U11 Classic D1

Last 3 games head to head :

2-0 Kennington
2-1 McKinney
3-3 tie

Not even close....   

I’m sorry I offended your kids team.

The consistent rankings of mckinney top 5 and Kensington 10-20 Plus same league results show over all. Plus I always see matt at his games, can’t say that for kennington

As we know by now....YSR rankings are meaningless to a degree....otherwise teams like RUSH would've qualified to D1....According to today's YSR McKinney is so much better than Kennington than they should beat them every time by 1.34 goals....definitely head and shoulders....  

Also...my kid doesn't play for Solar...I'm just an unbiased observer. But to come in here and state emphatically that McKinney is "Head and Shoulders" above Kennington is pure BS and anyone that has watched youth soccer enough knows it....I'm not saying they aren't better....they likely are....but it is not like they are on another level.....they might just be a man-child away from being even...  

Week 4 prediction:

FCD Academy v Solar McKinney 3-1
Solar Kennington v ETX Wildcatters 2-2
TXN Dallas v TXN Red 3-2
LP Owen v Celtic 0-2
Rebels v Ayses 4-1
TXN South v FCD Youth 1-2
Allegiance v Fever 3-0
Elite v FCD Blue 2-1
LP St John v FCD ETX 2-3
FCD W v Tigres 2-1

Solar Kennington - Being developed properly, skilled players, playing better than the rest. Doesn't win as much because of physical maturity and aggressiveness.

Solar McKinney - Built on size, speed and the old guy. Moves the ball okay, but still plays some kick ball. Wins more due to aggressiveness, not skills. But some players do have it.

Solar Volkan - Pure heart, those boys are fighters. Just a little inconsistent.

Solar Martinez/Oglesby - Growing.....


Texans Dallas - Well coached, plays better, growing rapidly

Texans Red - very good players, very poorly coached.

Youth soccer rankings, gotsoccer..... meaningless. It's youth soccer, let's start ranking teams based on player/team growth. After all development is what's being sold...

Bottomline is, we can't give any team credit for their history before 07/01 signing. All the teams had some level of shakeup. That's why recent performance, and the classic league games are so heavily considered. Anyone watching the games, or at-least paying attention to the standings, can see that McKinney and Kennington are both playing great soccer. In my opinion there isn't a gap at all. Two great coaches, both focused on development. One has better skilled player, the other has better athletes. This debate can/will be settled in the spring when they face-off in a Classic League game. Until then, we will have to just wait it out.

All of this Solar talk is beginning to make me sick... Let's get back to the predictions

Who do you go to?

BUELER13 WROTE:
So which coach (not team) would you choose to go to in regards to development? Choose 4 per Division and just on development and you can not choose your team: I am with Rush and very happy so just coaches:

D1: Stavrou, Gall, Pedro and Kennington
D2: Volkan, Mbemba , Dube and donaghy

I am just throwing this out and see what people truly feel on development over wins.

Factsmatter:
D1: Gall, Pedro, Stavrou, and Salaazar
D2: Voutier, Mbemba, Volkan, and Dube

My pick:
D1 - Gall, Pedro, Kennington, Shirley
D2 - Voutier, Donaghy, Dube, Volkan

D1: Pedro, Stavrou, Kennington, Obara
D2: Voutier, Martinez (Solar), Donaghy, Brown

Help me understand.

How has Gall developed his team since being handed the Crown Jewels of FCD U11 talent? How are his players better now then before he arrived?

How has Shirley developed his team after getting their doors blown off Labor Day weekend but bringing in an ace to help beat McKinney a couple of weeks later?

I have a looooong memory (makes it tough on my marriage) and I remember mere months ago when an Allegiance poster got dragged for suggesting the team was top 10 and them getting no respect for beating McKinney in a tournament final. Why wasn't Allegiance developing then instead of the win being dismissed as McKinney's team having an off game?

Then you got Volkan being welcomed back into the circle of trust by this board. He was dragged for playing weak tournaments like that Firecracker ish but his team is now showing development for doing well playing in D2 (D2 people!) and for their Labor Day performance. Remember the poster with an infamous "buddy" on Volkan's team   who tried to downplay the contributions of their 2 guest players. Now the board is showing Volkan love for development.

Then you've got the PST/Texans Red coach. Maybe it's because he looks like he's 12 and wears really shiny clothes, but dude gets no props for his coaching. I can't remember a time when his 07s didn't make the finals of a tournament they played but it's not about wins, right? Is he just the coach folks love to hate? What does he do so wrong?

