In another post, Keith directed the following statement at me:
For your information, unlike you, I discovered the truth from those who have gone before me. My interpretations of that truth are what make me a different coach to everyone else (and they from me) but I do not waver from the established principles that are self evidently true. It is these self evident principles that bind us as coaching brothers. That is why you are on the outer.
I consider that statement to be very powerful, and a sincere formulation of Keith's viewpoint. It also contains some very important issues that, if Keith doesn't mind, we might discuss. If you do mind, Keith, I'll be glad to start this post over with no discussion of the dialogue between us.
What I'm interested in here, though, is what might be called a "meta" issue. It's an issue that transcends all the other issues which we discuss here. I think it also helps explain the conflicts I have with people here.
Sometimes, it seems as if there is only one accepted model for the sport of soccer: how it should be played, and how it should be coached. I seem to believe in a different model. Similar in many ways (particularly in the desired ends), but definitely different in other ways (particularly in the means to those ends). Are there other models out there anywhere, or am I the only deviant? I don't know.
So, the question is this. Are viewpoints that stem from other models welcome here? Or is this website essentially the domain of that "band of brothers" who believe in the same "self evidently true" principles and methods? In other words, is diversity a value at this website, or not?
If diversity isn't a value, and constantly having to suppress an alternative model is a bother, I welcome some official word on this and I'll be glad to leave. If diversity is a value, and the presence of contrasting models is viewed as something useful to new coaches, I'm very interested in contributing where I can. However, personal attacks should then be understood simply as attempts to maintain a boundary around the "band of brothers."
All you think you know is the way we do it here in the US.
Then you come up with something and it's the best thing ever.
Take some vacation time go to Germany then go to Argentina and see how they really do things. About 4 months in each place.
Then compare what they do to what you thought up and see which is better after you actually been around the soccer world.
Just do soccer reshearch don't drink beer and don't learn the tango just soccer.Take the family it is a good experience for them they can dronk beer and learn the tango.
We have always had a great deal of diversity on our forums. My background is much different than say JimN, and we certainly approach soccer from two totally different angles, but there is what I would consider a mutual respect because we can both explain our ideas and, more importantly, have enough background in the sport to be able to answer direct questions about them. This has been pointed out to you probably 100 times Russ... so quit fishing for anything that will put you in the spotlight for awhile longer. Shut up for awhile and open your ears and your mind and maybe, just maybe, you might learn something! But I'm not holding my breath.
Take some vacation time go to The Moon then go to Uranus and see how they really do things. About 4 months in each place.
Just do soccer reshearch don't drink beer shouldn't that be reshearsh? hic! and don't learn the tango just soccer.Take the family it is a good experience for them they can dronk beer and learn the tango.
Ray, can't you just take out a contract on him?
Of course, compared to Russ... you and I Willie are starting to look like twins
As long as we aren't identical twins because you are an ugly american
Hey!!! I resemble that remark!!!
As I've posted in the past and as you've probably noticed, I like the forum members to be the moderators. I feel any censuring and/or moderation from me would only restrict the flow of information. Two great examples are the recent advertisement threads. I didn't delete or close the threads and the members let it be known they don't appreciate one-time advertisers. The problem was solved without any intervention by me. I have deleted or closed two or three threads in the past three years as they were very extreme cases involving profanity or ethnicity issues.
Therefore, I'm not going to get involved between you and some of the others. If I do get involved it would purely be from a poster standpoint as I have in the past. I believe this is the best way to encourage a diversity of views. I will not post any guidelines regarding diversity or similar topics.
I thought KtK was a little harsh to you in the thread regarding supporting the ball. However, you, as someone who has taken coaching courses, should have known that conditional-decision making games would not be looked at favorably by most course instructors. Your advice was going to hurt the poster's chances of passing the course and I have to believe you knew that. IMO that is one reason KtK responded in the way he did.
Okay, Greg, thank you for clarifying. I'll continue to express my views on things with that in mind, and deal with the responses. I agree that moderating things, or establishing ground rules of some kind, would be difficult if not impossible.
