Coaching in Canada - Too much, too soon?

[Cheeta]

^I don't think football(soccer) is unique in this, Ed. Plenty of sports end up with "under-qualified" parent coaches out of a necessity more than want. And because of the overwhelming popularity of football/soccer in this country, and the relative immaturity of the sport in some locations, this parent-coach reality may be more pronounced in soccer than some other sport.

My local community club teams, in my mixed income working class (and immigrant friendly/soccer friendly) neighbourhood is poorly served by their parent-coaches when it comes to soccer. Which is actually weird because in the East End we also have some absolutely excellent coaching available to us through the regional elite club (Phoenix Soccer, which is also an entirely parent-coached program).

Point being? While the parent-coach application is a necessary in all sports, it's not something we see so much as the lesser of two evils in other sports like hockey, grid-iron football and swimming where (in Winnipeg at least) you have coach "mentoring" programs in place to assist the parent-coach formula when it's required, as we do in football/soccer where the parent-coach is left to both their own devices and personal initiative.

This happens for a variety of reasons (as you've mentioned) but I think also because at the CC level football also seems to be handicapped by this legacy of "participation for all" over the usual sporting ethics you see demanded of other sports (especially in the higher age groups) and that this legacy somehow makes under qualified parent coaching okay for round ball football when it wouldn't be for other domestic sports.

Anyone who's been part of a hockey program in Canada knows what a parent-coach has to go through. Hockey parents will settle for a parent-coach (if they absolutely have to) only if that person shows commitment. Soccer parents will settle for anyone who will just keep a program going. That's a big difference and one we within the football community need to overcome.

No disrespect intended. Just my opinion based on experiences within my own small corner of Canada.

By the way, GREAT discussion. Very interesting read.

Also by the way, kids need to learn to see and enjoy football for football and not "track-and-field" or "play time" as is so often the case. When that happens exactly is up to the individual. If this six year old want to learn to handle the ball, he/she should learn to handle the ball. If they want to start to see & learn the field and the rhythm of play they should be allowed to learn the field and rhythm of play. Each according to their own time, and by that, they will influence each other. Tricky bit of work for any coach, but if they can get it half ways right, all the players benefit in the long term.

Great discussion. Carry on.

[masster]

quote:Originally posted by Ed

And the point I am trying to make (based on real life experience) is that there are more kids wanting to play soccer than there are parents / whatever 'with a passion for the game'. So you and Eric are quite clearly saying that those kids should be turned away for the sake of a principle. I don't agree.

No. What I am doing is pointing out the problem based on my experience. I have no idea what the solution is.

[Eric]

quote:Originally posted by Ed

And the point I am trying to make (based on real life experience) is that there are more kids wanting to play soccer than there are parents / whatever 'with a passion for the game'. So you and Eric are quite clearly saying that those kids should be turned away for the sake of a principle. I don't agree.

That's not what I'm saying Ed, the point you're missing here is that because of the ignorance about the sport, these parents instead of helping the development of soccer in our country, what they're really doing is setting it back.

Let me be more clear about this.

You're talking about 6 year old kids who just want to play the sport for fan. Very well, you don't think that a 6 year old can show already at such an early age signs of greatness? well believe it or not they do, between 6 and 7 is when in countries where soccer is the king sport they start to identify the players who have something special in them. That can only be done by coaches who understand the sport and the development process, because there are certain qualities that have to be picked up and develop from that moment on or it'll be to late if you try to do it latter. A child will be 6 years old only once in his life, if that child has something special that could be develop into a professional player, then he or she has to be educated properly from the very beginning.

You are saying that in your club the ratio is one "coach" every 6 players, I find that very positive only if those groups of parents working with those groups of six kids, where supervise by somebody with the knowledge and experience. What I'm saying is, the ratio to do a good job with the kids should be, to have an experience coach supervising four parents coaches who intern are working with four groups of 6 children. By doing it this way, the parents can turn to the coach at any time and ask for advise, the coach can also identify the talent and take the necessary route to keep improving that talent.

Obviously that coach would have to get pay, but that is when the ego of some parent coaches comes into play. Some of these people believe they can do the same or some times even better job than somebody who has experience in the sport, simply because they think soccer is just a recreational sport or they are using it for their kids to keep in shape for the hockey season, etc. That's where the root of the problem is and for that I blame the provincial associations, they don't really care about growing the sport to a professional level in Canada, they only care about making as much money as possible and above all keeping their lazy office jobs with a secure pay year after year.

[Guest Ed]

^ One coach every 6 players at U6 (3 vs 3 games), one coach every 8 players U-8 (4 vs 4 games) and the ratio gets smaller as roster sizes grow.

I would suggest you get involved in youth soccer and get a reality check. There are not enough people with experience in the sport to fill the positions you are demanding. Period. Our club has a paid technical director who does 'coach the coach' clinics, but he is spread thin as he also oversees all the elite teams (and our association has fantastic elite teams - two national winners). There is no practical way a 'super coach' can be made available to multiple groups of 4 parent coaches at practices / games.

As to your lead-in concerning little Johnny or Jenny who are recognized as having great potential, they can be accommodated at the 'elite' level, but at a cost, as they typically make up the academy kids who get (at above and beyond normal league fees) extra training from professionals.

