Are UEFA Coaching Licenses to blame?

[Dolman Exile]

(Hopefully someone with direct experience can shed some light here…?)

At professional levels of the game, it’s mandatory to hold a minimum level of UEFA Coaching License.

LM is one of a raft of new managers who are all linked by holding the top UEFA Pro License at a relatively young age. He’s not alone in struggling within this cohort. How many of us know what the license entails and could its influence explain some of his recent difficulties?

Is it pure coincidence that so many of the so called young, modern managers have similar possession heavy philosophies and playing styles? Is this solely down to growing up in the Guardiola era or are UEFA courses encouraging it?

Whether he has or he hasn’t or whether he’s capable of implementing it or not, LM certainly believes that he has a detailed blueprint in his head. Is this what the UEFA courses do, facilitate a manager to choose a formation and pattern of play and then validate it via assessment? Do they leave the programme with a fully assessed and approved Plan A which they are then scared to deviate from? Does it explain why so many supporters of so many clubs lament the lack of a Plan B?

I want to believe that LM has a coherent plan that he will quickly find a way to execute but I fear he might be one of a generation of Pep-ball Pro License academics when what we really need is a free thinker or maverick who happens to hold a license?

[East End Old Boy]

Currently there’s too much over thinking in the game. Back to basics and suitable players in correct positions.

Football isn’t rocket science and never will be!

[Phileas Fogg]

I think an interesting barometer to judge Manning by is Joe Edwards at Millwall.

Similar sized clubs with similar expectations, both appointed within a day of each other.. Manning slightly better win % but inflated by FA Cup games.

Very similar in age, both allegedly highly thought of.. just that Millwall cut their losses ASAP.

Edited March 17 by Phileas Fogg

[Kingswood Robin]

If everybody is being taught the same thing, won't many teams (of similar ability) just cancel each other out as both sides know what's exactly coming? I've always thought games are won by doing something a bit different/unexpected now and then. Is modern coaching all just perfect world stuff?

[ExiledAjax]

7 minutes ago, Dolman Exile said:

(Hopefully someone with direct experience can shed some light here…?)

I am not this.

7 minutes ago, Dolman Exile said:

Is it pure coincidence that so many of the so called young, modern managers have similar possession heavy philosophies and playing styles? Is this solely down to growing up in the Guardiola era or are UEFA courses encouraging it?

But, another aspect of modern football that I have heard cited as a reason for this and for the ubiquity of certain styles of football and coaching is TV, and the availability of video analysis. 

Everyone can watch everyone in excruciating frame-by-frame detail, from multiple angles and with all the AI-stripped data you can want. A far cry from 100 years ago when Chapman's Huddersfield could surprise everyone with the concept of counter-attacking. A far cry even from the 80s and 90s when scratchy VHS tapes were posted to analysts and managers and pored over in sheds. 

It's one aspect of what is a big issue in modern football, I suspect another may well be what you identify as well - uniformity of education.

[George Rs]

16 minutes ago, Dolman Exile said:

(Hopefully someone with direct experience can shed some light here…?)

At professional levels of the game, it’s mandatory to hold a minimum level of UEFA Coaching License.

LM is one of a raft of new managers who are all linked by holding the top UEFA Pro License at a relatively young age. He’s not alone in struggling within this cohort. How many of us know what the license entails and could its influence explain some of his recent difficulties?

Is it pure coincidence that so many of the so called young, modern managers have similar possession heavy philosophies and playing styles? Is this solely down to growing up in the Guardiola era or are UEFA courses encouraging it?

Whether he has or he hasn’t or whether he’s capable of implementing it or not, LM certainly believes that he has a detailed blueprint in his head. Is this what the UEFA courses do, facilitate a manager to choose a formation and pattern of play and then validate it via assessment? Do they leave the programme with a fully assessed and approved Plan A which they are then scared to deviate from? Does it explain why so many supporters of so many clubs lament the lack of a Plan B?

I want to believe that LM has a coherent plan that he will quickly find a way to execute but I fear he might be one of a generation of Pep-ball Pro License academics when what we really need is a free thinker or maverick who happens to hold a license?