Since I passed my D course using the scrimmage in question, I was sincere in making that a suggestion. It's wonderful for working on support. However, if that's not what the instructors are looking for, I'm glad to bow out. When one poster tells another to "Pxxs off!" however, isn't that going a bit far? Or is that acceptable here at the forum?
I said it was a "little harsh" and I am not going to take any further action for the reasons stated above.
Interesting about the D license. Did the instructor comment favorably regarding the restriction? I could see you passing because you would still be able to make good coaching points. What about your C instructors? Did they make comments regarding conditional decisions?
That's a good question, Greg, and I want to try to process it honestly. I'm always glad to do that, even if it might cast me in a negative light. It's an interesting story, hopefully, because it shows Thoughtful Soccer bumping into the established model.
During the test for my D course, the instructor, Graham Ramsey, sat up on a hill rather far away. He does this intentionally, I think, because a good session should be obvious from far away. I can't speak for Graham, of course, and I have the utmost respect for him. That's just my honest recollection.
So, it's quite possible that he didn't even realize the restriction I used to get my players using support! He saw the overall process, and the final outcome. This was my first coaching course, and I'll always be grateful to Graham for teaching me about coachable moments. I don't recall if we had to use a progression at that time; this was the mid 90's. I was working with a team of youth players, U-12 or so, that showed up for our demos. I set up a little scrimmage field, and let them have a go at it. Of course, everything was straight to goal, no use of support, bunch ball. Then, I imposed my little conditions. Before scoring, a team must use at least one drop pass. Also, players were restricted to three or fewer touches. Now, all sorts of coachable moments start popping up. A drop pass is made, but the player receiving it is too close or not at the correct angle. So, I freeze the action, and walk through a correction. Or, a player has the ball and forces it forward for a turnover because no teammates moved behind in a supporting position. After a while, some positives start happening. So, I freeze the action and walk through the moment of brilliance for all to see. By the end of this fifteen minute segment, the players are knocking the ball around effectively, supporting each other, communicating, and so on. Afterwards, Graham had some kind words for me. That's between him and I, but it's the kind of encouragement coaches need from time to time.
Did Graham realize a conditioned scrimmage had been involved? I'll probably never know. Had he known, would he have felt as favorable, or would he even have passed me? Maybe he would have nipped all this Thoughtful Soccer stuff at the bud. I'm just going to be thankful for distant hills.
Flash forward to my C course, and it's time for the oral exams. I had been told: "There's nothing you can study for. Just give your honest opinions on things." One of my questions was, "How would you coach the topic of width?" And here, I'm fairly sure that my belief in conditioned scrimmages helped in my downfall. Being perhaps the weakest player didn't help either. I'd used the Side to Side scrimmage as a stable of my practices for some time. Before scoring, a team must move the ball to each sideline (touch line). I knew that, using this scrimmage, I could successfully get a team to use width effectively. Just as I had used Three and a Drop to get a team to use support effectively in 15 minutes for Graham. So, I included that in my answer.
The difference? At my C course, the instructor wasn't sitting up on a hill! Keep in mind that, at this point, I would have done anything, said anything, to pass that particular course. I was not there to push my own ideas, or argue. I naively believed I should just say what I really believed in an oral exam.
I think it points out the difference between ends, and means to those ends. There is more than one way to skin a cat. If you don't like the coaching method someone else uses, try observing from up on a hill. Check out the final result. Check out the kind of soccer it leads to. Maybe the differences aren't as significant as the commonalities.
Returning to your diversity thoughts, please consider the following:
1. Are all ideas equal?
2. If some ideas are superior, then what value is there in diversity simply for the sale of diversity? Should we not accede to the superior ideas?
3. If all ideas are equal, then what value is there is diversity, for any idea is as valid as any other?
It would seem that diversity, as a value, is worthless.
What matter is the strength of the idea. For an idea, new or old, to have strength, it must be able to withstand challenge. Your ideas have failed to withstand challenge; you cannot answer basic questions that would lend credence to your thoughts.
By raising spurious issues such as this you invite ridicule. Your arguments, such as they are, do not address the issues. You often seek justifications for your ideas that are irrelevant and unsupported, such as suggesting a value in diversity.