Development is a word righteously thrown around in here but it's really just a unicorn in heat. Gets folks all frisky but it's highly elusive if it really does, in fact, exist. By it's very definition, development requires TIME. Lots of time and ain't nothing happened in the last 3 weeks of Classic that makes asking this question remotely fair.

Bears wrote:Help me understand.

How has Gall developed his team since being handed the Crown Jewels of FCD U11 talent? How are his players better now then before he arrived?

How has Shirley developed his team after getting their doors blown off Labor Day weekend but bringing in an ace to help beat McKinney a couple of weeks later?

I have a looooong memory (makes it tough on my marriage) and I remember mere months ago when an Allegiance poster got dragged for suggesting the team was top 10 and them getting no respect for beating McKinney in a tournament final. Why wasn't Allegiance developing then instead of the win being dismissed as McKinney's team having an off game?

Then you got Volkan being welcomed back into the circle of trust by this board. He was dragged for playing weak tournaments like that Firecracker ish but his team is now showing development for doing well playing in D2 (D2 people!) and for their Labor Day performance. Remember the poster with an infamous "buddy" on Volkan's team   who tried to downplay the contributions of their 2 guest players. Now the board is showing Volkan love for development.

Then you've got the PST/Texans Red coach. Maybe it's because he looks like he's 12 and wears really shiny clothes, but dude gets no props for his coaching. I can't remember a time when his 07s didn't make the finals of a tournament they played but it's not about wins, right? Is he just the coach folks love to hate? What does he do so wrong?

Development is a word righteously thrown around in here but it's really just a unicorn in heat. Gets folks all frisky but it's highly elusive if it really does, in fact, exist. By it's very definition, development requires TIME. Lots of time and ain't nothing happened in the last 3 weeks of Classic that makes asking this question remotely fair.

I agree that consistency and TIME can develop quality soccer players.

I think the question is - Development for what? The US Mens Team? MLS? Collegiate Soccer? DA? High school? U-11 D1? And development for who - the kid? Mom? Dad? Uncle Julio?

The important thing now for a 10 year old is play time, building skills foundation, soccer IQ and having fun doing it. I think a majority of Classic League coaches TRY and do this, but a coaching change usually changes every two years - if not sooner.

Top rankings and who can beat who is meaningless.

f you're kid is not having fun, development doesn't matter when they are 10 - because little Johnny won't be playing anyway once his voice drops a few octaves and he gets his own ideas on what he wants to develop...

Bears wrote:Help me understand.

How has Gall developed his team since being handed the Crown Jewels of FCD U11 talent? How are his players better now then before he arrived?

How has Shirley developed his team after getting their doors blown off Labor Day weekend but bringing in an ace to help beat McKinney a couple of weeks later?

I have a looooong memory (makes it tough on my marriage) and I remember mere months ago when an Allegiance poster got dragged for suggesting the team was top 10 and them getting no respect for beating McKinney in a tournament final. Why wasn't Allegiance developing then instead of the win being dismissed as McKinney's team having an off game?

Then you got Volkan being welcomed back into the circle of trust by this board. He was dragged for playing weak tournaments like that Firecracker ish but his team is now showing development for doing well playing in D2 (D2 people!) and for their Labor Day performance. Remember the poster with an infamous "buddy" on Volkan's team   who tried to downplay the contributions of their 2 guest players. Now the board is showing Volkan love for development.

Then you've got the PST/Texans Red coach. Maybe it's because he looks like he's 12 and wears really shiny clothes, but dude gets no props for his coaching. I can't remember a time when his 07s didn't make the finals of a tournament they played but it's not about wins, right? Is he just the coach folks love to hate? What does he do so wrong?

Development is a word righteously thrown around in here but it's really just a unicorn in heat. Gets folks all frisky but it's highly elusive if it really does, in fact, exist. By it's very definition, development requires TIME. Lots of time and ain't nothing happened in the last 3 weeks of Classic that makes asking this question remotely fair.

Gall = Assumption. He must be good otherwise they wouldn't have given him that team. But you are very much right.

Shirley - Went from being a struggling silver division team, to now competing with and beating the better D1 teams. They have improved a lot. Very skilled group of players.

Allegiance - didn't exist until last summer. Easily the most improved team considering how long they've been around. From a struggling team in the silver division to one of the top teams in D1. Their win against Mckinney was a shock taken as luck. And the poster was claiming too much too soon. Looking back, maybe it wasn't luck. We denied their top 10 claim, now they're looking more like top 5.