An over emphasis on the tactical side of the game imo, as you say most likely caused by the current “Pep era”. 

Too much focus on tactically outmanoeuvring an opponent, rather than your 11 men having more desire, determination and confidence than the opponent. 

Tactics win you games. Passion, determination and confidence wins you seasons. At least in my opinion. 

[Denbury Red]

Can't agree more.

The teams that excite, get fans off their seats and generally progress - attack at all costs, try and try to make things happen but all in all have a clear and simple plan on how to score goals.

At the moment it seems that City only want to keep possession, not concede goals - rather than score them and if you asked the players what the tactics were to score a goal I don't think any of them would know.

Think back to the Scotty days running down the right wing - ball passed to Tinnion (the only thing he's done really well for the club is ping a pass with his left foot)  who passes it out to Scotty who runs down the wing and crosses for one of numnerous forwards to run on to and score.

Simples!!!

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, Dolman Exile said:

(Hopefully someone with direct experience can shed some light here…?)

At professional levels of the game, it’s mandatory to hold a minimum level of UEFA Coaching License.

LM is one of a raft of new managers who are all linked by holding the top UEFA Pro License at a relatively young age. He’s not alone in struggling within this cohort. How many of us know what the license entails and could its influence explain some of his recent difficulties?

Is it pure coincidence that so many of the so called young, modern managers have similar possession heavy philosophies and playing styles? Is this solely down to growing up in the Guardiola era or are UEFA courses encouraging it?

Whether he has or he hasn’t or whether he’s capable of implementing it or not, LM certainly believes that he has a detailed blueprint in his head. Is this what the UEFA courses do, facilitate a manager to choose a formation and pattern of play and then validate it via assessment? Do they leave the programme with a fully assessed and approved Plan A which they are then scared to deviate from? Does it explain why so many supporters of so many clubs lament the lack of a Plan B?

I want to believe that LM has a coherent plan that he will quickly find a way to execute but I fear he might be one of a generation of Pep-ball Pro License academics when what we really need is a free thinker or maverick who happens to hold a license?

Is this what the UEFA courses do, facilitate a manager to choose a formation and pattern of play and then validate it via assessment? In parts yes. 

The pro licence is proof of proficiency. It consists of modules that cover things like game related training, tactics, scouting, match analysis to contracts and agents. To gain a A, B and the non pro C licence you have to create a project which covers your football your philosophy, how you will coach, what your mission and vision is.

That project and all its elements of training, its game approach and model of play could be 4-4-2 and playing like Dave Bassetts Wimbledon. During the project assessment will be made leading up to a game, during  a match by FA assessors. They don't tell the individual how to play the game, they assess efficiency and competency. 

Is it pure coincidence that so many of the so called young, modern managers have similar possession heavy philosophies and playing styles? No. Its where the game has been heading for decades. England has absorbed influence from wider football as we have brought in foreign coaches and their excellence is mimicked, copied, plagiarised etc. 

The FA and Howard Wilkinson created blue print for the national game, the future game two decades ago. This saw a move towards more possession based football to create more technical players. England's U teams to the XI are competing at levels they did not previously. Its been adapt to succeed. 

Pep is a maverick. He is a free thinker. His football clearly has a lineage to Rinus Michels, Cruyff, but aspects are unique and remarkable in their unorthodoxy. 

Edited March 17 by Cowshed

[Markthehorn]

Probably be a time when players will be told off for passing it forward too soon above knee hight !

[Mr Popodopolous]

Possession and 4-3-3 isn't necessarily too bad IMO.

Provided there is an intensity and hunger out of possession too. No I don't think it is Pep or bust, there are many other versions that are similar albeit falling short of Pep.

*Brentford under Frank at this level and vs middling or lower sides at PL when fairly good availability.

*For a time Italy under Mancini both had a lot of ball and a lot of dominance. Not much post 2021 however.

*Napoli under Spalletti were great last year at Home and in Europe.

*Leeds under Bielsa for 3 years albeit not always pure 4-3-3.

*Liverpool have quite a lot of possession under Klopp but aren't Tiki Taka.