[Guest Jeffery S.]

Responding to a few people:

Eric, talent is not identified at 6 or 7 anywhere. You will find that if a major club has a team of that age, they may win, but I doubt one of a hundred of those kids will make pro. It is too early, simple as that.

Now it does seem that 10-12 is a more reasonable age and more reliable age to identify future talent at. Especially when it comes to basic ball skills (not scoring punch, or central defender skills, those have to appear later). But it is also uncertain as you cannot judge a kid just because he has grown into a more mature body at 12 and can dominate that way, beside guys who are still pre-teen physically.

Coaches: there is demand, but maybe a lack of creativity finding coaches for kids.

Parents can coach, and some are okay. They have their kid on the team, and that could be a problem, there may be favoritism. They are responsible for other parents' kids, and that could be another.

I prefer to see late teens playing rep, summer camp counsellor age, doing the coaching, and for pay. A first year university soccer player picking up some extra parttime income. A little, but something. Guys and gals studying physical education, that sort of thing, with a grounding in some basic necessities (preventing injuries, proper group management, understanding the rules, what to do in case of a problem). Why is it so hard to give 17 year olds work coaching younger kids, I was asked to coach at that age by a father who had coached a friend of mine, did it with another friend and player. And we did it for free, and were okay. But that was the 70s, in our day and age things cost money, and quite rightly too.

I think most parents understand that if they want their kids properly taught something it costs something as well. Not a lot, but something.

I agree with Ed that some of those ratios bantered about are ridiculous. A single coach can coach a dozen 6 year olds, or even 15. In pairs that is half the work. In threesomes, a third of the work. Two teams, sit back and correct them individually. Sure, some may wander about in a daze, the odd one will drift. You let him be. One friend who came to train with my son at age 6 was clueless, unable to concentrate, immature even for grade one, but within two years was playing with Espanyol (now no longer, though in a school of a third team team, Badalona). Match the kids by basic skill level to not bore the ones that CAN do things. If a kid is a dud or uninterested rotate the others with him to not exasperate them, or do some drills with him yourself. Some may come around.

Finally, getting back to the skills taught. Aren't people being a bit dogmatic? Or trying to be too damn smartass? Let's not reinvent the wheel.

In principle you can teach a kid at 6-8 pretty well everything, maybe not in great quantity, but pretty well everything. Not all will get it, but others will. This idea that we have to make rules about what kids can and cannot do is simply not pedagogically sound, they learn languages, they can draw pictures okay with practice, they play music. They pick up arithmetic. Anything can be taught, but like in all learning, one thing is built on the next.

But passing, controls, dribbles, both feet, heading, tackling, some defending principles, even basic goalkeeping skills, all can be taught if you know what you are doing. Heads up can be taught. Sportsmanship of course. There is no reason to make up arbitrary rules, especially prohibitions, and coach dogmatically or in a freaky way.

Be normal. It is soccer. Be natural. It is not complicated. You play with your feet mostly, on a team. So teach foot skills and team skills. That is what soccer is from day one to pro.

[canadianfoot]

The day I see kids stop playing football on the street to move when a car comes, instead of playing hockey I know we will have achieved success. Until then cheers to ALL parents that try to juggle parenthood, job & coaching. I have 2, 1year olds and as soon as they start walking without falling for longer than 10seconds dad is gonna show them how to play football.

We talk about coaching kids in the tread but was has the CSA done to improve the curriculum itself in regards to licensing? The last major improvement was when Holger Osieck(by the was after Urawa where is he now?) was coach, right? Now the people that actually teach the licensing courses(B & A),how qualified are they? And what are they doing to improve?

Are we(CSA) actually well prepared to have good coaches? Without an actual league(USL/MLS type) & more teams playing at higher levels?

PS: I have mentioned in other treads my brother in-law coaches kids in Japan & if I remember well I saw kids (4-5yrs old) kicking around like crazy in 2x5min matches. It was chaotic since they all run for the ball but still, amazing to see

[Niagara Hammer]

Very good discussion.

I am now a 'Senior Community Coach'. I have coached house league and managed 1 year of a U9 team in NYSL (Niagara). I have never played an organized game of soccer. I only started to watch it with my son 4 years ago (age 5 ) when he started to play. I love it. I am an experienced coach with young adults and teens. Not with young children. I have found that if you are enthusiastic, that can rub off.

all three of my courses were taught by the same man. He is a retired teacher and has a few national Caps to boot. I would love to half as fit as he is when I'm 60. The Community course is just that to coach in the community. Senior Level is a prerequisite for coaching at the South Region (level 4 OSA). It was informative for me. I learned quite a bit about drills that can be used to influence the kids. I would recommend it.

In my club, house league, any parent willing to coach is given a team. We are currently setting up our U8 house league we have enough kids (160+) for 12 or 14 teams but we have only enough volunteers for 11 teams. This week we will be twisting the arms of many parents. If we had more parent volunteers than maybe we could get picky and select the best candidates.

Short version

Community coaching system is not perfect. The depth of soccer involvement is lacking. We may need a generation to fix the depth issue. Than maybe we can fix the community coaching issues.