There is a pay disparity related strictly on gender within society. There is no way to sugarcoat it, deny it or justify it. There are many examples of women who do the exact same work, hold the exact same positions with the same responsibilities who make less than male counterparts. This is not a sport issue but a societal issue. However, when it comes to sport the gap would seem to be even bigger.
Ask individuals involved in sport ( in this case read men) and they will pull out a list of what they feel are viable explanations as to why investing in women's sport, being it for salaries or sport in general is justifiable. Gender inequality in football is more entrenched than in than many other areas such as business, politics, or various other professions according to salary surveys that compared the employment status and pay of thousands of male and female footballers worldwide. Among some of the shocking facts revealed was that the combined pay of those playing in the top seven women’s football leagues equals that of a single male footballer, the Brazilian forward Neymar, who plays for the French club Paris St-Germain. His salary is almost exactly the same as 1,693 female players in France, Germany, England, the US, Sweden, Australia and Mexico combined. Over the last year or so, we have seen more and more women's national teams in soccer predominantly but USA hockey also being a case on point, standing up and demanding equitable pay for their service to the national programs under the threat of boycott. The Danish national women's team actually skipped a world cup qualifying game vs Sweden in protest and while it may cost them a spot at the 2019 World Cup, they felt the short term pain was worth the risk over the longer term and in the name of equitable pay. There are some signs of change in attempts to address the gender pay gap. The Norway Football Association forged an agreement earlier this year between its male and female internationals to bring about parity. The agreement started when the men's team gave away a significant amount of their finances for commercial activities to their female counterparts. In essence, this contribution to the women's budget, basically doubled the funds available to them. So why is this important, why does it have such a significant impact for the country's national team? In countries like Norway, often, there might be really one club that can offer a fully professional environment. Other teams don’t or can't pay as much. So it’s hard for female players to be able to fully commit to soccer as a career because they either work to earn a decent living wage or might be students, trying to earn a degree that will get them that job. In Britain, one club, Lewes FC announced a similar initiative and now pays its women’s team the same as its men’s team, as well as dedicating similar resources to both. But these are relatively isolated cases, with the chasm in remuneration for male and female elite athletes widening every year.Some women do make a good living from sport but it is nothing compared to the salaries and compensation from endorsements available to the men who make it to the top of their profession. Lyon, the best paid women’s sports team in the world, pays average salaries to its players which is in the area of 15 to 20 times less than players at the majority of top clubs in the various domestic leagues. So imagine what players are making at other teams and leagues. The gender pay gap is often explained away by those who argue that men’s sport is so much more commercially successful than women’s sport. This is a flawed logic. In terms of compensation for players with their respective national teams, there are those who will use as justification that that people with higher base earnings will demand more money for their time than people with lower base earnings. That the pay isn't based on the skills or abilities of the athlete, nor a judgement on the level of the women's game but rather on providing an incentive for the men's players to want to represent their countries. So if we apply the logic to soccer, it would mean that top players who are playing for “club and country.” need a reason to play for their national teams. Club refers to their regular jobs, for teams in Major League Soccer, the English Premier League or the other leagues around the world where they are making great salaries and since the goal of a national team is to have the most talented also play for country, it has to be worth their time Since most earnings come from club salaries, with national teams paying less money, for fewer games, some of the men might not bother to show up for paltry pay, but the women are likely to be less particular—because their regular jobs pay so little. So in essence, since women can't make a living wage as professionals in their sport, it's ok to play them less since it's still "pretty good !" Seems a little flawed. Women's sport has significant commercial value and in my opinion a huge untapped market. Good sport is good sport, if it is marketed, if it appeals to people they will watch it. I had previously posted about the benefits of investing in women's sport. see link investing-in-womens-sports-a-smart-move.html If the investment if women's sport is increased and there continues to be a growth in women's sport, it becomes more mainstream, then the resources available will only increase and then, the gender pay gap will hopefully start to close. However, might it be a situation of chicken or the egg? In order to make women's sport more mainstream , more competitive, more interesting to watch, does this mean it would require for dedicated full time athletes for whom their sport is their career and more importantly their source of income? Ah, so many questions! Hopefully the trend we have seen in the last little while will continue.....
