Exploring age bias in US-based MLS academies

The recent national team call-up of Miguel Ibarra rekindled my desire to dig into just where the American size bias comes from. Ibarra was one of what I suspect are dozens (hundreds? thousands?) of small players with top-level talent but who get ignored by the US soccer scouting and development system simply because they don’t fit the mold of big-fast-strong that seems so pervasive in the sport here. 

Early this year I did some exploratory research and writing to look at the question, “Does MLS have a bias against small players?” Based on that research, I concluded that yes, smaller players in the US have a more difficult time turning pro than their European counterparts. However, the problem persisted at a similar rate as in NCAA Division 1 teams. That left me wondering just where does the size bias start?

As a U14 coach, it was pretty obvious that it was prevalent even at that age. We have all seen the typical man-child players who finished puberty early and completely dominate games on their own. Unfortunately, most of us can recognize that type of player is generally just bigger-faster-stronger and that allows them to get away with mediocre technical and tactical ability while still having a huge impact on games. Not to say that all big-fast-strong players don't have technical and tactical ability - I had a U14 6'5" centerback who was one of the most technical and least physical on the team and played alongside two other centerbacks who were both about 5'4" and more physical than the tall CB.

A recent article explored how there’s a noticeable bias in Europe toward youth players born early in the year. I have been trying to find a way to explore the size-bias question at younger ages, but actual size data hasn’t been readily available. That article gave me an idea for a proxy so I decided birth month was a reasonable proxy if we’re willing to accept two things: 1. Players born early in the year are more likely to be more physically developed than those born later in the year and 2. Technical and tactical soccer ability and potential are normally distributed through the months. If you disagree with either of those assumptions, I’d love to hear your reasoning.

Do US-based MLS academies have a bias toward older players?

I looked at the birth months for every player in every U14, U16, and U18 US-based MLS academy. Here’s the bar chart:

It is pretty obvious that the answer is yes, MLS academies have a bias toward selecting older players. January and February are the birth months with the most academy players. November and December had the least. In fact, Those born in the first two months of the year were 2.4 times more likely to find a roster spot than those born in the last two months.

However, there’s another story told in this histogram. There’s a significant jump between July and August. In the part of youth soccer that isn’t USSDA, the age cutoffs aren’t simply based on calendar years. They are usually right there at the July/August split causing the older players in an age group to be born in August and the youngest in July. This spike in August could tell us a couple different stories. There are two that I think are more likely than others. The first is that the older players (August born) stand out more due to their physical traits in games where MLS academy coaches scout to recruit players. The second is that the older players are more likely to make rosters of non-USSDA “elite” club teams and get more playing time there resulting in them being more likely to develop soccer skills. It is impossible to know which is the larger contributor, but I suspect both are true to some extent.

Conclusions

It is apparent there is definitely an age bias in the youth ranks. MLS academies are guilty of it as evidenced by the increased likelihood for January and February birthdays. Non-USSDA clubs are guilty of it as evidenced by the spike in August birthdays and subsequent decline.

I plan to look more in-depth at which academies are particularly guilty of this bias and what trend differences there are between U14, U16, and U18. Who knows when I’ll make the time to do that.

Supporters' Shield Showdown - LA vs. Seattle

Well the MLS scheduler got their wish. The two best teams of the season are playing a home and home series to decide who wins the supporters shield. Seattle and LA have undeniably been the two best teams over the course of the season (honorary mention to New England since signing Jermaine Jones). Both teams are counter-attacking teams first, but have the quality to be a possession team when it is called for. Both play a 4-4-2 with an empty-bucket midfield. But the similarities generally end there.

Key points to watch for:

1.       How deep do Sarvas and Juninho sit to frustrate Dempsey and Martins in transition?

2.       How deep does Evans stay to frustrate Donovan in transition?

3.       Can Seattle avoid playing crosses in the air for Gonzalez to easily clear?

4.       Can LA’s central attacking three slip their defenders on through runs?

Here's a look at each team's tactics. Now with plenty of gifs of examples!

Seattle’s attack in transition

Seattle wants to transition immediately after winning the ball. They try to find a player facing forward or able to turn and find the feet of either Dempsey or Martins as early as possible. There’s been a lot of talk about how Seattle combines up the gut, but that isn’t necessarily true. They want to get the ball in the half-spaces. Half-spaces are the areas between the middle and the wings when you divide the field into fifths (here’s a greatarticle about their tactical relevance). Seattle’s plan in transition is for the two forwards to get into the gaps where it isn’t clear who is supposed to be marking them – the centerbacks, fullbacks, or holding mids. When they receive the ball in these areas it causes the defenders to pick their poison – one of the back four step high and leave a seam for the other forward or run of a wide midfielder to exploit, the holding mid slide over and allow the other forward a giant hole to sit in for combination play, or drop off and give them time to shoot.

