The Cross Over Movement Blog

In the Forum, there is a link to several articles on the FA’s attempts to improve football development in England. One article mentions Manchester United as the club to replicate because of its philosophy.

For those unfamiliar with European football (soccer to us), Manchester United is one of Europe’s most storied and decorated clubs. The English Premiere League is regarded by many as the best league in the world even at a time when England’s National Team failed to qualify for the 2008 European Championships. Some in England believe the number of foreign players playing and dominating in the EPL is one reason England’s National Team is losing and they believe the number of foreigners on the EPL teams should be reduced. Others argue that creating a watered down professional league will not serve the National Team’s best interest.

In some ways, this is similar to discussions in the United States regarding the NBA and USA BAsketball. In England, the FA (Football Association) hired a new National Team coach to restore England’s National Team to prominence, mush like USA Basketball did with Coach K. However, more important, the FA has examined its youth development program and made recommendations which will be introduced nationwide. In the U.S., USA Basketball has not taken this measure, and the only changes at the youth level has been changing the name of Nike’s All-American Camps, changing the marketing of the adidas brand and Sonny Vaccaro searching for a sponsor for his elite academy.

The FA’s report concluded:

The central argument of the in-depth report by Richard Lewis, the executive chairman of the Rugby Football League brought in by football’s governing bodies to advise on producing the next generation of Rooneys, Gerrards and Lampards, is that professional clubs must spend more time working with five to 11-year-olds on technique, rather than obsessing over results.

In Europe, players develop within the youth programs of professional clubs rather than at various rec centers, AAU teams, schools, etc.

In England, Man. U is the model.

This is the United ethos. Backed by Sir Alex Ferguson, an Academy overseen by Brian McClair and Les Kershaw have focused on accentuating first touches in well-coached training sessions, or four v four matches, rather than launching into rivals in competitive fixtures of eight-a-side or more. United are so committed to improving technique that they just cancelled an Academy fixture with another club who wanted to play eight v eight, not four v four.

United even employ one of the world’s foremost skills coaches, the Dutchman Rene Meulensteen, to hone the touch of their youngsters (and also the first team).

Sir Alex Ferguson is the Head Coach of Man. U. Imagine youth basketball programs that employed some of the finest basketball coaches and focused on skill development not winning games. This is the FA’s recommendation for English football; it is also the recommendation made in the final chapters of Cross Over: The New Model of Youth Basketball Development for basketball in the USA.

As I argue in Cross Over, the FA report’s author says:

“I recommend a change in ethos in age groups 5-11 so that much more emphasis is given to skill development and acquisition rather than an emphasis on results in matches,” said Lewis.

When people have disagreed with me about the failings of the U.S. system, I argue that the U.S. should not be satisfied with good results, but should ensure that the U.S., with its financial resources invested in basketball, has the BEST system.

“If football in England wants to be the very best in the world, it must be the very best at every aspect of young player development,” stressed Lewis. “There can be no room for compromise.”

In Cross Over, I argue that the Foundation and Fundamental stages are the most important stages for elite player development, as players need to learn the proper execution of general motor and sport-specific skills during the formative, “skill hungry” years.

The key area of Lewis revolves around what the Dutch call “the golden years” of learning. Skills acquired then, from the step-overs that United youngsters learn from Meulensteen to dragbacks and kicking with either foot, set them up for life.

Lewis underlined how important “the formative years are to the establishment of correct technique”, adding: “Young players must be able to pass, control, kick and shoot correctly, as well as learning how to improve speed, stamina, flexibility, agility and balance. Their mental tool-kit must also be built up in their formative years”

Instead, the great solution in the U.S. has been to add role players to the senior national team and watch Vaccaro search for an elite academy for a dozen 18-year-olds. While the media suggests that players’ readiness for Division I basketball is aided by the constant AAU basketball, I disagree. Too many games at a young age stifles the players’ development, not enhances it.

Skirmishes with local rivals are pointless. “An over-emphasis on results leads to a climate of fear, something remarked on by many in the system,” added Lewis. “I am not advocating the removal of the ‘winning ethos’, nor the downplaying of the very successful FA Youth Cup or the desire to produce winning England Under-21 teams. However, match results, especially at the youngest levels, are not all-important.”

I watched yesterday as an AAU coach yanked players in and out of games whenever a player made a mistake. The kids were 12. The tournament was another meaningless tournament in a long line of tournaments this year. How is a player supposed to improve when he gets yanked out of the game every time he makes a mistake? Why do we expect 12-year-olds to be perfect? A kid I train is looking for an AAU team; he was going to play for the big sponsored all star team, but they don’t even practice and at 12-years-old, the kid thought that was stupid.

Another point I have made on this site and in the book is the disproportionate amount of respect we give NBA coaches versus youth coaches. Few if any major coaching clinics hire youth coaches who understand how to teach youth players. Instead, college coaches are used for name recognition even though many have never taught a child and 95% of the audience works with kids and teens.

The position of youth coach must also be lent more respect, Lewis argued. “The coaching regime required for young players aged 5-11 is a highly specialist area, and coaches of these children must be rewarded appropriately,” Lewis maintained. “Quality coaching is critical.”

The FA saw a problem, hired someone to examine it and now is charged with implementing the changes. In the U.S., no organization is examining the problem or implementing solutions. I know. I have approached Nike, adidas, NBA, USA Basketball, NABC, AAU, BCI, YBOA, ESPN and others about my book and the change in philosophy necessary in the U.S. in regards to youth basketball development. Thus far, nobody has shown any interest. However, I have heard from coaching directors in Scotland, Australia, Canada, Italy, Slovenia and more who are interested in the book, its philosophies and concepts. It is disappointing that nobody in the U.S. is willing to examine the problems and make the effort to change the system, while other smaller, less basketball rich countries are moving forward with more progressive plans for youth basketball development.