0 Comments
For anyone, starting university is a significant step in their lives and personal growth. I've always felt is a milestone in someone's transition from teenager adult. It can be a daunting and challenging experience for anyone as they try and figure out the field of study that will influence their future career choices. Add to this, perhaps moving away from home, living on their own and probably most significant, having to career the financial burden of paying for school. However, what happens if on top of all those factors, an individual isn't just a student but rather a student-athlete. Having the chance to play a sport in university is an exciting opportunity. But being a student-athlete can seem a bit overwhelming then individuals first arrive on campus for their freshman year. Not only do they have to adjust to a new environment with new responsibilities, but also have to add in being an athlete with new teammates as well. Regardless of the sport, as a varsity student-athlete, they are going to be very busy. A typical day may look something like this: wake up and eat breakfast before classes, go to classes, find time to eat lunch, go to afternoon practice, eat dinner before study hall, go to study hall, go back to the room for more homework/studying/ then go to bed. Social time or hanging out with friends is often at a premium. I actually had a former student-athlete tell me that they schedule themselves 30 minutes a day for a bath and even the occasional nap just to make sure they could enjoy them. Then the next day, it is wake up and do it all over again! If I use this winter's schedule, we train at 8.15 once a week some for those athletes who don't have class, it means getting up earlier than they might have and getting into the complex. During the season, they also have to account for games (including travel time to and from), team meetings, and time with the athletic trainer, if needed. Don't even get me started about those athletes who have to squeeze in part-time work or internships into the equation. The hardest part for many, is getting through all the challenges in the first year. Like many things, if you get through the initial part, establish a routine and most importantly do so successfully, the challenge seems less difficult and coping skills are developed. So, how does a 1st year student athlete get through that all important first year. Based on my 16 years coaching at the university level, these are some thoughts on it. One thing you that is important to figure out is how to balance academics, athletics, social activities, and other commitments. During the playing season, maintaining the balance will become more challenging, due to the demands on time. One of the biggest challenges faced is time management. This is a crucial skill that on a very positive note will serve the student-athletes well not just in university but long after their playing days are done.. At times it will seem that 24 hours aren’t enough time in the day to accomplish everything to get done. But with structure and organization, it is much easier to manage time effectively. Taking the play to document a planned schedule, will allow them to keep up with academic responsibilities, athletic commitments, work schedule (if applicable), and social life. Having structure and plan will help stay balanced and on top of things. Of course the most important factor all student-athletes need to remember is that if they are not doing well academically, they could lose their eligibility and ultimately a spot on the team. It might go without saying, but attending classes is the most important thing about being in university. It all starts there. If a student falls behind in the reading, doing the work etc, then they will find themselves in catch up mode. This is tough for anyone, but for a student-athlete with a demanding schedule, the time to put in extra required study time is difficult. Class is where you will acquire valuable information from professors that can't be obtained just from reading the course textbooks. This is particularly important because a student-athlete will inevitably miss some classes anyway due to games and traveling during the season. It also allows the student-athlete to make contact with other students who can provide support and help, a resource to share class notes, or a willing study partner. We encourage our student-athletes to make sure to talk to and stay in contact with their professors. It is much easier to request an exemption for an exam or extension on an assignment, if the professor knows the student-athlete and have been given a heads up in advance when they might have to miss class due to athletics. There are tools and resources available via universities and in most cases, university athletic departments will also have support services, such as tutoring, to help all students. However, there are also additional support services specifically in place for student-athletes. For example, some academic advisors work primarily with student-athletes and are accustomed to the specific challenges they face. These athletics specific services are there to assist with things such as selecting the appropriate courses and eligibility requirements.Tutoring centers, study halls, and priority class registration are additional resources for student-athletes. Some schools even have special dieticians and trainers on staff for student-athletes. However, it has always been my philosophy that it is up to student-athletes to advantage of them or at a minimum not be afraid to ask for help when they are feeling overwhelmed. Most importantly in my opinion, It is extremely important that student-athletes, take on the lifestyle and all that it encompasses when they choose to be a student-athlete. It starts by making sure to take care of themselves by eating right and getting plenty of rest, trying not to skip any meals and if at all possible, eat at least three a day. There will be days that it will seem difficult if not impossible to take the time to eat—and eat well—but it is crucial that they do so. If finding the time to sit down for a meal, then it is important to try snacking on fruits and vegetables until time is available. Food is the fuel needed to stay energized not just throughout the day but through your practices and games as well. Getting a full night’s sleep whenever possible is crucial With all of the running around required of student-athletes, rest while it comes at a premium sometimes serves both the recover the body but also as a mental break from all the obligations. Getting an adequate amount of sleep is not only necessary for performing in the classroom and on the playing field but also for simply being able to remain healthy. Most successful student-athletes would probably agree that although being a student and an athlete in university is not easy, it is definitely a rewarding experience that not many people get to have. It comes with many rewards and benefits but these are always going to be balanced with responsibilities. It will demand student-athletes make some tough decisions and certainly in the busiest of times, require them to put all social activity on hold. However, from experience, once they have gotten through it once, and seen the benefits of managing their time and energy properly, they can thrive. For soccer fans in Montreal, the Impact started their training camp last week and with a new coach, a few mainstay players having gone, all eyes on how the new coach will deploy his team. What formation, who will play where etc.