Vancouver gave us yet another example of how to frustrate Seattle’s attack. Sit two holding mids deep to plug the gaps where Deuce and Oba try to find the ball. Another team did that quite effectively already this season – LA. Other teams have tried this tactic, to make someone other than the pair of forwards win the game for Seattle.

LA’s defense in transition

LA has probably the best defensive transition team in the league. Juninho and Sarvas have extremely high positional IQ and allow other players (Donovan and Ishizaki) to apply ball-pressure without worrying as much about what happens if they get beat. Last time the two teams met, Juninho and Sarvas limited the service Martins and Dempsey got in transition and more importantly, didn’t allow them to turn when they did receive the ball. That resulted in pushing Seattle’s attack wide and pitting Rogers and Gargan against Neagle and Pappa. The fullbacks for LA don’t heavily press forward in attack, which allows them to already be in defensively sound positions in transition.

Seattle’s attack in possession

This is where the nickname of “Hydra” for Seattle’s attack comes into play. There’s a lot of positional flow with everyone but the centerbacks making appearances in the final third. The majority of possession comes on the right side as Seattle try to create overloads by sending Yedlin to join whoever happens to be occupying the space of right mid at the time. Usually Martins, but sometimes Dempsey, pushes over and creates an attacking triangle on the right channel. What the left mid and center mids do depend on who the left mid is at the time. Pappa drifts central and sits in zone 14 with Alonso and Pineda sitting a bit deeper. Neagle pushes high as a second striker and one of the center mids steps higher into the area Pappa likes to camp in.

Plan ‘A’ is to get to the endline and send a ball back toward the penalty mark or across the six. Plan ‘B’ is to switch to the weak side and then send an early ball into the box in hopes that the defenders lost sight of their marks.

LA’s defense out of possession

The Galaxy have conceded the fewest goals of anyone in the league. A big part of that is down to their collective discipline not to dive in and try to win the ball. Again, Juninho and Sarvas play a big role in shaping the defense to force opposition wide and allow Gonzalez to play to his strengths - winning defensive headers. The wide midfielders drop to maintain shape and help minimize seams for passes to penetrate their lines. It isn’t full-on parking the bus, just solid defending in patient blocks.

LA’s attack in transition

Like most transition teams in MLS, the Galaxy like to transition to the flanks first. Everyone knows Landon Donovan is deadly in transition, especially as a midfielder. The development of Zardes as a target forward allows Donovan to play as that transition shuttling player. It also allows Keane to drop into the same half-spaces where Martins and Dempsey live. Something not a lot of people appreciate about Zardes and new this season to his game is Zardes making dummy runs to purposefully open space for other players.

Seattle’s Defense in transition

This is Seattle’s great weakness. Yedlin’s propensity to bomb forward means he gets caught out of position and cause the rest of the line to shift over. Whether this is an issue is largely dependent on who the right midfielder is in front of him. The right flank has been absolutely abused several times this season; most notably away at Portland, away at New England, and home against LA. The common thread? No Brad Evans. Evans provides that same positional awareness that Juninho and Sarvas do for LA. He simply goes about being in the right places to prevent clear exploitation of the right flank and doesn’t get enough credit for it. Alonso does a lot of the dirty work making tackles and fouling high up the field when necessary and gets a lot of recognition because he makes those flashy plays. But Evans is every bit as important to Seattle’s defense in transition.

LA’s attack in possession

I’m going to take a second here to say how completely flabbergasted I am that opposition haven’t figured out “Galaxy attacking 101”. In possession, they get the ball high on the wing (usually right), stack two forwards in line with the ball, and play a ball on the ground to them. The first forward dummies the ball and peels off on a thru run while the second forward plays a one-touch pass to the first forward who is in on goal. Donovan and Keane have been doing this for years and teams still fall for it and don’t track the runner. What’s scary is that Zardes is now in on the choreographed play as well.

LA have scored some great goals after long sequences of possession this season. They’re comfortable cycling the ball from side to side, front to back, until they can get the ball to the feet of Donovan or Keane in zone 14. They're comfortable shooting from distance and crossing in the air, but their main goal is, like Seattle, to get to the endline and send a ball across the six.