Volkan - if you take him out of it, who do you pick from D2?

PST/Texans Red - He gets no respect because his team kicks the ball way too much. And that's on him. His players are too good for that.

baller07 wrote:

PST/Texans Red - He gets no respect because his team kicks the ball way too much. And that's on him. His players are too good for that.

I would agree with that. He is a phenomenal recruiter and gets a lot of talent, which is why his teams are good at this age. Unfortunately he does not develop them the way other teams do. His 06 team was untouchable at U9. By the time they reached U11 Classic, I think they finished 4th or something like that. Other teams developed and overcame the "shoot from anywhere" tactics he urges from his players. I've seen him have his Goliath of a goalie (07) shoot free kicks from just behind midfield. How does that develop a goalie in the long run? It doesn't, he'll never do that as he gets older and fields get bigger. It just helps him win now. I guess everyone has their own agenda. Some have winning as their top priority, some have development. As parents, you need to decide what is important, winning, or developing. In an ideal situation you can do both, but many times you sacrifice one for the other. I've seen Allegiance play and would be happy if my son was on that team. They are developing and learning to play. Those kids have a brighter future in my opinion than those on many other teams who are better than them.

As far as my opinion of top 4 development teams (in no particular order):

Allegiance, TXN Dallas, FCD..............hmmm, not sure I have a 4th. There are some, but I can't really separate them.

factsmatter wrote:Kennington vs McKinney - In my opinion there isn't a gap at all. Two great coaches, both focused on development. One has better skilled player, the other has better athletes. This debate can/will be settled in the spring when they face-off in a Classic League game. Until then, we will have to just wait it out.

All of this Solar talk is beginning to make me sick... Let's get back to the predictions

Right.....Both might be focused on development...but ONE is CLEARLY very focused on RECRUITING!!!  

baller07 wrote:

Bears wrote:Help me understand.

How has Gall developed his team since being handed the Crown Jewels of FCD U11 talent? How are his players better now then before he arrived?

How has Shirley developed his team after getting their doors blown off Labor Day weekend but bringing in an ace to help beat McKinney a couple of weeks later?

I have a looooong memory (makes it tough on my marriage) and I remember mere months ago when an Allegiance poster got dragged for suggesting the team was top 10 and them getting no respect for beating McKinney in a tournament final. Why wasn't Allegiance developing then instead of the win being dismissed as McKinney's team having an off game?

Then you got Volkan being welcomed back into the circle of trust by this board. He was dragged for playing weak tournaments like that Firecracker ish but his team is now showing development for doing well playing in D2 (D2 people!) and for their Labor Day performance. Remember the poster with an infamous "buddy" on Volkan's team   who tried to downplay the contributions of their 2 guest players. Now the board is showing Volkan love for development.

Then you've got the PST/Texans Red coach. Maybe it's because he looks like he's 12 and wears really shiny clothes, but dude gets no props for his coaching. I can't remember a time when his 07s didn't make the finals of a tournament they played but it's not about wins, right? Is he just the coach folks love to hate? What does he do so wrong?

Development is a word righteously thrown around in here but it's really just a unicorn in heat. Gets folks all frisky but it's highly elusive if it really does, in fact, exist. By it's very definition, development requires TIME. Lots of time and ain't nothing happened in the last 3 weeks of Classic that makes asking this question remotely fair.

Gall = Assumption. He must be good otherwise they wouldn't have given him that team. But you are very much right.

Shirley - Went from being a struggling silver division team, to now competing with and beating the better D1 teams. They have improved a lot. Very skilled group of players.

Allegiance - didn't exist until last summer. Easily the most improved team considering how long they've been around. From a struggling team in the silver division to one of the top teams in D1. Their win against Mckinney was a shock taken as luck. And the poster was claiming too much too soon. Looking back, maybe it wasn't luck. We denied their top 10 claim, now they're looking more like top 5.

Volkan - if you take him out of it, who do you pick from D2?

PST/Texans Red - He gets no respect because his team kicks the ball way too much. And that's on him. His players are too good for that.

Gall = Correct. I'm biased, but can keep an unbiased opinion. While he might be a great developmental coach, he hasn't had time to show it yet with this 07 group as he was handed the keys....

Shirley - Part of that improvement came from getting a few VERY GOOD players from other local teams...One specially comes to mind...So hard to gauge Development vs being lucky with great new talent...time will tell...too early.

