X, for at least the level we’re operating at.So for example, we want Brazilian style outside backs. Players not only capable of defending 1v1, but hyper-technical and capable of effectively projecting forward in the attack. Now, everyone would say they’re looking for that (and that’s the problem with the “player characteristic” question). The difference is always in how good of an eye you have for player identification, AND in training them to fulfill the vision.
Therein lies a huge part of the benefit of the training framework we’ve released.
In it, there’s already a specific role the outside back must be able to execute. And if you’ve selected a player that’s progressing and executing that role to your standard (hopefully appropriately high), then great. If not, then either they don’t “have it”, you’re not training them well enough, or they’re better suited to another position.
And that helps drive the development of what you “look for” in player ID efforts.
I hope that offers a little help and insight. 🙂
Thanks for checking in Sean and giving everyone an update!
I would like to zoom in on this:
I am going to keep with this for at least a month to see where we are at. In the past I would have moved onto something else after a week!
It’s critical that everyone here NOT “move on” to something else!
Doing that is guaranteed failure.One month, or 2 months, or 5, is not enough.
The 3four3 methodology requires a much longer commitment. These core activities must be worked on and repeated over and over and over.
These core activities must become part of your identity. And it never gets old … because the objective becomes to execute it better than you did yesterday – the vision is of “perfection”! The vision is of master class, jaw dropping execution!If this commitment is made, then you’re on your way.
If not, then it’s not gonna happen.That’s the methodology. That’s what’s enabled us to field the product we field.
Keep at it Sean!
And if possible, try to have some video taken of your team now, and then 6 months from now, and then again at the 1 year mark.
I personally would love to see how everyone’s team looks like a year into the program.Really glad you started this topic Chris.
We haven’t dedicated ourselves to the young ones U9 or under, and I’m certainly curious how well it can be done.What would be awesome is if you – and others – could periodically film over the coming year, and post here!
Historically, no formal player evaluations.
For parents:
Brian has had an open-door policy for parents that want to talk about their kid. So throughout the year, the parent can get feedback. But of course there is a limit. When they ask me, I too share.But, parents must also be ‘managed’.
That means I’m not brutally honest. Because in most cases, that would be totally crushing.For players:
They get straight up feedback every single training session and match. Year round we’re telling them what they’re doing good and what their deficiencies are.But as for the hard data/statistics like you’re suggesting … no, never done that.
Much comes down to what Mike said; “we know it when we see it”.Cool Eric!
You definitely should throw in the pressure side of things too. Never too early to instill the defensive work ethic and identity. That is key.
Not at all saying this is you … but my biggest worry with coaches is that they won’t continue the process long enough to see the results. The methodology is one that requires long-term repetition, commitment, and dedication.
One might see a pretty quick team improvement in matches, but I caution not to confuse that with the players “getting it”. They don’t. Consistency is the sign that players are “getting it”. That will take a long time.
If a coach wants to adopt our methodology, these activities aren’t something to just sprinkle on top of what they’ve historically done. The frame of mind must be the opposite. This is the core, not the icing on the cake.