The signing of Alan Gordon now gives LA a completely different look up top to switch up their tactics. He can be that target forward that is just going to body up on Chad Marshall and perhaps allow the Galaxy to play a little more direct. He can finish on crosses and has the ability to knock down balls for players sitting underneath him. Don’t expect him to start in either game, but him subbing on might allow for the tactical change needed to break through.

Seattle's defense out of possession

Seattle's main objective is to invite the opposition to play the ball in the air so Chad Marshall can clean it up. Similar to Dempsey's mostly free role in attack, Alonso has a mostly free role in defense. He roams wherever he sees fit to make tackles and interceptions while others, mainly Pineda and Evans, fill spaces to keep some semblance of shape. Dempsey and Martins don't have a lot of defensive responsibilities when out of possession, so LA should be able to keep the ball by utilizing their backs.

Other notables

This year’s MVP will likely be decided by who has a better series – Robbie Keane (who I think had the best season of any MLS player ever) or Obafemi Martins (who is probably more important to his team’s style of play than any player in the league). Sigi has been bested by The Bruce time and again over the last five years in matchups between Seattle and LA. This year’s Sounders side operates much differently than teams in the past, so I’m not sure there’s much we can take away from past meetings between the two teams. Even in their lone meeting this season in Seattle, the result won’t tell us much since Seattle was missing 4 regular starters. The two key takeaways from that meeting are how tight LA’s outside backs played to Seattle’s wingers and how much Alonso was roaming from his usual anchored spot in front of the back four.

Conclusions

Ultimately, I think this series is going to come down to how disciplined a central pair on each side can be over 180 minutes. Juninho and Sarvas or Marshall and whoever ends up lining up beside him. Seattle has the tiebreaker so they can afford one more mistake than LA can. There's always the chance to see the spectacular when either of these teams are involved. With the shield on the line, I think we're more likely to see some chippy games and a lot of frustration from the big names.

My (abridged) style-of-play philosophy

After my last post, I had a bunch of people ask me what the 8 drills are that I use. You missed the point. The specific 8 drills I use are tailored toward exactly how I want my teams to play. I would use a different set of drills if I were coaching my teams to play differently. In short, the drills I use are, and should be, different than the drills you will use to mold your players to play your specific brand of soccer.

Simply having my set of 8 drills is useless to you unless you completely understand my philosophy about how I want the game to be played. You will never get to that level of understanding unless you coach with me on a daily basis. (pssst, your philosophy should be that detailed too!)

So, what I decided to do, is to give you the extremely short and summarized outline of how I want my teams to play. That should give you enough understanding to grasp why I emphasize specific areas of focus for skills to learn. That was the basis of choosing the drills I use. I had to ask myself, "What specific skills do I want my players to learn?" Then it was a simple process of researching drills I could use to teach those skills, trying them out in sessions, and eliminating the ones that weren't effective in teaching the skills I demand of my players.

The following is a document that I review with and give to my players each season. Without providing any additional context, it is largely a bunch of buzzwords that are thrown around by coaches all over and at all levels. This is what I give my players on day 1 and provide the details and context throughout the season.

Key tenets for our style of play

1.                  Pass with purpose

a.       Maintaining possession until we can create a chance is of utmost importance. Simply playing kick-and-run is not good enough.

b.      We must be decisive with who, where, why, and how we are passing the ball.

2.                  Penetration

a.       We must look to penetrate the defensive lines by either dribbling or purposeful passing.

b.      When we penetrate a line, recognize visual cues of offball movement.

3.                  Containment/delay

a.       We must not dive in to win the ball and cause our entire team’s defensive shape to be thrown off balance.

b.      Containing their attackers allows our teammates to track back and apply additional pressure on the ball.

4.                  Communicate

a.       Communicating what runs you’re making and where you are helps us make the correct decision more often.

b.      Letting your teammates know what to do when you pass to them helps us play quicker and maintain possession better. “Send a pass, send a message.”

5.                  Off-ball movement to create space for self

a.       A man standing still is a man easily marked out of the game.

b.      Dynamic movement (check away/to, curling run, overlapping runs, etc.) will create space for you to receive the ball.

6.                  Recognize pressing triggers

a.       We press high up the field to win the ball quickly and in dangerous areas.

b.      If the first defender recognizes a visual cue to press, everyone must press.

7.                  Everyone defends

a.       No matter your position, you have a job on the defensive side of the ball.

b.      After your line is penetrated, it is your responsibility to either apply additional pressure or eliminate a passing.