I thought about posting something fairly basic for new coaches about how to go about deciding which players or types of players might make the best fit for the different positions. For me, this is really where great coaches make their mark. Each coach might have different qualities that he or she seeks for specific positions but a really great coach can sometimes change a players position and the end result is that the players becomes even more effective and dangerous in the new role. Initially placing players in positions, in order to prepare for games, is when coaches start applying their “art” to soccer. There are many factors involved, including which formation to use, but often it comes down to how the coach feels about what combination of players will accomplish the best outcome. The decision on a formation may be based on the types and skill levels of the players, or it can simply be the system with which the coach is most comfortable. In either case, it comes down to knowing the abilities and the temperaments of the players themselves. At the most basic level, the coach is going to need goalkeepers, back defenders, midfielders, and forwards. Each of these positions carry with them a certain skill set. Goalkeepers need to first be good with their hands and should have a desire to play the position. Back defenders need to first know how to mark and track an opponent and how to get and stay “goal-side” (between the opponent and the goal). Midfielders need to first understand that they are needed on both offense and defense and should like to run. Forwards need to first demonstrate the ability to score and to have an attacking mind-set. Of course there are some situation and tactical considerations that coaches will take in consideration when planning out the team. Who do they defend a lead, chase a game when down, play direct or play possession, press high or sit back. Before making any decisions regarding positions, the coach should evaluate his players. This can be done informally, by simply watching how the players perform, or formally, by setting up a system of notes. Some of the tools available to coaches include: – Observe: make a point of looking specifically at each player individually – Test: set up drills to evaluate how well players can perform certain skills – Experiment: see which players interact better with others –Ask the players: talk with each player to see if they have a preference –Independent review: obtain the assistance of a knowledgeable outside observer –Scrimmage results: move players around during scrimmages –Awareness: determine if players understand the changes they need to make in their play when they are in different parts of the field –Success: monitor players’ achievement and enjoyment There are a number of classic generalizations which may be applied to placing players in positions. These are: Goalkeeper: tall, lanky, shows no fear, wants to play there, good eye-hand coordination, a leader, vocal (good communication); has ability to punt and/or throw. Years ago, coaches might tend to put the least mobile or athletic player in nets at a young age but in fact, it requires someone with a very special athletic ability. Defenders – understand “goal-side,” want to get in the way (willing to go in for the tackle); ability to recover; generally the ability to hit longer passes or clearances. In the modern game of wingbacks or attacking lateral defenders, stamina and pace are important. Central defender– leader, vocal (good communication), understands and can implement “support in defense” (knows to run and cover for a defender who has been beaten) Midfield – overall skills, overall fitness (endurance), really likes to run; grasps getting forward and getting back (wide midfielders and traditional wings – ability to cross) Forwards/strikers: goalscorers, aggressive, desire to put the ball in the back of the net; low shot, quick, “selfish;” demonstrate running to space to receive a pass. Then aside from player traits, there are positional considerations to think about. Center of field (backs, midfielders and forwards) – ability to play in space (contrast – players who have problems in space and need the “comfort” of the sideline) Speed on wings – fastest players, both on offense and defense, to the outsides Naturally left-footed (both on offense and defense) – on the left side. Strength up the middle – strongest, all-around-skilled players, at center back, central midfield, and center striker Central midfield or in some cases the so-called #10, “best” player, the players through whom most coaches want to play through and ensure they are able to get the most touches on the ball. Once you as a coach are comfortable with the evaluation of the players:
Coaches must also note that placing players in positions exists in the larger context of program objectives, while trying to be competitive in games. Especially at the youth level, such considerations as equal playing time, equal exposure to different positions, and proper player development, must be factored in to the placement decisions. For example, four different goalkeepers may be used in games with each being rewarded with time in the field. Also, it’s simply a fact that all players are not created equal. Coaches are forced to draw conclusions, and make decisions, about real children. A playing-time chart can be developed to ensure equality and less-skilled (or tentative) players may be “hidden” at right back or at left-wing. Coaches must also remember that they may never know who is going to be the “late-bloomer.” This is a very basic summary of filling positions with players but when looked at looked closely, I am pretty sure that these will be the foundation of how most teams are put together to one degree or other. Happy coaching ! I haven't posted in a whole for two main reasons, one, work responsibilities, the start of my own coaching during our winter semester but also given the topic I wanted to post about, as I started to put down thoughts, the post became longer and longer so I have actually been writing part of it over a week's time.