*Newcastle under Howe when in form and good fitness.

Probably many more.

Without intensity and aspiration to dominate though, possession in itself is pointless but can assist in a defensive sense at times but is dull as hell.

These examples all differ in specific style but for periods or longer they were dominant sides or attacking sides, with a fair share of possession and good shot numbers.

Edited March 17 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

What I'm trying to say I guess is that it is a bit reductive (IMO) to say about a host of clubs and some national teams.

https://www.holdingmidfield.com/how-did-roberto-mancini-new-look-italy-win-euro-2020-2021-tactics-tactical-analysis/

https://www.besoccer.com/new/euro-2020-smart-pressing-midfield-control-and-attacking-fluidity-ndash-how-mancini-guided-italy-to-glory-1017845

Young manager

Doesn't have players

Tries to clone Pep

Flops

These examples above are all or have been quite serviceable. Granted none of them are present Championship sides..

Their finishing touch reserved them hence why they missed the WC 2022..by most metrics they were still superior but their finishing was not.

Edited March 18 by Mr Popodopolous

[Numero Uno]

All I know is that for a good five or six years now the football has deteriorated rapidly at Ashton Gate. The club has literally forgotten that you are there to ENJOY what you are watching. I was able to swallow it under Nige for a while and was hoping that THIS SEASON was the one where we would move forward in terms of moving the lack of style on a little bit. However we know what happened there. The football we saw last week (Bristol City v Swansea) was an appalling indictment of the "Tactics Board" over-coaching that now seems to be prevalent. Liam Manning, Ian Foster, Joe Edwards, Luke Williams.................I couldn't care less what professional coaches, data analysts and the like say, as someone who pays money and contributes in a tiny way to your over-inflated salaries I would just like to say that, as entertainment, your football really is SHIT, it's BORING and it's nothing more than BINARY BALL with the odd exception every now and again in our case.

26 points in 23 games and 26 goals in 23 games having been shut out 9 times - how turgid is that? It gets worse though - it's very spooky but it's also 12 points and 12 goals in our last 14 matches with seven where we have failed to score (or half). Have a think about that for a moment - TWELVE GOALS AND SHUT OUT SEVEN TIMES IN FOURTEEN MATCHES. If that's what coaching genius means then stick it right up your hairy arsehole.

03011113400012023010210 for those who are interested. I know others do some great stats but simple ones we all understand show that this is what Tinnion's and Manning's "front foot" football looks like (since Boxing Day in brackets):

Nine games - 0 goals (7)

Seven games - 1 goal (3)

Three games - 2 goals (3)

Three games - 3 goals (1)

One game - 4 goals (0)

[tin]

11 hours ago, Dolman Exile said:

(Hopefully someone with direct experience can shed some light here…?)

At professional levels of the game, it’s mandatory to hold a minimum level of UEFA Coaching License.

LM is one of a raft of new managers who are all linked by holding the top UEFA Pro License at a relatively young age. He’s not alone in struggling within this cohort. How many of us know what the license entails and could its influence explain some of his recent difficulties?

Is it pure coincidence that so many of the so called young, modern managers have similar possession heavy philosophies and playing styles? Is this solely down to growing up in the Guardiola era or are UEFA courses encouraging it?

Whether he has or he hasn’t or whether he’s capable of implementing it or not, LM certainly believes that he has a detailed blueprint in his head. Is this what the UEFA courses do, facilitate a manager to choose a formation and pattern of play and then validate it via assessment? Do they leave the programme with a fully assessed and approved Plan A which they are then scared to deviate from? Does it explain why so many supporters of so many clubs lament the lack of a Plan B?

I want to believe that LM has a coherent plan that he will quickly find a way to execute but I fear he might be one of a generation of Pep-ball Pro License academics when what we really need is a free thinker or maverick who happens to hold a license?

I don’t think so, no. Would you think Pep or Klopp tell their players to be emotionless? Absolutely no chance IMO. 

I suspect the licences teach the modern coaching methods, but on top of that you need to be able to motivate, man-manage and be tactically astute to be successful.