Allegiance - Agree Pedro is doing a great job here. Watched a few games and the way they play the game it is obvious that they try to play a nice, enjoyable brand of soccer that will benefit the kids going forward....It might make some parents mad for losing games they should have won, but they have a good group with a coach that looks like he is doing it the right way.

Volkan - Hard to tell. Their team plays really hard. I don't know the kids well enough to know if there were many changes from last season. People I know talk really well about the guy. You asked if you  take him out who do you pick from D2? I would say Voutier is doing a great job with the kids from Rush. Similar style as Allegiance. And it looks like Martinez is too. I have only watched one game and don't know him well. But Oglesby handpicked him to take over his teams after going DA. Guy has been around too long not to select someone he trusts to continue his development path....

PST/Texans - Kid was a great player. Successful in College. The Pedigree helps sell parents when recruiting. Looks to be very focused on winning. Young guy that should mature as time goes on and become a great coach. Needs to calm down just a bit as the screaming is just too much for some of those kids...

Stavrou - Looks like he inherited a good team from Marcio and added several new kids. To early to tell. I thought Marcio was one of the TOP 07 Coaches in DFW. Unfortunately parents have too thin skin....

Bears wrote:Help me understand.

How has Gall developed his team since being handed the Crown Jewels of FCD U11 talent? How are his players better now then before he arrived?

How has Shirley developed his team after getting their doors blown off Labor Day weekend but bringing in an ace to help beat McKinney a couple of weeks later?

I have a looooong memory (makes it tough on my marriage) and I remember mere months ago when an Allegiance poster got dragged for suggesting the team was top 10 and them getting no respect for beating McKinney in a tournament final. Why wasn't Allegiance developing then instead of the win being dismissed as McKinney's team having an off game?

Then you got Volkan being welcomed back into the circle of trust by this board. He was dragged for playing weak tournaments like that Firecracker ish but his team is now showing development for doing well playing in D2 (D2 people!) and for their Labor Day performance. Remember the poster with an infamous "buddy" on Volkan's team   who tried to downplay the contributions of their 2 guest players. Now the board is showing Volkan love for development.

Then you've got the PST/Texans Red coach. Maybe it's because he looks like he's 12 and wears really shiny clothes, but dude gets no props for his coaching. I can't remember a time when his 07s didn't make the finals of a tournament they played but it's not about wins, right? Is he just the coach folks love to hate? What does he do so wrong?

Development is a word righteously thrown around in here but it's really just a unicorn in heat. Gets folks all frisky but it's highly elusive if it really does, in fact, exist. By it's very definition, development requires TIME. Lots of time and ain't nothing happened in the last 3 weeks of Classic that makes asking this question remotely fair.

Feeling a little grumpy this morning?  I disagree, there's enough time to make a snap judgment on how teams have progressed since July 1.  They've either improved, stayed level, or regressed.  Should we put too much stock in the first 10 weeks of Select??  Of course not, but we've debated much more trivial things on this forum and its still 3 days until I get my next youth soccer fix so I welcome anything to entertain me in the interim.

I agree its hard to give Gall any credit fairly or not based on the team he was given.  Most would say that JT did little to develop this team over the past year, but Gall has a pretty good reputation so I'd give him an incomplete...

Hadn't heard anything about Celtic having a ringer last weekend??  I view this team as the product of the whole being better than the sum of its parts which points to coaching...but not enough to put Shirley in my top 4.

Your memory is long but incomplete on Allegiance...I as many others on this board didn't feel they had the resume to make top 10 claims in May...but they've proven themselves in my mind over the past 4 months.  Regardless of results...especially of late, they play good soccer and I attribute that to the coach.  Pedro definitely makes my top 4 and has an argument for overall #1.

I put Volkan in the very good recruiter category.  I've been pretty vocal in the past that I don't put a lot of value in what he's teaching.  However, I do give him credit for the way his team has handled the adversity of not making D1 as expected.  Regardless of the opponent, their effort appears to be high.  It could have easily gone the other way.

Salazar is obviously good at teaching his style of play.  He doesn't make my top 4 simply because I think most of his talent was recruited vs developed.  Their success is undisputed but the category for this discussion is developing player not playing winning (at age 10) soccer.

You didn't mention Kennington, Stavrou, and Obara which I included in my top 4.  Here's why each of them get the nod imo.

Kennington-Has the same core that struggled mightily last fall.  The wheels used to fall off when the starters went to the bench but if you watch them today, the dropoff is nominal.    This to me is the textbook definition of development.