A little over a week ago, the soccer community in Canada got the surprising news that John Herdman who had been coaching the Canadian women's team since 2011 was be given the reins of both the men's national team but also structuring the entire national team program. The news was met with surprise and shock and many experts and fans started to weigh in on the validity of the appointment. Those who support the women's side were disappointed to see the coach that had taken the team from a last place finish at the 2011 World Cup, to back to back bronze Olympic medals and a place among the world elite. Those who support the men's program questioned the validity of putting someone "who had only coached women for years" in charge of a men's program. Much has be written and said about the move and many varying opinions have been presented about whether John Herdman will be able to win over the men's locker room and have an impact on the team. For once, news about Canada Soccer actually got coverage beyond our borders because of the reputation and profile of John Herdman but also sparked discussion about the role of gender issues in coaching. A few days later, news in England started to circulated about Phil Neville, formerly of Manchester United and Everton and with limited coaching experience emerging as the leading candidate to take over the role of head coach for England's national women's team ( a role that ironically Herdman was considered the leading candidate for prior to the news here in Canada). England has been looking for a coach since the dismissal of Mark Sampson and it seemed as all the viable ( and female ones aside from Herdman) were either discounted or took themselves out of consideration. The candidacy of Neville on appearance, seems to come out of nowhere and is stories are true, he was approached about the role and did not solicit it. Both stories are interesting in that they highlight different issues about the role in gender in coaching from two very different perspectives. In one case, does a highly successful coach in the women's game have the ability and credibility to coach on the men's side and in the other case, why are there not sufficient qualified female candidates to take over a women's national program and how does a successful men's player with limited coaching experience at any level emerge as a favorite for the role. These points are merely a preamble to my main topic for today's post. I will let events play out in both cases to see if the decisions were good or bad. For today, I want to share my opinion and perceptions on the differences between coaching female and male soccer players. Yes, this is a potentially controversial topic but one that merits reflection, dialogue, and constructive disagreement if a coach ultimately wants to be able to comprehend, coach, communicate, and connect with his/her athletes. The bulk of my experience is coaching women, however I did play the game and I have been around many male players and team in my career. I have had numerous discussions with peers about this reality and feel I can provide as valid an opinion as anyone. Let me state clearly up front that I think there are MANY more similarities in how men and women approach sport and competition than there are differences. The Psychology of Coaching applies equally to both genders. Coaches of male teams and female teams can learn much from each other. Thus, my intent is not to be divisive or derogatory in any way. It is merely to better understand and coach the athletes we are trying to develop. Let me also state that one gender's approach is not better than the other. Both approaches are highly valid and respect the general differences, psychology, and values of each gender. Thus, there are differences, not advantages. Finally, let me state that these highlighted differences are gross generalizations designed to categorize tendencies that each gender seems to have. Certainly each individual is different and needs to be respected and coached as such. Thus, you will be able to find many exceptions to the rules for both males and females. The intent is to examine the potential tendencies overall to inform and sensitize your coaching. With all this being said, there seem to be some subtle yet significant differences in how men and women approach and interpret the sporting experience overall. This Special Report is designed to explore those differences and reflect on how you might better adapt and adjust your coaching accordingly. I hope this exploration is fruitful for all coaches - but especially for male coaches who are coaching female athletes. Some males, who only knew a male-dominated approach to sports growing up, may have to re-examine some of their coaching tactics that might not connect as well with women. I have purposely chose to focus on the human elements and not look at tactics, comparing the women's and men's game or anything related to the actual teaching / coaching of soccer due to my firm belief that if you know the game, you know and like any role if coaching, it is about adapting to your athletes. The 4 main areas I wanted to share about are as follows; - COACHABILITY Females: On the whole, females tend to be more coachable then males. Compared to male athletes, females tend to be more open to coaching and new ways of doing things. They are willing to try new techniques, especially if it will help them perform better. Females tend to give their coaches much more initial respect, rather than reserving judgment or making their coaches prove they are credible. They also are much more appreciative of good coaching and willing express their gratitude in large and small ways. Women on the whole, seem to want to please their coaches more so than men do. USA Olympic Softball coach Mike Candrea says that women are much more willing to give you their hearts and best effort. Males: Male athletes tend to be more convinced (and sometimes deluded) of their own prowess, and are therefore often less coachable. They may feel like they know everything there is to know about the sport and will dismiss the coach if they do not think he/she is