One of the liberties that we have at Preston North End is a large enough coaching staff that we are able to work on very specific issues with players. Last night, with 20 players, we had five coaches, plus the manager. As a result, we are able to break out into smaller groups and work on specific items: technical defending, passing and possession, finishing, goalkeeping.
Our coaching training in the US is all about integrating the entire squad into training on a unified theme. Which is all fine and good, and really necessary when the player coach ratio is 1:16. However both at youth and college level, I think we overlook the opportunity to tailor teaching methods to small groups (other than the use of the goalkeeping specialist coach.) If there are two coaches and sixteen players available and four players have been identified with technical shortcomings bringing the ball down out the air, why not have one coach work with them separately while the rest of the squad works in a small-sided exercise with another coach?
Perhaps the biggest missed opportunity however is when you have four players who are very good at bringing the ball down out of the air and are ready for more advanced technical work and functional training than the rest of the squad. In that scenario, the two center forwards and two center backs who are ready for "next level" concepts and demands can be worked separately while the rest of the squad works on, say, delivering crosses. Then, for the final third of the session, re-integrate the squad, and ideas, and really see if you can develop the qualities of the players in the context of the entire squad.
The staff here at PNEWFC, most of whom have a background in the professional game, certainly seem to be much more comfortable with the small group technical/tactical/functional exercises than we, as Americans, tend to be. I look forward to working on my UEFA coaching badges in the future (most likely with the IFA, but depending on how the next couple of years shake out for me professionally, the FAI, FA, or SFA are all possibilities as well) and seeing how much of the comfort English coaches have in the smaller environment is cultural, and how much of that is enshrined in education.
Thinking about individual training returned my thinking to analysis again. One of the things I look for in watching opponents is consistent technical tendencies -- does the number #8 shirt like the ball at her feet or into space? When the number #10 turns, does she want to go right or left? By identifying the comfort zone of a player, we can then work to be sure our opponent is out of the comfort zone. Likewise, we can identify technical weaknesses and tactical blindspots in our own players. Each individual is going to have different weaknesses, but by grouping players by similar technical needs, you can work on those specific items.
Last night, I was working with only three players, all fullbacks, and each with different technical defending weaknesses and strengths. In spending time carefully watching sessions, as well as video analysis of matches, I had a very clear idea of what each player needed to improve upon. What Pip does well is one of Reg's weaknesses; what Alice does well is a weakness in Pip. And so on. So not only was I able to get a lot of repetition in with a small number, but I knew going in that I could use each player as models for each other. When I'd catch Reg doing something good, I would make sure she knew it, but also use it as an example of what I'm trying to get Pip and Al to do.
I would occasionally reference something that happened in a match or in a previous session, but for the most part that analysis was useful for me as a coach. It is a great temptation to give the player a "firehose" of data about themselves or about their opponent. However, as coaches and as managers, we have to be very aware that not all data is equal or necessarily probative in all applications. Some is useful for coaching, such as my understanding of the technical tendencies of the three fullbacks I was working with last night. Some data is useful for management, such as the patterns of play of the opposition, and their strengths to be negated and weaknesses to exploit. And some data is useful for players, such as how their immediate opposite will defend and can be beaten. Even then, depending on the player you may not want to present it to an individual, "the #7 is vulnerable to the dribble to her left" as you may have a player forcing play to the #7's left in inappropriate conditions. As a coach, we might just want to work in training the day before in taking the ball to the defenders left, and emphasize patterns of play that create that matchup. Other players though might perform better with the firehose of data aimed at them, and they will sift there. It depends on the learning style of the individual, and is a judgement call from the coach.