Another example is to allege that a "Band of Brothers" is aligned against you. Rather than consider that ALL who confronted your ideas rejected then as specious, you prefer to see some coven arrayed just against Russ. That smacks of paranoia and an unwillingness to rationally analyze the arguments confronting you and respond with an intellectually valid argument in kind.
You thoughts on all being in lock step are absurd. Anyone who reads this forum for any period will see that CB and I differ on the utility of formations, that Keith and I differ on what is appropriate at particular ages, that at various times we have all disagreed. The difference between us and you Russ, is that Keith, CB, Willie, Tom, Jim, scoachd, BobC, CoachKev and myself, to name a few offer reasoned arguments for our positions. You do not. This forum is rich in diverse and well argued opinions. It is interesting that all of these diverse people, with differing points of view find your ideas so flawed.
Finally, your many posts evidence a fundamental lack of understanding and having undertaken basic research into the game. You have failed in the past to understand or even have knowledge of its Laws, vocabulary and principles. This lack of understanding causes you to reinvent some of the simplest concepts and drills applying those concepts. It also results in you failing to understand what others learned long ago and from you benefiting from that knowledge.
What is perhaps truly ironic is that Russ you do not want diversity. You want others to accept your ideas while you reject theirs.
Until you learn the game and understand it you will fail to attract any adherents. You will be seen as a pariah, as you were on the issue of support.
Score another victory for Russ!!! He got all of you to bite once again. Congrats Russ on the continued success of your social experiement! You are indeed a popular guy!
Admit it CB, what ever Russ' motives, and I think they are varied and as fuzzy as the thoughts he expresses here, it is fun to to write back with righteous indignation. Anyway, isn't this supposed to be about what is fun?
I know. As long as you are viewing it as entertainment. I'm just not sure we should keep this going forever. Russ is not gaining anything from it besides continuous attention (no I'm not jealous), you are not learning anything from Russ, and Russ is not learning anything from you. And it appears Russ now wants to get Greg involved to help him out against the, what did he call it, gang of something? Anyway, I think you are being used AFB and really don't understand how many years of this you are going to waste your talents on.
Being used is not a concern. If I am and I enjoy it, what difference does it make? I think too many of us are too concerned about others' motives. It is my decision to participate and I make my decisions based on my time and interests at the moment.
Paradoxically, if it is control by others that is an issue we become far more susceptible to outside control when we seek to avoid such control. It is then that reverse psychology can become potent.
Better to look at your options and chose what interests you. For now topics such as this are stimulating and cathartic. When they are no longer rewarding I will find something else to do.
Took time out from reading Mexican poetry to respond to this post.
Russ it may be you against the world you sure seem to think so, KtK puts it very well as does Mr. Soccer. You have only seen the world of US youth soccer, exposed to only USSF teaching methodology and understand little of the cultures that the rest of the world bring to the game.
Many years ago in a book by Tony Waiters a personal friend of KtK's there was a quote that there are many ways up the mountain. This is advise any coach should heed. Many great minds have gone before all of us I have spent 35 years working with youth players and my methods changed along the way as I gained more experience, additional knowledge and the type of athletes I coached. I disagree with many US trained coaches not because I think they are wrong in their belief just that I believe there is a huge need to create a path to the professional game and that takes a different approach. There are as KTK reflects certain standards that apply universally to the game they have stood the test of time and are the foundation of the game. That said there is a huge variety of opinions and cultural influences that make this the great game of the world. Spend more time learning about your neighbors culture and you will better understand the game and will become a much better coach and person.
I didnt bite CB, because I respect greg and the honest way he allows free debate (within reason) which is the basis for ALL transference of knowledge (good AND bad).
Also, I DONT want to be likened to a balding ugly Scot who coaches sheep in his spare time (oooooooh I just COULD not resist that one -sorry willie :lol.
However, Russ IS getting TOO much forum space so I will let his 'dated' opinions fade away as they should.....
I didnt bite CB. So the big question is, If you didn't bite CB then who did?
Kev, I think you are confusing me with my identical twin sister CB
Supported videos include: