'At U-16s, winning becomes part of it'

Here's the quote from Brian Bliss. (former U.S. World Cup player, the MLS club’s Technical Director, assistant coach of the U.S. U-20 national team, coach of U10 national champions)

"But we also say once we get to U-16s, at our club, winning has to be part of something. We just can’t be developing players for the sake of developing players. We’ve got to be able to learn how to win and develop players at the same time. That’s the juggle."

Your coach may be smarter, but probably not! Link below for those inclined

http://www.socceramerica.com/article/47575/brian-bliss-at-u-16s-winning-becomes-part-of-it.html[/url]

Interesting view, however the challenge is the business model ($) on the girls side. The clubs revenue streams are driven by winning at all ages. There is no revenue stream or reward for developing players.

SA: What can be done at the youth level to get American soccer to a higher level?

BRIAN BLISS: You hate to compliment them, but look at what Mexico’s got going on over there. They probably have half the resources that we do on the youth side but they’ve got it going. Whether it’s identifying players who are more technically gifted and then running with that -- as opposed to running with the more physical guys who are more mature in terms of their body at an early age for the sake of winning. We need to get away from that a little bit. I know it’s painful because youth clubs are in existence to win things in order to drive more revenue by kids signing up.

That’s unfortunate. But maybe we’ve got to get to a system where there are no more trophies, there are no more awards at the younger ages. Because that may be pointing us in the wrong direction at times.

Lefty wrote:Interesting view, however the challenge is the business model ($) on the girls side. The clubs revenue streams are driven by winning at all ages. There is no revenue stream or reward for developing players.

SA: What can be done at the youth level to get American soccer to a higher level?

BRIAN BLISS: You hate to compliment them, but look at what Mexico’s got going on over there. They probably have half the resources that we do on the youth side but they’ve got it going. Whether it’s identifying players who are more technically gifted and then running with that -- as opposed to running with the more physical guys who are more mature in terms of their body at an early age for the sake of winning. We need to get away from that a little bit. I know it’s painful because youth clubs are in existence to win things in order to drive more revenue by kids signing up.

That’s unfortunate. But maybe we’ve got to get to a system where there are no more trophies, there are no more awards at the younger ages. Because that may be pointing us in the wrong direction at times.

The problem with this line of thinking is that Mr. Bliss is assuming the entire purpose of youth soccer is to take 2 millions kids and give him the two dozen a year he needs to win at the national level.

Most of us don’t expect our kids to play in World Cup. Youth soccer is a chance to have fun with friends, stay healthy, stay busy, and LEARN life lessons of hard work = payoff and healthy competition and with a little luck, play in college.

The VAST majority of kids will quit playing organized sports regularly at some point between U16-U20, and if the entire purpose of their youth sports life was to train for the National Team then the VAST majority of money and resources spent is a complete waste.

The super-freak-super- star- super-talent kids will find their way to the national level, and the rest of the kids will still learn about hard work and healthy competition. The kids who truly love soccer will stay with it and those who don’t wont.

Learning that hard work can bring wins and that sometimes you lose anyway at age 7-10 is a GOOD thing. Learning to handle wins and losses with good sportsmanship is a GOOD thing.

Taking trophies, awards, and the concept of winning away until U16 is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. That is unless you think the whole purpose of youth soccer is to win the World Cup for the USA…

Bliss didn't say to take away the concept of winning and losing.

[quote="Lefty"]Interesting view, however the challenge is the business model ($) on the girls side. The clubs revenue streams are driven by winning at all ages. There is no revenue stream or reward for developing players.

Actually the business model is what the parents pay the clubs. Unfortunately thats usually driven by the wins

Lefty wrote:running with the more physical guys who are more mature in terms of their body at an early age for the sake of winning.

What is he talking about? That never happens in NTX soccer.

The problem with this line of thinking is that Mr. Bliss is assuming the entire purpose of youth soccer is to take 2 millions kids and give him the two dozen a year he needs to win at the national level.

Most of us don’t expect our kids to play in World Cup. Youth soccer is a chance to have fun with friends, stay healthy, stay busy, and LEARN life lessons of hard work = payoff and healthy competition and with a little luck, play in college.

The VAST majority of kids will quit playing organized sports regularly at some point between U16-U20, and if the entire purpose of their youth sports life was to train for the National Team then the VAST majority of money and resources spent is a complete waste.

The super-freak-super- star- super-talent kids will find their way to the national level, and the rest of the kids will still learn about hard work and healthy competition. The kids who truly love soccer will stay with it and those who don’t wont.

Learning that hard work can bring wins and that sometimes you lose anyway at age 7-10 is a GOOD thing. Learning to handle wins and losses with good sportsmanship is a GOOD thing.

Taking trophies, awards, and the concept of winning away until U16 is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. That is unless you think the whole purpose of youth soccer is to win the World Cup for the USA…
[/quote]

The purpose of youth soccer is to have fun learning to play a sport. The problem with your thinking is that the super freak athletes will not be able to play at a world class level without the development in the youth years. Nothing wrong with wins and losses, the problem become when that is the focus. Coaches coach just for wins, kids play not for enjoyment but because they win, Parents show up and chase top teams so they can win and in the process nobody learns how to play. Kids drop out because the game is no longer fun.

