I’m coaching my son’s u12 team. 8 v 8, we have 11 players on the roster.
Like every rec. team, we have a few players who are not the best athletes. Can’t run fast, can’t kick the ball correctly, or well, most of the time, don’t really understand the game but try hard for the most part.
Last week we played the #1 (and unbeaten) team in our league. We lost 2-1. The kids played a great game but just could not get the ball on target. In fact, we spent ~20m of the 1st 30m half in their end of the field. Our defense really controlled the game, stole the ball and distributed it to our midfield very well for most of the game.
One of the parents wanted to know why I don’t put the weak players on defense and allow the skilled players up front so we can score more? I said “because I put them where they can do the least damage”. I can promise the game would have been 7-1 (at best) if either of those two players had been playing defense for even part of the game. Even in drills in practice they don’t handle it well, don’t recover, and don’t know what to do with the ball when they do get it. Why give the other team more chances to score? I’d rather lose possession at their end of the field than give the other team a free 1 v 1 on our goalie. We were not going to win a shoot out. He pointed out “7-1 or 2-1 is still a loss…why not try to score more? Uhm….if it was 6-1 we have NO chance to win at the end, at 2-1, the game is still in doubt and one shot and it’s tied one more and we’re ahead.
My team plays 3-3-1. My strongest/faster and smartest players are on defense, the most skilled and fast play mid field and the weakest go up front. That has always been how I position players and I would recon that my teams (again, this is rec.) have won more than lost in the last 10-seasons. The parent then went on to point out that last fall (another parent coached the team as my son was playing football) they switched to putting those two kids on defense and they started scoring more goals. Let’s see, the team finished 2-6-1 last fall in the same league against basically the same teams. We are 5-2 right now (and should finish 6-2) and in the fall 2010/spring 2011 with mostly the same players the team was 14-3-1 when I was coach.
I asked him if he’d rather give our weak players 5-shots random chances on goal, or the other team five 1 v 1 against our weak player in the penalty box? He said “who’s playing goalie for us?”…..so then I realized he was just being stubborn. I understand his point, you do have to score to win, but with a rec. team that has glaring weaknesses in the line-up, I rely on the mid-field to create opportunities and score and let the defense control the middle of the field and dictate what the other team can/cannot do and put that glaring weakness where he can do no harm. That goes completely out the window if my defense cannot control the game because that weak player is getting beat all the time.
NOTE: The opposing team we lost to above 2-1 is averaging about 7+ goals a game. My team is averaging 4 per game.
Final NOTE: If that weak player does manage to score a goal, it's going to make his day. No one remembers playing great defense, you remember that time you scored that awesome goal. If I can help this kid find that kind of success, then I feel I've done something right.
Like every rec. team, we have a few players who are not the best athletes. Can’t run fast, can’t kick the ball correctly, or well, most of the time, don’t really understand the game but try hard for the most part.
Last week we played the #1 (and unbeaten) team in our league. We lost 2-1. The kids played a great game but just could not get the ball on target. In fact, we spent ~20m of the 1st 30m half in their end of the field. Our defense really controlled the game, stole the ball and distributed it to our midfield very well for most of the game.
One of the parents wanted to know why I don’t put the weak players on defense and allow the skilled players up front so we can score more? I said “because I put them where they can do the least damage”. I can promise the game would have been 7-1 (at best) if either of those two players had been playing defense for even part of the game. Even in drills in practice they don’t handle it well, don’t recover, and don’t know what to do with the ball when they do get it. Why give the other team more chances to score? I’d rather lose possession at their end of the field than give the other team a free 1 v 1 on our goalie. We were not going to win a shoot out. He pointed out “7-1 or 2-1 is still a loss…why not try to score more? Uhm….if it was 6-1 we have NO chance to win at the end, at 2-1, the game is still in doubt and one shot and it’s tied one more and we’re ahead.
My team plays 3-3-1. My strongest/faster and smartest players are on defense, the most skilled and fast play mid field and the weakest go up front. That has always been how I position players and I would recon that my teams (again, this is rec.) have won more than lost in the last 10-seasons. The parent then went on to point out that last fall (another parent coached the team as my son was playing football) they switched to putting those two kids on defense and they started scoring more goals. Let’s see, the team finished 2-6-1 last fall in the same league against basically the same teams. We are 5-2 right now (and should finish 6-2) and in the fall 2010/spring 2011 with mostly the same players the team was 14-3-1 when I was coach.
I asked him if he’d rather give our weak players 5-shots random chances on goal, or the other team five 1 v 1 against our weak player in the penalty box? He said “who’s playing goalie for us?”…..so then I realized he was just being stubborn. I understand his point, you do have to score to win, but with a rec. team that has glaring weaknesses in the line-up, I rely on the mid-field to create opportunities and score and let the defense control the middle of the field and dictate what the other team can/cannot do and put that glaring weakness where he can do no harm. That goes completely out the window if my defense cannot control the game because that weak player is getting beat all the time.
NOTE: The opposing team we lost to above 2-1 is averaging about 7+ goals a game. My team is averaging 4 per game.
Final NOTE: If that weak player does manage to score a goal, it's going to make his day. No one remembers playing great defense, you remember that time you scored that awesome goal. If I can help this kid find that kind of success, then I feel I've done something right.