8.                  Utilize drops / play the way you face

a.       This is part of the means to maintain possession.

b.      Playing the way you face allows for your teammates to use their better vantage point to pick out the best pass to move forward.

9.                  Off-ball movement to create space for teammates

a.       Sometimes we are just marked too closely to receive a pass for ourselves.

b.      Clearing yourself and your defender out of the space allows for a teammate to move into that space to receive the ball.

10.              Switch the field of play

a.       Switching the play allows us to attack with an overload.

b.      It also allows us a good opportunity to let the game breathe and slow the tempo down.

The broader framework I hammer into the players is a possession-based style that is heavy on short, quick combination play. We aim to keep the ball on the ground while utilizing visual cues that tell my players they're supposed to make specific movements to either open up space with movement or find space with movement.

The importance of a small set of drills

First, this post is all entirely useless if you haven’t clearly defined your philosophy: How do you want to create your chances? How do you want to penetrate opponents’ lines? Where do you want to win the ball? Where is your initial line of confrontation? What visual cues tell your players what action they’re supposed to take now? What are the responsibilities of each position in each phase of the game?

If you haven’t detailed out exactly what you want your team to be doing in the various phases of the game, do that NOW. Otherwise, you’re just teaching the kids random pieces of soccer without teaching them how they fit together. That results in sloppy play, poor decisions, and a slow speed of play - jungleball, kick and run, pickup soccer.

Once you have your philosophy and style of play detailed, you have an actual end-point for where you want your team to end up. That makes it infinitely easier to identify and utilize drills that are relevant to accomplish your goals. I’ve seen coaches (the select few who have a detailed philosophy) waste an incredible amount of time explaining rules of the drill. As the imparter of knowledge, we are collectively throwing away so much opportunity for our players to get in repetitions and also to layer on additional coaching points (which are usually the higher-level and most important ones for player development!).

The simplest way to eliminate your wasted time is simply to identify drills that you can use to teach multiple components of your style of play. After once or twice through the drills early in the season, the kids understand exactly what’s going on which allows the coach to just say “go to Drill X” and the kids start immediately playing. That’s about 2 minutes saved each drill, 6 minutes each practice, 18 minutes each week, 72 minutes each month, or about 3 hours each season. You just bought yourself two entire training sessions worth of time. That doesn’t even touch the even greater benefit of time saved from the players trying to figure out the process and how to actually succeed within the drill.

I have narrowed my set list down to 8 drills for U12-14 for the entire season. It takes the kids two weeks to learn them all and then we can really get started on learning the soccer part – layering on crucially important pieces that will make them better soccer players. Verbal communication, visual communication, checking shoulders, creating space for themselves, creating space for their teammates, finding space created by teammates, recognizing when to get forward with or without the ball, and a million other bits of information top-level players need to have imparted to them.

Each drill allows me to teach at least two aspects of our style of play on each side of the ball. I’ll use the simple 4v1 rondo with a rule of no passing across the square as an example. Many coaches simply use it as a generic passing drill to warm up, but it has the potential to be so much more:

Offensively, the two key points for my style of play are receiving across your body (and passing across a teammates body) and quickly getting into angles of support. These are key to moving the ball quickly and keeping it on the ground, the absolute core of my entire philosophical framework. On top of that, I layer on moments of communication like asking for the ball, telling them not to play to you, and telling them to play a specific teammate. All of those hinge on players learning to read the defender’s positioning relative to the ball and the available passing options.

Defensively, the two key points are channeling play to the desired direction and recognizing the visual cues of when to press the ball to win it or force an error. On top of that, I layer on selecting what type of tackle (block tackle or poke tackle) to use in specific situations and the importance of intensity for being decisive to take advantage of opponents’ errors.

The small drill set is about more than just being able to layer on more complex ideas. It is also about allowing your players the time to absorb what you’re trying to get them to learn via the drill. Repetition creates calm players. Repetition creates consistency. Repetition creates recognition of situations and increased speed of play.

Welcome to the new location!

I decided to switch the name of my blog and remove the "MLS" portion of it for two reasons.

1. This allows the space to be more of a catch-all for my thoughts about tactics and coaching.
2. MLS doesn't need what (extremely) little publicity I gave it via the old name.

Additionally, the purpose of the blog is more for my own learning than it is for teaching others. I'm challenging myself to write out important pieces of my coaching philosophy and style so I am forced to think through them and be critical of myself. Any feedback you want to give is welcomed. We can always learn something from every coach we meet, even if it is how exactly not to do something.

If you want to check out my old posts, you can find them here.