Stavrou-I debated this one since the body of work is limited.  I can't help but be amazed at how well this team rebounded from the loss of 5 significant contributors from the Spring.  Stavrou gets the nod for whipping the new additions into shape in record time.  I give the assist to Marcio...for my money this is the most technically and tactically sound team in NTX.

Obara-This is the team that surprises me the most from week to week as they are typically over-matched physically and technically but still manage to get results.  I can't say for sure, but I'd bet that this is the most home-grown team in D1.  He gets the nod for getting the most out of his players.

FUZZ - Salazar's 06 team that was untouchable a few years back were younger 06's that were playing 07, right? After age pure, they became the young kids in the new 06 age group. My understanding is the bulk of that team is in the Texans U12 DA program?

Socceropath - for Gall, I think you are onto something by comparing him to JT. Both are handed great talent... what are the coaches' reputations for developing that talent?

Week 4 prediction:

FCD Academy v Solar McKinney 5-2
Solar Kennington v ETX Wildcatters 2-1
TXN Dallas v TXN Red 2-2
LP Owen v Celtic 1-2
Rebels v Ayses 5-1
TXN South v FCD Youth 0-3
Allegiance v Fever 3-1
Elite v FCD Blue 2-2
LP St John v FCD ETX 1-3
FCD W v Tigres 2-1

Let me start with this...Get off my lawn. Kidding.

Cranky? Maybe. Didn't mean to come off that way and I hope I didn't offend any of you buttercups. Again, kidding.

I come to this board because my BB didn't hit the genetic lotto. Born to two nerds who never played, followed or watched soccer...ever. I come here to learn from the OGs.

Development, for me, is: a growing interest and love for the sport, ability to respond with increasing creativity and consistency to game time situations, increasing level of fitness and improved knowledge and understand of the game and rules.

I genuinely appreciate all who responded with their reasoning and those who fessed up to making assumptions about a coach's competence or ability to develop players based upon being tapped to coach a certain team.

What I take issue with is the notion that there is one right way to coach the game of soccer or to develop players.

This is nerd me talking now who began studying the game of soccer only recently. The Brazilians were heavily criticized for their uncivilized brand of soccer. Germany and England clearly play a different style of game and many found them superior because of it.

I take issue with crediting (or dinging in the case of Salazar) a coach for developing players because of the game time strategy he employs. Game strategy and tactics does not equal player development in my book.

Possession style soccer. I know. I get it. It's quite popular on this board. It's not the right way to coach or the wrong way to coach. It's just ONE way to coach. I know that's heresy to some of you good people.

Take a player who hits a big growth spirit and now has a physical advantage among his peers. That is development. Does a coach have anything to do with that?

Take a player who has a trainer and attends camps, skills, and speed training and works his azz off at practice and outside of practice. That is development. Does a coach have anything to do with that?

Show me a coach who is able to retain his players, is a great teacher and who makes practice fun, and that is more meaningful to this nerd over "he's great at developing players" which is a convenient but not meaningful catch phrase.

Socceroo wrote:

baller07 wrote:

Bears wrote:Help me understand.

How has Gall developed his team since being handed the Crown Jewels of FCD U11 talent? How are his players better now then before he arrived?

How has Shirley developed his team after getting their doors blown off Labor Day weekend but bringing in an ace to help beat McKinney a couple of weeks later?

I have a looooong memory (makes it tough on my marriage) and I remember mere months ago when an Allegiance poster got dragged for suggesting the team was top 10 and them getting no respect for beating McKinney in a tournament final. Why wasn't Allegiance developing then instead of the win being dismissed as McKinney's team having an off game?

Then you got Volkan being welcomed back into the circle of trust by this board. He was dragged for playing weak tournaments like that Firecracker ish but his team is now showing development for doing well playing in D2 (D2 people!) and for their Labor Day performance. Remember the poster with an infamous "buddy" on Volkan's team   who tried to downplay the contributions of their 2 guest players. Now the board is showing Volkan love for development.

Then you've got the PST/Texans Red coach. Maybe it's because he looks like he's 12 and wears really shiny clothes, but dude gets no props for his coaching. I can't remember a time when his 07s didn't make the finals of a tournament they played but it's not about wins, right? Is he just the coach folks love to hate? What does he do so wrong?

Development is a word righteously thrown around in here but it's really just a unicorn in heat. Gets folks all frisky but it's highly elusive if it really does, in fact, exist. By it's very definition, development requires TIME. Lots of time and ain't nothing happened in the last 3 weeks of Classic that makes asking this question remotely fair.

Gall = Assumption. He must be good otherwise they wouldn't have given him that team. But you are very much right.

Shirley - Went from being a struggling silver division team, to now competing with and beating the better D1 teams. They have improved a lot. Very skilled group of players.

Allegiance - didn't exist until last summer. Easily the most improved team considering how long they've been around. From a struggling team in the silver division to one of the top teams in D1. Their win against Mckinney was a shock taken as luck. And the poster was claiming too much too soon. Looking back, maybe it wasn't luck. We denied their top 10 claim, now they're looking more like top 5.

Volkan - if you take him out of it, who do you pick from D2?

PST/Texans Red - He gets no respect because his team kicks the ball way too much. And that's on him. His players are too good for that.

Gall = Correct. I'm biased, but can keep an unbiased opinion. While he might be a great developmental coach, he hasn't had time to show it yet with this 07 group as he was handed the keys....

Shirley - Part of that improvement came from getting a few VERY GOOD players from other local teams...One specially comes to mind...So hard to gauge Development vs being lucky with great new talent...time will tell...too early.

Allegiance - Agree Pedro is doing a great job here. Watched a few games and the way they play the game it is obvious that they try to play a nice, enjoyable brand of soccer that will benefit the kids going forward....It might make some parents mad for losing games they should have won, but they have a good group with a coach that looks like he is doing it the right way.

Volkan - Hard to tell. Their team plays really hard. I don't know the kids well enough to know if there were many changes from last season. People I know talk really well about the guy. You asked if you  take him out who do you pick from D2? I would say Voutier is doing a great job with the kids from Rush. Similar style as Allegiance. And it looks like Martinez is too. I have only watched one game and don't know him well. But Oglesby handpicked him to take over his teams after going DA. Guy has been around too long not to select someone he trusts to continue his development path....

PST/Texans - Kid was a great player. Successful in College. The Pedigree helps sell parents when recruiting. Looks to be very focused on winning. Young guy that should mature as time goes on and become a great coach. Needs to calm down just a bit as the screaming is just too much for some of those kids...

Stavrou - Looks like he inherited a good team from Marcio and added several new kids. To early to tell. I thought Marcio was one of the TOP 07 Coaches in DFW. Unfortunately parents have too thin skin....

What is your love affair with Marcio???

He the WORST example of any coach - in any sport -  I have ever been around - EVER... Demeaning and intimidating 9 year olds may have worked 25 years ago in Brazil, but it will get your little butt whipped here in Texas.

Thin skin? He's lucky I pulled my kids early, or he would have seen how thin my skin really is...

And I'm not the only one - this is a common topic year after year after year... How he is still a Coach is beyond me - oh yeah, I remember now,  he wins at all cost.

My daughter played for the Texans for 4 years, my son for 2 years. Them backing and heralding a coach like this is the the main reason I pulled them from the organization.

Marcio lasted less than 6 months before Stavrou took over - nothing was "inherited" - more like "saved"

Soccer_Dad_NTX wrote:FUZZ - Salazar's 06 team that was untouchable a few years back were younger 06's that were playing 07, right? After age pure, they became the young kids in the new 06 age group. My understanding is the bulk of that team is in the Texans U12 DA program?

yes, that is correct, however, they were still dominant in the newly formed 06 age group as most of the good players in the previous 06 age group went to 05, and so on. So, the age within the year wasn't that much of a factor, they still had very athletic players and still won most of their games. I watched them a couple times and watched them be the weaker team, yet win because of a 30 yard free kick. They scored, the other team didn't. They won 1-0, other team lost. However, the other team was better in all facets of the game (I guess except scoring). They dominated passing, possession and all around skill.

Yes, a lot of that team is now Texans DA. Nothing against the players, they were good players and very athletic. They deserve to be DA. My point was simply that he didn't develop them and to be honest, going DA and now being with Hassan and Marcio is probably what is going to make them great players. I never had anything negative to say about the players, just the style of play the coach chooses to do and what I see as a lack of player development over there. He's always been able to recruit great athletes and players, that's not an issue. He just can't develop them like the other guys can.

I have to agree with Socceroo. Marcio was great at teaching the kids tactically and technically. He was rough with the kids, and certain parents are ok with that. Others, obviously aren't. Just because he doesn't fit the nurturing style of coach certain parents may want, does not make him a bad coach.

Bears, I completely agree on the love for "possession" soccer on this forum. Every team in the world does not play the same style of soccer, therefore every coach should not coach the same style as well. Real Madrid does not play a possession style of soccer. They play a very direct style and if they score, play a counter attack. Juventus looks to hit on counters as well.

