How to develop a game model? Part 1

Let us add two more more phases to the model. In the illustration below you can see that before a Transition is happening, players have to anticipate and prepare for that transition. Therefore we add these two phases to the model.

Let us add two more more phases to the model. In the illustration below you can see that before a Transition is happening, players have to anticipate and prepare for that transition.

Let us integrate these two moments into our game model.

At this stage, we already know the four main phases of the game, and additionally, we have added two pre-moments before the defensive or offensive transitions. However, the game consists additionally consists of a lot of sub-phases per game phase. Next, we will add sub-phases to each phase of the game. So from now on we will call the four phases as Main-phases and the additional phases we will integrate into the model, we will call them sub-phases.

In my game model, I divide into five sub-phases during the organized attack, three sub-phases during the attack-defense transition, three sub-phases during organized defense, and two sub-phases during the defense-to-attack transition.

First, let's explore the five sub-phases during the organized attack. Normally, possession starts with the goalkeeper, who is responsible for initiating the game. After opening the game (excluding the second ball), the team systematically builds up from the back, progresses play in the midfield (midfield possession), and finally creates chances to score. If the team loses the ball (attack-defense transition), it has three options: to counter-press immediately, to maintain their formation and reorganize, or to fall back as a team, often during the opponent's counter-attacks.

Now, imagine we are in the defending phase, and the opponent has the ball. This can occur at any point in the game, even after a stoppage (e.g., a throw-in or opponent's goalkeeper restarting the game). In this phase, the team also has three overall options: defend using a high, middle, or low block, which indicates the team's defensive line but not the specific pressing strategy (e.g., pressing traps or pressing signals). Another tactic, not mentioned in the graphics, is situational pressing, which often occurs when a team shifts from a midfield press to a high press in response to game context signals.

After defending, when the team regains possession, they must decide whether to counter-attack directly and play deep or to switch to ball possession and rebuild the attack. Now, we understand the four moments of the game, also known as the Main Phases, and the Sub-phases for each Main Phase. However, the model still lacks an important phase of the game: set-pieces.

Set-pieces, which include throw-ins, penalties, free-kicks, and corners, are crucial for team success and must be included in the game cycle model. Normally, offensive set-pieces occur after an attacking phase, and defensive set-pieces follow a defensive phase.

We now have a complete game phase model that includes all phases and sub-phases of the game. However, the game phase model still doesn't dictate how we want to play as a team. It merely defines our phases and sub-phases, which can later be used for periodization to structure our training according to a training focus or for analyzation purpose to have a better understanding of the game.

Working in a professional club or a youth academy necessitates an adherence to a specific philosophy on how they want to develop talented players and the style of play they prefer. I have spent many years as a youth coach at a renowned professional youth academy in Germany, known for its strong emphasis on nurturing young talents. It is essential to acknowledge that a club's philosophy can evolve over time. During my tenure, I observed slight shifts in philosophy, influenced by modern tactical trends in football.

The current philosophy of the club is built around six core values:

Ball-oriented

Creative

Brave

Positionally flexible

Proactive

Offensive

These values serve as the foundational guidelines that coaches should consider when building their game models. For instance, if the primary defensive strategy is to defend in a low block and counter-attack, it clearly contradicts the above values. Thus, these values significantly influence the development of your game model and provide a clear direction.

Take "positionally flexible" as an example. If the goal is to develop players who can adapt to different positions both during and between games, your game model must incorporate this concept. Similarly, considering the "offensive" value, if the team is to embody an offensive style of play, it is crucial to develop players with an offensive mindset. This applies not only during offensive phases but also in defensive situations where, for example, the team might press high to regain possession quickly and transition back to attack.

As you can see from these examples, it is essential to align your game model with the club’s philosophy. If you are not working for a specific club or if you own a club, you have the autonomy to shape these elements yourself. However, the beliefs and principles we hold as coaches will play a significant role in this process, which we will explore in the next section.

Reflecting on what shapes our beliefs about how a team should play football, most of us can likely recall at least one team that inspired us as coaches. For me, the standout example was Barcelona under Pep Guardiola from 2008 to 2012. In my view, they were the best team in the history of football, and I often wonder how contemporary teams nowadays would fare against them. They inspired me not just with their tiki-taka style, but also with their completeness as a team in every phase of the game. They were a perfect example of a team where the best individuals complemented each other's strengths and weaknesses and played as a unified eleven. Their dominance was not only evident in possession but also after losing the ball. The team's immediate and coordinated counter-press to regain control was striking. Although today we often associate counter-pressing with Jürgen Klopp, a review of Barcelona's games from that era reveals they were exemplary in this tactic.

This example underscores that as coaches, our beliefs about how to play the game are shaped by various experiences. It's not just professional teams that influence our coaching philosophy; our personal playing style also plays a significant role. For instance, I played as a number 10, was creative and technically skilled, but lacked defensive abilities and the attitude for defending. Naturally, it would be unusual for me to advocate for a catenaccio style of football.

Thus, it's clear that both the overarching philosophy and our personal beliefs as coaches will significantly influence the development of our game model. However, perhaps the most crucial factor to consider is the players themselves—their strengths and weaknesses must also guide our approach.

Coaches often hold differing opinions on whether players should adapt to the coach's game model, beliefs, and ideas, or if the game model should be built around the players' abilities. Some coaches prefer flexible players who can fulfill various roles and meet diverse requirements, while others strive to develop a game model that centers on the players' strengths. A third group of coaches seeks a balance, merging the two approaches mentioned above.

However, it's generally indisputable that a game model must consider the players' abilities. In my view, there should be a synergy between the coach's beliefs and ideas and the available talent within the team. I believe a game model needs to be dynamic and continually adjusted to align with the team's capabilities. For instance, if the goal is for the team to maintain extensive ball possession and dominate space and time, the players must possess the requisite skills to meet these demands. Otherwise, players may be placed in roles that do not play to their strengths, potentially leading to ineffective gameplay.

From my perspective, a game model should always be constructed around the players' abilities. If it isn't, the coach risks operating as a "template coach," imposing a rigid framework that players must fit into. This approach might be feasible at the highest levels, where clubs have substantial resources to recruit players that precisely fit their tactical needs. However, in youth teams or clubs with limited financial resources, constant adjustments are necessary to adapt to the available talent.

In summary, a game model must account for players' abilities to varying degrees, depending on the specific circumstances and resources of the team.

Short Summary

We have established that a game model must be derived from the club's philosophy, the coach's beliefs, and the players' abilities—key factors in developing a game model. Therefore, it is crucial for a coach to work for a club that aligns with their vision of how football should be played. It's also worth noting that there are various paths to success in football, but having a well-defined concept is fundamental. Acting spontaneously without a clear game model and a specific plan for how you want your team to play and train might still lead to success. However, it raises the question of whether that success is truly attributable to your coaching or if it stems from other factors, such as merely having the best players.

Adjusting strategies based on the opponent is undoubtedly a crucial aspect of game modeling. This involves considering how and to what extent our game should be adapted in response to the opponent's style of play, strategies, tactics, and overall game model.

Personally, I advocate prioritizing the strengths of our own team initially. Only in the second step should adjustments be made to counter specific opponent threats, ensuring that such changes do not diminish our players' natural capabilities. Especially in youth development stages, focusing extensively on the opponent might not be as critical as fostering a strong internal game model. The emphasis on the opponent generally increases as players mature and their competitive environments become more complex.

For instance, consider Player A, who excels as a central midfielder where he can utilize 95% of his strengths, but also has the capability to play as a right fullback, albeit at 75% efficiency. If a coach positions him as a right fullback solely based on tactical needs against a particular opponent, it might inadvertently weaken the team's overall performance.

Therefore, it is essential during youth development for players to experience various positions. This not only promotes flexibility and adaptability to the evolving demands of the game but also deepens their understanding of the game from multiple positional perspectives.

In summary, while the game model must be adaptable to opponents, the extent of these adjustments is subjective and largely depends on the coach's strategy and the developmental stage of the players. As players age, the significance of opponent adjustments tends to increase.

A frequently debated topic is whether good results are indicative of effective player development. The answer to this question is not straightforward. Let’s consider some examples to explain why success on the field does not always equate to optimal player development.

I recall a few players I trained in the past who were highly successful in their age groups but struggled as they matured, eventually becoming unable to meet the academy's standards. Despite winning nearly 90% of their games against some of Germany's top academies and being key players, these individuals were later released from the club. One player, in particular, was dismissed because he was deemed too slow, despite having consistently played as a central midfielder. From a developmental standpoint, this was suboptimal. Each position on the field demands varying skills across technical, tactical, athletic, psychological, sociological, and cognitive areas. Young players benefit from experiencing these varied demands, gaining new stimuli essential for comprehensive development. Playing the same position continuously can limit these developmental stimuli, potentially stunting a player's growth in a high-performance environment.

This brings us to why some coaches prioritize immediate success over long-term player development:

- The coach values short-term success over comprehensive development.

- The coach faces pressure from the club's management or other stakeholders.

- The coach believes that winning is a proxy for optimal player development.

It's crucial to specify the context—while professional football often emphasizes winning, many clubs also expect coaches to develop young talents within the first team, allowing them time to adapt to professional levels. However, in developmental settings, an overemphasis on success can hinder growth. There’s a saying that you learn more from failure than from success, and there is truth to this, particularly in sports.

Why is this relevant to our discussion on game models? Because a game model should accommodate these developmental needs. For instance, if we prioritize ball dominance, our game model should facilitate extensive ball contact, shaping our tactical principles around possession and ball-handling skills. Conversely, a model focused on counter-attacks might lead to a different developmental trajectory, where players spend less time in possession and more on quick transitions, possibly at the expense of technical skill development.

Additionally, consider goal kicks: if a goalkeeper's first choice is to play long balls, players miss out on learning how to build up from the back, progressing the attack through various phases.

All these considerations are pivotal when developing a game model. As we've discussed the game's four phases and set pieces, along with influential factors in game model development, the next chapter will delve into how to actually construct a game model for our team.