But I find it interesting that the win now because you won't be playing later mentality never get applied outside of sports. I'll expand it for you. Why do we spend so much time preparing kids for college? Most kids in the US will not go to college. Half of those that do go will fail to finish college. So a majority of our educational money is wasted.

Sweeper wrote:

Lefty wrote:running with the more physical guys who are more mature in terms of their body at an early age for the sake of winning.

What is he talking about? That never happens in NTX soccer.

This happens in every sport in every country (See: Outliers).

go99 wrote:The purpose of youth soccer is to have fun learning to play a sport. The problem with your thinking is that the super freak athletes will not be able to play at a world class level without the development in the youth years. Nothing wrong with wins and losses, the problem become when that is the focus. Coaches coach just for wins, kids play not for enjoyment but because they win, Parents show up and chase top teams so they can win and in the process nobody learns how to play. Kids drop out because the game is no longer fun.

But I find it interesting that the win now because you won't be playing later mentality never get applied outside of sports. I'll expand it for you. Why do we spend so much time preparing kids for college? Most kids in the US will not go to college. Half of those that do go will fail to finish college. So a majority of our educational money is wasted..

Well look... the education system in the USA is a mess for many reasons. That being said, CLEARLY a higher percentage of those being educated will use skills learned there to get a job or go to college than youth academy players will play at the national level... it's not even a close analogy.

Again, the purpose for most of us having kids in competition is NOT for them to play at the pro/national level. If they have the stuff great, if not... all is not lost. They still had fun, made friends, learned life lessons, and hopefully learned sportsmanship and character.

Taking awards away will in my opinion LESSON the benefits of these REAL reasons the kids are playing. Guess what, kids want to win and they want to win awards…. If not in Soccer they will go somewhere where they can do these things.

Furthermore, I think if the system is broken anywhere in the US for the national levels, it’s in the bureaucracies, scouting, and coaching levels not the talent. The USA is CLEARLY turning out more talented/skilled soccer players than ever before and this is ONLY increasing in the next 10 years as the level of popularity has risen sharply for our kids and driven more and better athletes into the sport.

The academy scene has changes DRASTICALLY here in north Texas just in the past 3-5 years and overall you have kids playing U8 and U9 at higher levels than they were 5 years ago. It will take another 5-10 years for these kids to trickle into the national level. Let’s hope the other components of the US Soccer system don’t let them down.

All this “too much winning focus” and “no awards” is just nonsense.

sctually the analogy is closer than you think which is why contries like Germany or Japan will split kids off at the highschool level so they can get more practical knowledge that they can actually use in the workforce instead of the theoretical knowledge for school. But you are already off to the wrong start. Kids should not be in soccer for "us" they should be in it for themselves. Learn to enjoy and work really hard to be good at something is a life lesson. Nothing at all wrong with trophies and winning but if that is the point just pick the right team and you will get all the winning you desire. And my DD has a stack of useless medals and trophies that the day after she could have cared less about. She plays to have fun, in the games, with brother, at school, doesn't matter to her she just wants to play.

go99 wrote:sctually the analogy is closer than you think which is why contries like Germany or Japan will split kids off at the highschool level so they can get more practical knowledge that they can actually use in the workforce instead of the theoretical knowledge for school. But you are already off to the wrong start. Kids should not be in soccer for "us" they should be in it for themselves. Learn to enjoy and work really hard to be good at something is a life lesson. Nothing at all wrong with trophies and winning but if that is the point just pick the right team and you will get all the winning you desire. And my DD has a stack of useless medals and trophies that the day after she could have cared less about. She plays to have fun, in the games, with brother, at school, doesn't matter to her she just wants to play.

At no point did I say they play for "us"... You are making my case... they play for life lessons and to have fun. Winning, when kept in perspective, is a healthy part of that process.

Obviously in evaluating the progress of your kids, the score is NOT the only factor. If you can play a game and possess the ball 60+% and do the things you work on and yet you still lose by a goal or 2… big deal. You can view progress without a win… but overall… if your team is not winning at all you are either at the wrong level of competition or you are not developing well.
So really there are two extremes… 1)all about winning and trophies and 2) no winning and no trophies.

Both extremes are counterproductive to development of the player.

it's impossible to take competition out. Kids are not stupid they know when they won or lost. Competition is not something that has to be added and cannot be taken away. Seems the problem here is that we have gone too far towards the winning extreme. Where coaches do sacrifice possesion, they do tell the kids what to do and sacrifice play for wins. Parents often bounce from teams not for better coaching but in search of more wins.

This conversation took place on the boys side a few years back. The argument being why develope we just want to win now and won't be playing later anyway. Then US soccer came up with a different solution. They left CL alone and came up with the Acdemy league (ECNL) as a developmental league. Which of course didn't go over well with the win now crowd.

go99 wrote:it's impossible to take competition out. Kids are not stupid they know when they won or lost. Competition is not something that has to be added and cannot be taken away. Seems the problem here is that we have gone too far towards the winning extreme. Where coaches do sacrifice possesion, they do tell the kids what to do and sacrifice play for wins. Parents often bounce from teams not for better coaching but in search of more wins.