Klopp once said of his and Pep’s teams that they match their own personalities. Manning could say the same.

[Dr Balls]

Well let’s look at the FA Cup Quarter Finals for evidence.

Wolves v Coventry - exciting and unpredictable

Chelsea v Leicester - exciting and unpredictable 

Man United v Liverpool - exciting and unpredictable 

Man City v Newcastle - dull and predictable

if you were a neutral 3 out of 4 were great games, but the possession-obsessed game provided minimal entertainment. And that’s a big part of the problem. And it’s not a new one because that successful Spanish team from 2008-2012 at times looked as if they were trying to bore the opposition into submission!

 

 

[Fpcity]

29 minutes ago, Dr Balls said:

Well let’s look at the FA Cup Quarter Finals for evidence.

Wolves v Coventry - exciting and unpredictable

Chelsea v Leicester - exciting and unpredictable 

Man United v Liverpool - exciting and unpredictable 

Man City v Newcastle - dull and predictable

if you were a neutral 3 out of 4 were great games, but the possession-obsessed game provided minimal entertainment. And that’s a big part of the problem. And it’s not a new one because that successful Spanish team from 2008-2012 at times looked as if they were trying to bore the opposition into submission!

 

 

I don't even bother watching Man city games as they're so boring. The Premier league was pretty much always exciting to watch certainly if it involved the top clubs, can't stand Pep and would love to see him manage an average team to see if he play the same type of football. 

 

[Monkeh]

No, they are not,

If every manager were like LM then you could attribute some blame, bit they aren't,

We've just got a poor manager who is here because he is a yes man instead of someone who can challenge the higher ups,

 

[22A]

13 hours ago, Dolman Exile said:

(Hopefully someone with direct experience can shed some light here…?)

At professional levels of the game, it’s mandatory to hold a minimum level of UEFA Coaching License.

https://www.uefa.com/insideuefa/news/0268-11ef810e73fb-f340214d3d91-1000--uefa-coaching-licences-every-course-for-which-uefa-sets-m/

To be admitted to a UEFA coaching diploma course, candidates must:

- possess sufficient spoken and written skills in the official course language
- meet the organiser’s admission criteria, which should include an aptitude evaluation
- submit all admission documents required by the course organiser
- have no criminal record for crimes incompatible with the coaching profession

[Cowshed]

2 hours ago, Fpcity said:

I don't even bother watching Man city games as they're so boring. The Premier league was pretty much always exciting to watch certainly if it involved the top clubs, can't stand Pep and would love to see him manage an average team to see if he play the same type of football. 

 

Pep Guardiloa has not played the same type football from Barcelona to Bayern Munich to Man City. Bayern played a 4-1-4-1 and played with wingers who crossed to Muller and the Polish/German whose name I cant spell. Barcelona to Man City is more similar but Man Citys build up play due to having Ederson and changes in laws (post 2020) see the team having a wide variation, Man Citys formations in possession due to Ederson, Stones, Walker are very different to Barcelona and Bayern, they are playing a times with eleven outfield players with Ederson as a centre back. So. Mr Guardiola adapts and evolves his football to environments x personnel, its not the same club to club.

2 hours ago, tin said:

I don’t think so, no. Would you think Pep or Klopp tell their players to be emotionless? Absolutely no chance IMO. 

I suspect the licences teach the modern coaching methods, but on top of that you need to be able to motivate, man-manage and be tactically astute to be successful.

Klopp once said of his and Pep’s teams that they match their own personalities. Manning could say the same.

Licences do not teach modern coaching modern coaching methods. Tutors across education will teach coaching methodologies, It is the coach who has to prove across modules that they can demonstrate proficiency in coaching. Motivation, man management is part of modules, but this is again a demonstration of knowledge and proficiency, this does not mean the individual is an expert and at the zenith of psychology.   

Modern coaching methods. Erik Ten Hag, De Zerbi have pro licences, so does Gareth Ainsworth. Hopefully you see where that goes.  

 

 

Edited March 18 by Cowshed

[Dolman Exile]

So the UEFA License is beginning to sound like ISO9001…?

That doesn’t stop you producing a useless product but it does mean you do it to a consistently high standard!

[LondonBristolian]

I don’t think education or accreditation is to blame for how people apply it.

The problem isn’t giving coaches a standard of knowledge and testing it - which is in itself a good thing - but that prospective employers of managers need to assess who has learned the basics by rote and who can apply them practically.

I think, in any walk of life, you get the same conflict within vocational training and learning. Some people learn instinctively and need no formal training at all but, without any training or accreditation, you have no measure of recourse for people who are appalling at their jobs. At the other end of the scale some people take training, combine their learning with practical experience and are incredible at their jobs but others learn all the theory but lack the flexibility to apply it well with practice. Ultimately this should be picked up in any effective recruitment process. 

[Roe]

3 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

All I know is that for a good five or six years now the football has deteriorated rapidly at Ashton Gate. The club has literally forgotten that you are there to ENJOY what you are watching. I was able to swallow it under Nige for a while and was hoping that THIS SEASON was the one where we would move forward in terms of moving the lack of style on a little bit. However we know what happened there. The football we saw last week (Bristol City v Swansea) was an appalling indictment of the "Tactics Board" over-coaching that now seems to be prevalent. Liam Manning, Ian Foster, Joe Edwards, Luke Williams.................I couldn't care less what professional coaches, data analysts and the like say, as someone who pays money and contributes in a tiny way to your over-inflated salaries I would just like to say that, as entertainment, your football really is SHIT, it's BORING and it's nothing more than BINARY BALL with the odd exception every now and again in our case.

26 points in 23 games and 26 goals in 23 games having been shut out 9 times - how turgid is that? It gets worse though - it's very spooky but it's also 12 points and 12 goals in our last 14 matches with seven where we have failed to score (or half). Have a think about that for a moment - TWELVE GOALS AND SHUT OUT SEVEN TIMES IN FOURTEEN MATCHES. If that's what coaching genius means then stick it right up your hairy arsehole.

03011113400012023010210 for those who are interested. I know others do some great stats but simple ones we all understand show that this is what Tinnion's and Manning's "front foot" football looks like (since Boxing Day in brackets):

Nine games - 0 goals (7)

Seven games - 1 goal (3)

Three games - 2 goals (3)

Three games - 3 goals (1)

One game - 4 goals (0)

In fairness to Manning, and I never thought I'd say that , it looks like he had a similar start with Oxford last year when he took over.

5 dull draws and 2 defeats to nil in his first 7 games.

From what he's said about "not working much with possession", it seems quite clear that the only thing he's really bothered about now is working out of possession with his boring, block football.

I would assume he's then looking to implement whatever he wants to do with the ball from next season when we can look to strengthen in those areas.

I kind of get it, but it smacks of not being able to read the room in the meantime and concerns me how adaptable he'll be in the future when needed. Not to mention that it's almost blind faith that what he will implement over the next pre-season will even work anyway.

 

[Cowshed]

39 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I don’t think education or accreditation is to blame for how people apply it.

The problem isn’t giving coaches a standard of knowledge and testing it - which is in itself a good thing - but that prospective employers of managers need to assess who has learned the basics by rote and who can apply them practically.

I think, in any walk of life, you get the same conflict within vocational training and learning. Some people learn instinctively and need no formal training at all but, without any training or accreditation, you have no measure of recourse for people who are appalling at their jobs. At the other end of the scale some people take training, combine their learning with practical experience and are incredible at their jobs but others learn all the theory but lack the flexibility to apply it well with practice. Ultimately this should be picked up in any effective recruitment process. 

A parallel. A driving licence proves a individual is proficient to pass a exam and a test, they can drive. this does not mean in future the individual does not drive badly, dangerously, recklessly etc.

We don't allow people to drive cars without proof of a standard and knowledge.

Football at each level has certifiable standards from grass roots up to the pro game to achieve. Football doesn't allow people to coach without proof of a standard and knowledge, standards that are not easy to achieve, taking years to reach pro licence level and through evaluation of candidates are not widely available. 

Edited March 18 by Cowshed