Every coach that is in D1/D2 had to do something right to get their team there. Their job is to work with what they have and teach/play the style of soccer they see fits best for their team.

Solar 07B wrote:
What is your love affair with Marcio???

He the WORST example of any coach - in any sport -  I have ever been around - EVER... Demeaning and intimidating 9 year olds may have worked 25 years ago in Brazil, but it will get your little butt whipped here in Texas.

Thin skin? He's lucky I pulled my kids early, or he would have seen how thin my skin really is...

And I'm not the only one - this is a common topic year after year after year... How he is still a Coach is beyond me - oh yeah, I remember now,  he wins at all cost.

My daughter played for the Texans for 4 years, my son for 2 years. Them backing and heralding a coach like this is the the main reason I pulled them from the organization.

Marcio lasted less than 6 months before Stavrou took over - nothing was "inherited" - more like "saved"

This makes me laugh. A little research and you'll be able to put this all together on your own . Here's what I've been able to gather about this whole ordeal. First, this was the first time Marcio was given kids so young. So, "demeaning" 9 year olds probably still didn't work in Brazil 25 years ago either. It was an irrelevant comment since he has never done it before. Marcio has his reputation and style and it has not changed. What did change was the age of the kids. You may be able to fault him for not adapting to the younger kids, but someone who has coached that long with as much success as he's had, I doubt change was something he was able to do easily. Second, I've talked to several people on those teams. There were two teams, A and B. From the sounds of it you were on the B team. I believe his A team pretty much stayed together the entire time. The B team is the ones who had the problem. It seems that most of the better kids actually didn't mind Marcio that much and actually still like him. The B kids on the other hand seemed to not handle him. Probably has something to do with their abilities and the expectations he puts on his players. That is probably the biggest difference between A and B players in my experience. "A" team boys tend to work hard, enjoy the learning and have a desire to be better. B team kids tend to be more about having fun. Sure, they want to win and take it seriously, but not like A team players. I think Marcio holds kids to a standard that no other coach does. Most kids crack under that, but those who don't tend to go on to be very good soccer players. He is definitely not the coach for every kid. I've met him and I'd personally let my kid play for him. He would either make it and become stronger for it or he would fail and we would try something else. I'm not afraid to throw adversity at my boys. I've spoken to parents of much older boys and they tell me that their kids hated Marcio and couldn't stand him when they played for him. Later, after college they all stated he was the best coach they ever had. I guess he's a little like tequila, you either love him or hate him, no in between To add more fuel, I heard from several 08 Parents that most of the parents missed Marcio and took some time to warm up to Nick. That's a bit of a shocker but I got it straight from the source.

Bears wrote:Let me start with this...Get off my lawn. Kidding.

Cranky? Maybe. Didn't mean to come off that way and I hope I didn't offend any of you buttercups. Again, kidding.

I come to this board because my BB didn't hit the genetic lotto. Born to two nerds who never played, followed or watched soccer...ever. I come here to learn from the OGs.

Development, for me, is: a growing interest and love for the sport, ability to respond with increasing creativity and consistency to game time situations, increasing level of fitness and improved knowledge and understand of the game and rules.

I genuinely appreciate all who responded with their reasoning and those who fessed up to making assumptions about a coach's competence or ability to develop players based upon being tapped to coach a certain team.

What I take issue with is the notion that there is one right way to coach the game of soccer or to develop players.

This is nerd me talking now who began studying the game of soccer only recently. The Brazilians were heavily criticized for their uncivilized brand of soccer. Germany and England clearly play a different style of game and many found them superior because of it.

I take issue with crediting (or dinging in the case of Salazar) a coach for developing players because of the game time strategy he employs. Game strategy and tactics does not equal player development in my book.

Possession style soccer. I know. I get it. It's quite popular on this board. It's not the right way to coach or the wrong way to coach. It's just ONE way to coach. I know that's heresy to some of you good people.

Take a player who hits a big growth spirit and now has a physical advantage among his peers. That is development. Does a coach have anything to do with that?

Take a player who has a trainer and attends camps, skills, and speed training and works his azz off at practice and outside of practice. That is development. Does a coach have anything to do with that?

Show me a coach who is able to retain his players, is a great teacher and who makes practice fun, and that is more meaningful to this nerd over "he's great at developing players" which is a convenient but not meaningful catch phrase.