credible. They force coaches to prove that they know more than them. Males sometimes brace against coaching, especially if it is the in-your-face, coercive approach. When the coercive style is used, many males seek to prove the coach wrong, whereas women might have a tendency to shut down when this approach is used. Ironically, the coercive approach can yield the desired result in the short-term with some males - better performance - although the athlete often ends up despising the coach for it. Putting this Principle into Practice: When coaching a team of males, understand on the front end that you are not immediately going to have their full trust and respect - especially if you don't have a proven coaching record. Invest the time to earn it by explaining your philosophy and telling them the "why" behind your methods. Be prepared for those who will not embrace your way right away and decide whether you want to coax them along or draw a strict line in the sand. - CONFIDENCE and MINDSET Females: Confidence is one of those factors that is obviously critical for every athlete. All athletes struggle with their confidence, however, a good number of females I have worked with, even at the elite levels, have found maintaining consistent confidence their toughest struggle. While confidence seems to ooze from the pores of the most successful male athletes, there are many world-class female athletes who struggle with their confidence. Soccer superstar Mia Hamm is the perfect example. Considered the best athlete in her sport, Mia constantly struggled with her confidence throughout her career. Said former national team coach Tony DiCicco, "A lot of players have trouble with confidence. It's not just Mia. But it surprises people when a great player struggles with confidence. That's been her life work to deal with her own lack of self-confidence on the soccer field." Like Mia, some women tend to not give themselves enough credit for the things they are good at. They attribute their skills and successes to luck rather than to their talent and hard work. They also tend to base their confidence more on what they think others (coaches, teammates, fans) think of them -- rather than relying on their internal sources of confidence. Because of this, their confidence becomes very fragile and fleeting. Females also tend to be more open and forthcoming when they are not feeling confident. They are less inhibited to show a lack of confidence in their body language and words. As some coaches have succinctly paraphrased, many women need to feel good to play good. Or as Anson Dorrance says, "In coaching women, there is more of a need for 'ego-boosting.' With men, it is more 'ego-busting.'" Males: Male athletes are taught from an early age to project confidence and toughness. Why? Similar to the animal kingdom, the Alpha Male tends to get all the attention, accolades, and awards. The top males exude a sense of confidence. Sometimes the confidence is classy and contained by humility. However, more and more, the confidence has become cockiness and bravado that gets reinforced on SportsCenter. This is what Dorrance means when he says coaching males is more ego-busting. Some men's overconfidence contributes to poor preparation, selfish attitudes, poor social behavior - and motivates opponents to put him in his place. Cocky male athletes often need coaches who are willing stand up to them and cut them down to size so they don't get too full of themselves. Of course, like females, all males struggle with the confidence from time to time. The difference is that most males will go to great lengths not to show that they are struggling. They will often shut down and not seek the help they need to get back on track. They would much rather try to do it all on their own. In my sport psych consulting at Arizona years ago, the females were much more likely to take advantage of the services than were the males. It seems that most males base their confidence more on internal factors such as their strengths and past successes. In this way their confidence tends to be a little more stable and durable. Whereas females have a tendency to rely more on external factors for their confidence - namely, other's opinions of them. Putting this Principle into Practice: Coaches of female teams need to especially monitor their athletes' confidence. Use a positive approach to build confidence when they succeed. When they fail and make mistakes, remember that many of your athletes are probably tougher on themselves than they need to be. So help them learn from the failure and refocus. Coaches of male teams need to keep their athletes' egos in check. As good as some of your male athletes think they are, help them see that there are areas for improvement and that they can't take things for granted. Remember, too, that many of your male athletes will struggle with their confidence, even though they will try to hide it. Talk with them individually to build their confidence. - CRITICISM and FEEDBACK Picture this scenario: A frustrated coach comes into the locker room and starts chastising the team because of poor play. "We aren't working hard enough, our teamwork is horrible, and this is unacceptable!" Many females in the room think, "Coach is talking to me. He thinks I'm not working hard enough. I'm letting him and the rest of the team down." The males on the other hand are thinking, "You're right coach. John and Jim really are sucking it up tonight. They better pick it up or we all are going to lose this game." Females: In the example above, many females take the coach's criticism personally. They believe a general statement made to the team is something that was meant for them individually. Females tend to be more sensitive to comments that are made; often because they are internalized and scrutinized for an underlying message or meaning. Similarly, I often talk with females who are offended by teammates who use loud and blunt language during competition. They sometimes interpret the harsh tone as a personal attack, rather than critical information that needs to be conveyed in a high-stress and time-bound setting. Males: Males on the other hand often depersonalize general criticism and think it is not meant for them. Thus, coaches need to be more specific when addressing males who need to improve. Once males do somehow understand the criticism is directed at them, they will often fight against it. For many males, their approach is to prove the coach wrong and make him eat his own words. Thus, criticizing men and telling them they are not good enough or that no one respects them, while often confidence-crushing for women, is often viewed as a primordial challenge by men. Their manhood is at stake and they react like an animal that is backed into a corner. As Anson Dorrance says in the book The Man Watching reflecting on his time as Carolina's men's soccer coach, "I kept challenging their manhood, which is a great way to get them to do something they don't like. 