College Critique

Why Possession Can't Be A Priority 
In College Soccer

  Pragmatism and the NCAA hobble the game

While most of the world is steadily moving toward an acceptance of highly skilled players at all 11 positions who can pass and retain possession, the United States lags behind.  Here, a quick case study in the most significant factors at the college level holding the game back.

It's worth noting that the rules of the game (FIFA has laws - the NCAA has rules and as such operates as a wild west of football unrelated to the rest of the world's game) are ironically written by the coaches.  In an effort to aid and abet the sham of college amateurism and the cartel of the NCAA, the coaches of the game have hidden behind the participation argument and completely removed any need for technical development of players.  The NCAA would have people believe that liberal substitution rules allow more players to "participate."  This, of course, serves only to further reinforce the notion that a player who doesn't get on the field is of no value, and can gain nothing from being a team member.  Life is hard, sometimes a player isn't good enough to warrant getting in the game.  A better lesson than encouraging participation by under qualified athletes might be: work harder, get smarter and be a better player or manage the consequences.

What effect do these bastardized rules have on the game?  There is but one team on earth at the pro level that presses their opponent at virtually every spot on the field, for 90 minutes.  And while the Catalans are to be admired for their athleticism and effort, one need watch only minutes of them pinging 10 and 15 yard passes about almost aimlessly, how efficient they are at balancing the keep-ball offense with calculated bursts of extremely high pressure defending.  At the college level, however, defending is done the same way, only instead of trying to keep the ball for long stretches to save the legs, tire the opponent and ensure that the team has three and four players around the ball in case of a turnover, it's just one counter attack after another, end to end, and when a player tires, a substantially less-talented player is brought on to play the rabbit for 15 or 20 minutes.

Compare to Akron under Caleb Porter:

We have two main problems to overcome:  the substitution rules & the need to replenish the roster by 25% each year, give or take.

The Case Study

Watch this film which is from 2008, which is pretty similar to the re-match played by these two teams in 2012, in terms of the style of play, and then read the stats below:

When it comes to sub rules, Loras and Messiah brought the game to a new low, but both (among many, many others) wisely use the rules to their advantage.  The outcome?  They win, but the game is corrupted.

Loras V. Messiah in 2012 NCAAs where 19 SUBS appeared in the game; 41 players got in the game at least once!   57 actual substitutions were made utilizing the 22 starters plus the 19 subs (41 individual players) with the first five subs made before one quarter of the game had been played.  Read the play-by-play transcript for yourself here or here.  Even a perennial power like Messiah (who we played in 2012 at Haverford, and who I watched in person twice prior, as well as once during the NCAA tournament) is not so deep that they can go more than two or three into their bench before a noticeable drop off in team performance occurs.  They can, certainly, increase the frenetic nature of the game and keep the pace of play as high as possible; they aren't terrible players, but clearly they are subs for a reason.

17 changes made in the first half (mind you, once a player is removed in the first period, he or she may not be returned to the field until the second period).

The second half saw 34  changes made (each player is allowed two appearances in the second half; they may start, come off and then back on, but if they leave a second time, they are done for the remainder of the match.  Subs may come in, go out, come in again, but should they leave a second time, are done for the remainder).

The overtime period saw 6 more subs, in the less than 10 minutes played (Messiah wins 1-0).

The final effect?  Less live game time, so it becomes a truncated exercise in winning set pieces either by fouls in transition, long throws, or corners conceded in desperate counter-attack defense.  I wouldn't walk across the street to watch these two teams play (though I admire their win/loss records, and would love to have national championships to my name!) but I'd have paid top dollar to watch Porter's Akron sides as they made deep NCAA runs, and won a title (2010) and finished runner-up in 2009.  And I certainly know which team I'd rather play for...

Add to that the fact that most kids get to college lacking fundamental skills and there's too much remedial work to be done in too little time and under too much pressure to win.

The Other Elephant In The Room

With remedial work being all but required at every level (and I'm not griping- every college coach in America will tell you that 1st touch, passing, ball striking, 1v1 defending, etc...the absolute basics - and I bet Arsene Wenger rolls his eyes heaven-ward on the same points) and the limited time allowed by NCAA rules to develop players, it behooves a coach, at least one who wants to keep the job, to opt for direct play, a stretched game and field position over possession.  Get the best athletes, irrespective of whether or not they can control the tempo of the game, manipulate a defense, or play clever combinations at the top of a crowded penalty area, and let 'em run.  Coaches at the college level love technical players, but they always play for safety with athleticism.

So often, the senior class has the ability to play a little keep-ball, but the other three classes haven't got it yet...that class, of which maybe four or six will be starters, graduates, another handful move up and the cycle repeats itself.  This isn't to say more kids should stay in school for fifth years, but rather it's a simple reality. It just isn't easy to find a 17 or 18 year old high school senior who can play as well as a 22 year old senior...worlds of difference between those two demographics!

A little bit of a chicken-or-the-egg situation.  That said, if a player is looking to stand out among the thousands of players out there in his or her graduating class, being more technical is a good place to start.