I think when most of us refer to development we are generally talking about things like "knowledge", "multi facet skills sets", etc. The reason "kickball" soccer is bashed so much is because it honestly doesn't take that much skill. You kick the ball as hard as you can and your teammate runs as fast as he can and kicks the ball as hard as he can. Kicking the ball hard and speed are genetic traits, not "developed" by coaches. Developing players (to me) is about instilling situational awareness. About the player's ability to adapt and change styles depending on the game/opponent. Being able to demonstrate many different skill sets. I learned a lot of this the hard way, at my own expense. I grew up playing soccer and was considered great in High School. Even won a league MVP. However when I got to College I learned the hard truth. I was never given the skill set to succeed outside the environment I grew up in. I wasn't able to readily adapt. I had one facet. I was the product of coaching that didn't develop well rounded players. I know exactly why I failed. When I watch other teams play and how they are coached I can easily see if they are more focused on true "development" or on "winning".

Every coach that is in D1/D2 had to do something right to get their team there.  Their job is to work with what they have and teach/play the style of soccer they see fits best for their team.[/quote]


love this statement.   unfortunately, this is a results driven business. people equate winning to the development of kids.   success in this business is driven by recruiting.   same as in any sport (College Football?).  if you look at Texans Red 08 recruiting link, it says only strong players.  I hope all of your kids come home after practice and say they enjoyed themselves, or don't complain every time they have to go.   I think all the coaches at this level are probably pretty good, but have to sacrifice teaching for winning.   some kids who could use the extra playing time wont get it because the coach knows it will be a dropoff when the kid comes in.   the other issue I have is that these coaches think they are celebrities.   the truth is, you are paying them for a service and they should do what you are paying them to do.  even if they do dress like Jay Z.

Fuzz wrote:

Solar 07B wrote:
What is your love affair with Marcio???

He the WORST example of any coach - in any sport -  I have ever been around - EVER... Demeaning and intimidating 9 year olds may have worked 25 years ago in Brazil, but it will get your little butt whipped here in Texas.

Thin skin? He's lucky I pulled my kids early, or he would have seen how thin my skin really is...

And I'm not the only one - this is a common topic year after year after year... How he is still a Coach is beyond me - oh yeah, I remember now,  he wins at all cost.

My daughter played for the Texans for 4 years, my son for 2 years. Them backing and heralding a coach like this is the the main reason I pulled them from the organization.

Marcio lasted less than 6 months before Stavrou took over - nothing was "inherited" - more like "saved"

This makes me laugh.  A little research and you'll be able to put this all together on your own .  Here's what I've been able to gather about this whole ordeal.  First, this was the first time Marcio was given kids so young.  So, "demeaning" 9 year olds probably still didn't work in Brazil 25 years ago either.  It was an irrelevant comment since he has never done it before.  Marcio has his reputation and style and it has not changed.  What did change was the age of the kids.  You may be able to fault him for not adapting to the younger kids, but someone who has coached that long with as much success as he's had, I doubt change was something he was able to do easily.  Second, I've talked to several people on those teams.  There were two teams, A and B.  From the sounds of it you were on the B team.  I believe his A team pretty much stayed together the entire time.  The B team is the ones who had the problem.  It seems that most of the better kids actually didn't mind Marcio that much and  actually still like him.  The B kids on the other hand seemed to not handle him.  Probably has something to do with their abilities and the expectations he puts on his players.  That is probably the biggest difference between A and B players in my experience.  "A" team boys tend to work hard, enjoy the learning and have a desire to be better.  B team kids tend to be more about having fun.  Sure, they want to win and take it seriously, but not like A team players.  I think Marcio holds kids to a standard that no other coach does.  Most kids crack under that, but those who don't tend to go on to be very good soccer players.  He is definitely not the coach for every kid.  I've met him and I'd personally let my kid play for him.  He would either make it and become stronger for it or he would fail and we would try something else.  I'm not afraid to throw adversity at my boys.  I've spoken to parents of much older boys and they tell me that their kids hated Marcio and couldn't stand him when they played for him.  Later, after college they all stated he was the best coach they ever had.  I guess he's a little like tequila, you either love him or hate him, no in between   To add more fuel, I heard from several 08 Parents that most of the parents missed Marcio and took some time to warm up to Nick.  That's a bit of a shocker but I got it straight from the source.

Justify it however you want. I do think we (and everyone else, including Hassan) agrees he should not be coaching U-11 or younger...

He started off with 30 kids when he "took over" the age group and practiced them all together. How many of that group stayed together in tact? I don't know exact numbers, but I would bet it was 10 or less.

That says something...