'What? You don't think I'm man enough to drive a car off this cliff? Stand back!' Motivating men is such a simple process." Putting this Principle into Practice: Make sure you use constructive criticism rather than derogatory criticism, especially coaching females. Also, discuss the differences between what I call performance communication (loud, short, quick communication in the heat of battle) and personal communication (caring, sensitive, detailed communication away from the field). Help your players learn that performance communication during a competition should not be taken personally. For the males, you can from time to time take advantage of their "simple" motivation and dare and challenge them to accomplish things by "doubting" them. Many will rise to the occasion to prove themselves - and try to prove you wrong. - Team Chemistry Females: Chemistry is important for both genders, but seems especially critical for females. Sally Helgesen has written an excellent book called The Female Advantage. In it she talks about women's relationships with each other much like a web-like structure. Each woman wants to feel connected to the other in some way. The web also symbolizes that all women are on the same plane and that one is not necessarily better than the other. This is in contrast to the typical male hierarchical structure of relationships, where there is a distinct pecking order, much like a totem pole. Former coach Kathy DeBoer expands on the web analogy in her great book Gender and Competition. She says, "The males achieved their sense of self from their position in the hierarchy, the females from their position in the web. For males, standing was determined by what they did and how well they did it - performance. It was only peripherally associated with their ability to connect and maintain relationships. For females, standing was determined by their ability to connect and maintain relationships - acceptance. It was only peripherally associated with their ability to what they did and how well they did it - performance." Thus, good team chemistry is highly valued by many female athletes. At some levels and on some teams, the importance of team chemistry is at least on par with and sometimes trumps winning. It is a critical criterion for many females when they judge the quality of their sporting experience. Thus, many females are continuously on the look out for ways to enhance team bonding. They will often plan team dinners, arrange movie nights, create elaborate pre-game rituals, organize secret psych pals, etc. all in an effort to enhance team chemistry. When things are going well, the team provides a great source of unity and nurturing social community. However, when it goes bad, chaos, drama, and resentments are sure to follow. Disagreements, slights, and problems between teammates can be very disruptive to the web. Much like a spider web, when you cut a key strand, the rest of the web has a hard time not getting all bent out of shape. Thus, team issues do have a greater tendency to distract, disrupt, and sometimes destroy a female team. The off field issues can easily find themselves on the field when teammates refuse to warm up with each other. And the issue becomes a major distraction that takes the focus and energy away from competition. Males: Chemistry is important for men and should also be developed, monitored, and maintained. However, men seem to believe that chemistry is not as important to winning and having a successful sport experience as it is for the females. The males would like to get along with their teammates, but it isn't absolutely necessary for their team to be successful. The differences between men and women when it comes to chemistry can be best categorized using what researchers call task cohesion and social cohesion. Task cohesion means that the team is all focused on the same common goal - usually winning a conference, state and/or national championship. Social cohesion refers to how well the teammates get along with each other. The Chicago Bulls dynasty of the '90's was a great example of a male team that had high task cohesion but low social cohesion. Meaning when they were on the court together, Jordan, Pippen, Rodman, Paxson, Grant, and Cartwright were willing to work together to win 6 NBA Championships. Off the court, the group had many jealousies and resentments and rarely hung out together. When it comes to team building for males, it seems that task cohesion is the most important and that social cohesion is a nice plus and desirable - but not a necessary component. Females on the other hand highly value social cohesion. Further, it seems that a female team's level of social cohesion plays a big role in determining the team's task cohesion. Translation: Good team chemistry is a highly significant factor in how well a female team performs. Putting this Principle into Practice: Coaches of female teams need to be extra sensitive to their team's chemistry, especially social cohesion. They should do things to promote it on the front end, monitor it regularly, and quickly repair it when it is seeming to unravel. Male coaches should focus on building team chemistry that focuses more on task cohesion. Make sure that everyone is on the same page, committed to a common goal, and understands, accepts, and embraces his role. As I have often stated, this is my opinion based on my years involved in coaching. Some of traits put forward are quite stereotypical the reality is that there is no one type of female or male athlete. These are just generaly tendancies that I have observed. One person's opinion ( mine) that I hope you enjoy reading about. One big difference and challenge I encountered when I transitioned from coaching with the provincial teams to working at the university was in player scouting and recruiting. While both involve attending games and watching players to find those that will fit in with your team, that is where all similarity ends. When I was scouting for the provincial program, it was about identifying quality that I as a coach felt had the potential to play within the provincial program but without the competition from other teams. I was basically afforded the chance to select from a large player pool where all the players ( or most of them anyways ) wanted to player for "my team"
At the university level, not only do you have task of scouting players will fit within your team and future plans but are not in competition with a bunch of other universities, all doing the same thing and where the selection criteria for the prospective student-athlete often goes way beyond just soccer, but includes choice of academic program, location of the universities, living arrangements, social environment, amount of potential scholarship. In addition is so much about watching a player play and deciding if they have the skill set to play within your team, but rather watching players anywhere from 16 to 19 years old and trying to extrapolate how they might develop as a player ( and as an individual over the next 4 or 5 years) and evaluating them on traits aside from soccer. Technology has certainly changed the recruiting landscape. There are all kinds of university sport recruiting sites and services where future student-athletes can load up profiles and video. Many individuals create their own recruitment pages with youtube soccer video clips highlighting their skills. Another change is the increase of the so-called soccer showcase. There are more and more of these showcases out on by soccer clubs and 3rd party organizations all with the goal of helping you athletes achieve the dream of getting recruited to play at the university level. The formats of these showcases can vary with athletes participating with their club team, to so called showcase teams to players registering individually and being put together as a team for the duration of the event. In the 16 years I have been coaching university soccer, I have attended a ton of showcase and seen all kinds of formats but there are some things that are common to all; The player profile where some athletes take the time to put something together that really sells who they are as an athlete and person to others that have the minimum of information. The recruiters section, coaches and scouts huddled together, watching games, taking notes sharing observations and lets be honest, some times spending more time chatting among themselves than actually watching. The parents trying to get their son or daughter noticed. Video cameras set up to capture highlights, straining to overhear comments scouts might be making about their kid. Those parents trying to drop subliminal and often less discrete hints about how " great " their kid is and how any school would be lucky to have them. I always enjoy the showcases that have some form of meet and greet set up. Universities with varied set ups, tables with information to hand out, potential student-athletes circulating, stopping to gather information from some and ignoring others. However, the thing I have often found about these showcases is the unrealistic expectations that many young athletes arrive with and the pressure that seems put on them to attract attention from coaches. I thought I would write a post on my thoughts about the pros and cons of recruiting showcases and how potential athletes can maximize their chances of being noticed. Showcase…just the word puts potential student-athletes under a certain stress. They are the center of things. On the big field, the feature field, the stadium field, the special turf. Coaches come from far and wide to watch them play. They are easy to spot, even when trying to be discrete, often in designated areas reserved for them, away from parents ( with any luck) standing there with their clipboards, player profiles and game sheets, wearing jackets or caps with the university logo. This experience is daunting for some, perhaps many, kids. It used to to be about athletes who might be in their final or second to last year of high school or cegep, but more and more university showcases seem to bring in athletes at 14 and 15 years of age, 3 and 4 years away from starting university. They didn’t need to worry if anyone was watching. Now, with the expansion of competitive play and showcase events to the “elite” younger set, the desire to be noticed starts at an earlier age. One fact that is often ignored is that supply far exceeds demand. If I consider just soccer, my sport, there are so many players that attend showcase, that are hoping to play at the university level, but the reality is that female university soccer players represent maybe less than 2% of all female players over 18 years of age playing soccer in Canada. In the US, of course there are a significantly higher number of universities and colleges fielding teams but the player pool is also proportionately that much greater. I am sure when players attend showcases, they wonder what those serious-faced, clip-board toting coaches are looking for? It’s not random, especially for the ones who have been doing this a long time. They know exactly what they’re looking for in players they are watching. Each coach is looking for sport specific and character traits that they feel with make the best fit with their soccer programs. There is no one type of student-athlete that fits with every coach. With some many players available and the increase in showcase