This conversation took place on the boys side a few years back. The argument being why develope we just want to win now and won't be playing later anyway. Then US soccer came up with a different solution. They left CL alone and came up with the Acdemy league (ECNL) as a developmental league. Which of course didn't go over well with the win now crowd.

Sure there are coaches likes that but that's not going to change. You can't change the coaches/parents who are too ignorant of the sport to tell the different between kickball wins and possession wins.

That being said, nothing wrong with coaching tactics in a tournament to get a win as Kennington did over RASE in the "03/04" game a couple of months ago. If an opposing team is better skilled and more athletic as a team, there is nothing wrong with teaching the kids that there are certain strategic adjustments that can be made to protect the goal. This is also a valuable lesson learned.

Did Kennington “coach” to win? Maybe… did he do so at the expense of a learning opportunity… no. In fact, the girls might have learned something about tactics in that game.

Now you can argue whether or not you think Kennington is a good developer or recruiter and for that matter you can argue that with RASE as well. My point is these are both talented teams with good players and probably playing better ball than most girls at the top level 5 years ago.

go99 wrote:Here's the quote from Brian Bliss. (former U.S. World Cup player, the MLS club’s Technical Director, assistant coach of the U.S. U-20 national team, coach of U10 national champions)

"But we also say once we get to U-16s, at our club, winning has to be part of something. We just can’t be developing players for the sake of developing players. We’ve got to be able to learn how to win and develop players at the same time. That’s the juggle."

Your coach may be smarter, but probably not! Link below for those inclined

http://www.socceramerica.com/article/47575/brian-bliss-at-u-16s-winning-becomes-part-of-it.html[/url]

This article makes little sense when applied to the state of womens soccer in America. The US currently has the #1 ranked Womens Soccer program in the world. They are on the way to winning another Gold medal and doing just fine. If it ain't' broke, don't try and fix it.

As for the men, that is another story.

according to the womens national team coach the time to fix the problems on the womens side is before they lose the number 1 spot. She believes that the time where they can just be more athletic than the other countries is coming to an end.

go99 wrote:according to the womens national team coach the time to fix the problems on the womens side is before they lose the number 1 spot. She believes that the time where they can just be more athletic than the other countries is coming to an end.

Well really, what does she know. She might not want to tell Abby Wambach about her plans, as Abby is perhaps the biggest and strongest player in all of womens soccer.

The US ascended to the number 1 spot based upon its speed, size, strength and power. Until someone can match that, why not keep perfecting it? They lost on PK's in the finals of the World Cup, but that is no reason to scrap the system. I anticiapte they will win the Olympics Gold and dominate again using the US style of soccer.

By the way, I realize I am going upstream against every known soccer advocate and commentator, but I say the proof is on the field. I think the mens game is fundamentally different than the womens game in this regard.

But, I do not get paid to coach anyone.

but they lost to a team half their size and none of their athletic ability and struggled with a Brazil team that does very little team practice or preparation. BTW Brazil is currently dealing with the argument that they may have to spend some time an effort on their womans national team. The time were they can just show up and win games is also coming to an end. Hopefully we don't do an England and wait until it's too late before we start to change things

go99 wrote:but they lost to a team half their size and none of their athletic ability and struggled with a Brazil team that does very little team practice or preparation. BTW Brazil is currently dealing with the argument that they may have to spend some time an effort on their womans national team. The time were they can just show up and win games is also coming to an end. Hopefully we don't do an England and wait until it's too late before we start to change things

Due to increased soccer popularity, the pool of players will get both more athletic and grow in skill. The question will come down to how they are coached to play and tactics... not players.

Am I the only one who noticed the quick 2 goal scores on France when we quit trying to long ball it to the middle and played small ball?

Again... talent is there... it's tactics and coaching that is suspect IMO.

soccer is a players games unlike the tactical warfare that goes on in Football. You must have the development to make players. The US has more kids playing soccer (player pool) than the entire population of Netherlands yet we produce no worl class players while they send out a steady stream. The popularity of soccer is what will kill the womans side. As it becomes more popular for women other countries start to attract better athletes and when I have 2 equally athletic teams the one with the more skilled players wins.

go99 wrote:soccer is a players games unlike the tactical warfare that goes on in Football. You must have the development to make players. The US has more kids playing soccer (player pool) than the entire population of Netherlands yet we produce no worl class players while they send out a steady stream. The popularity of soccer is what will kill the womans side. As it becomes more popular for women other countries start to attract better athletes and when I have 2 equally athletic teams the one with the more skilled players wins.

Are you talking about the mens or womens game with regard to world class players? I would argue Abby Wambach and Mia Hamm are/were both world class womens players. I would also argue Alex Morgan, Rapinoe and Cheny will be world class players when it is all said and done.

sorry that was the men. Doesn't apply to the women because what it takes to be a world class womans soccer play is not at the level of the men's. The womans game is much younger so as the game develops what will be required to be world class will be much higher, The young girls today will be playing in a much different soccer enviorment