events, potential players need to sell themselves, find ways to stand out and make an impression. However, most importantly, as individuals who are looking to be student-athletes ( with emphasis on the student part, at least for me), they need to be ready to ask questions about the academic programs, admission requirements, application process. Personally, when I've met with athletes and their parents and all they want to know about is playing time and scholarship amounts, it tends to be a huge red flag for me. If potential student-athletes can’t see themselves approaching a coach, asking questions, advocating for themselves, honestly, is university soccer really right for them? Whose dream is it, anyway? Reality is that right now, playing in the university showcase is as easy as it’s gonna get. Coaches are constantly recruiting, watching potential players, attending showcases, evaluating candidates on an ongoing basis. They look for a freshman recruiting class to replace the athletes already on their rosters. All of them; not just the players who are graduating. The university coach is there because there are thousands of players to look at in the same place. They did not come just to see "you" play. They came to see "you" and a hundred other players like you as quickly as they can. If you watch coaches at showcases closely, you will see that they are not even watching full games. They are watching a team play for 20 minutes or half a game and then they move on because they have a lot of players to see. Efficiency is the name of the game. After showcases, the coaches will begin contacting players they are interested in. They have watched dozens of teams and hundreds of players. Players can't be discouraged if the coach doesn’t know exactly who they are or which game they were seen in. They probably see flashes of interesting potential in a wide range of players, make a few notes and move on to one of the other 100 plus players that they might contact in the ensuing days. While a few players will stick out in their mind, many just become a number until the player shows interest in the school and athletic program. From hundreds of contacts, they will determine who is interested and continue to recruit a smaller number of players. A coach cannot rely on picking ten athletes and expecting that they will all come play in their program. Most university coaches will tell anyone who asks that there is nothing guaranteed at the university varsity level. The best make the team and the best 11 play. Once potential recruits commit to a school and where required, sign some form of Letter of Intent, it just means that they are on the roster, but that’s it. Now they're looking to fight for playing time and, if lucky and good, for a starting spot. But look out for next year’s class. They may be bigger, stronger, faster, better, or more productive. When that happens, the veteran players might have to take a seat or even get cut. It’s nothing personal. It’s business. The business of fielding a team that can win as many games as possible. How those coaches train and manage their teams is up to them, but they’re looking for the best raw material out there. In my experience, parents often put undue pressure and unrealistic expectations in the minds of their kids when it comes to the university recruiting process. Remember, what I wrote earlier, less than 2% of all soccer players over 18 are playing at the university level, so clearly, a significant portion of players will never play university soccer. I have gone to showcases where they are 500 participants or the equivalent of 1/3 of the total number of female university soccer players in Canada, all of them thinking they will play soccer somewhere at the university level. When a young athlete doesn’t get a look, it can be a very hard thing. This translates to “You are not good enough.” I beg to differ. Competitive sports is a pyramid, a funnel of sorts. university soccer (or any sport), there is a selection process which, by definition, not everyone can win. Their star quality on the club team gets ‘em nothing on the next level unless they earn it. University coaches are looking for kids who can make it happen on the playing field, but will also succeed academically and be good well rounded individuals. They’re looking for that special someone, and they’ll know it when they see it. When they do, you can bet they’ll come knocking. Then athletes, by all means when it happens, do your homework, ask your questions and make sure the fit is right for you. So… simplify, relax, and have a clear vision about your objectives and expectations. First, last and always, be teachable. It is university you’re looking at after all. And that, most everyone who has been there will tell you, is what you make of it. Start acting like a university soccer player, and before you know it you’ll convince yourself that’s exactly where you belong. In the last few years, I have added a recruiting event in house. I accumulate a list of potentially interesting student-athletes and invite then to participate in a day of activities which include presentations on both academic and athletic topics, a campus tour, group lunch and of course, an on field session alongside current players. Of course, I like being able to watch them play soccer and do so in comparison to come of my current players, but most importantly, I can see how they react as individuals. Do they pay attention during presentations, what kind of questions do they ask, how do they interact with other potential players ( potentially future teammates). How they apply themselves to a day of activities can tell me a lot about who they might become as student-athletes. There is no one right way to recruit, and for the student-athlete, no one right way to sell themselves or evaluate options. Like many things in life, it is about a fit, with the coach, with the team and most importantly, with the university. |
AuthorAfter many years of coaching at various levels and with different teams, I thought I would share some of my experiences and thoughts about coaching. Archives
January 2023
Categories
All
|