SC Soccer Forums SCSoccer.com Forums Girls Varsity Soccer The creative forward....the female "Enzo"

There has been lots of talk on the 3A thread about "best players". I agree that the player who has the opportunity to consistently deposit the ball in the back of the net is not always the best player, but I do have a soft spot for creative players who can score goals against good competition.

Where is the female Enzo? Is there a player out there who can dribble through a couple of quality defenders and change a game by scoring a great goal? Is there a player out there with the will (and ability) to take a game over on the offensive end?

Do we teach this? coach this? encourage this?

We've had a number of great players reach the Division 1 level over the past years:

Alex Mouton (very fast)
Blakely Mattern (very technical, smart)
Julie Bolt (very fast, very strong, skilled, fit)
Jen Ficklen (very technical, strong, smart)

We've also had a couple of girls break the century mark (Caitlin Robinson - TL Hanna, Danielle Schmitt - Fort Mill).

But is there a girl out there, who when the chips are down, can dribble through a quality defense and score a creative goal? Can anybody dance like Enzo?

Robinson and Gmereck are both great dribblers, but very direct with little negative motion. I haven't seen a "Brazilian-style" female HS player in the last two years.

Gmerek, Campbell and Sheets are all very solid juniors with college careers ahead of them. All can score but generally within the confines of "the system". All three do a heckuva lot more than score, in fact when you think of these three, goal-scoring may not be the first thing that comes to mind. They don't need to score to be effective.

Do we teach players to become great goal scorers? Do we discourage it? When we find a great individual player at age 8, do we put her on a competitive team and encourage her to play within the system? Is this a male/female thing where girls are uncomfortable with garnering all of the attention at the expense of their friends/teammates?

Pass=good, dribble=bad?

Is it easier to teach a young lady to be a great defender than it is to teach her to be a great goal scorer? I believe it is. I don't think coaches spend enough time turning their good finishers into "great" finishers.

It isn't "easier" to coach "great" regardless of position. Maybe easier to coach "good" def over "good" forward.

Several top players can score or take over when needed, but at HS level those same tend to do many other things day in and out for the good of the team.

The real world isn't "Goal!" or "Bend It Like (you know who)." Am quite glad we don't have many young women players trying to "dribble through the whole defense" as far too many young men think that is soccer. . .

p&y,

I haven't seen a girl take over a game offensively, by beating decent defenders 1 v 1, in seven years of watching varsity high school in this state.

You want me to applaud them for not dribbling through the defense "selfishly" and scoring a goal? I watched Fort Mill, Wando and Lexington play three round-robin 0-0 draws last month. It would have been exciting if someone from any of those teams would have decided to take matters into their own hands.

Explain your "confines of the system" comment.

Gmereck can make it as a winger or even attacking mid. She does exceptional while facing the goal. Robinson is the best finisher I HAVE EVER seen, and often comes back to the midfield to help. She does best while posted up to the goal/defender. A male comparison would be to Ching or McBride. Gmereck is more of the Donavon or Beasley mold. She dribbles well, creates, shoots from afar, and has burning speed.

I guess we should encourage our players to do often what they do best. We set Cait up so as to capiltalize on her strengths and I know Michael Burriss does the same with Gmereck.

The more talented players can do about any job you want, but the personality has to be matched to the position. One thing like dribbling or passing isn't to be commended over the other, that is pigeon holing your players and very, very unwise. Run 'em through the drills and watch as they develop their favorite areas.

Top 15 teams usually have the luxury to put their better players where they will fit best. Those more towards the middle/bottom usually put their talents up top, center mid, or at sweeper. Best players are put in the highest traffic areas as opposed to what suits them best.

(Little off topic, but fun to brag on the Region 1 players )

Hurst66—

I'm sure we're talking about different things—Of course, a player taking on a defense and winning a match is what we all are looking for (and it has happened—sorry you've missed it), but that is different than a player who thinks that is everything. That mentality ruins a number of males; so my point was about that.

Good points all around. Any "one way" of thinking is wrong as we all know. They gotta believe you can dribble so you can pass and verse visa.
How the player is developed is a big factor. If like the case with most of mine they come from rec. coed. The girls play even with the boys ages 5-10. Then from 10-14 the playmaking is done by the boys, girls for the most part are in support. When they arrive at JV/V they are back in control and in central positions. So you can see the shifts that take place.
Of course this is not 100% true in all cases.
I am trying to get a girls only league in my area for ages 11-14 but it is a very tough climb.

M*A*S*H Daddy,

I agree that every HS coach has to strategically place their best players in the middle of the field. Some teams have more "A players" than others. I guess Enzo benefits from having other very good forwards and midfielders around him, giving him the luxury (and freedom) to go to the goal and take on defenders, without the fear of losing the ball.


p&y,

I'm not saying a player has to be "selfish" to the detriment of the team.....I'm just looking for a player who has the ability to do this at "crunch time". I'm sure it's happened as you state above, I'm also pretty sure that it doesn't happen that often.


Coach Tim,

Good point concerning player development. Again I ask, are we teaching 1v1 and 1v2? Are we encouraging it? In the middle of the field it's generally not a great idea, but when you get into the final attacking third it often becomes necessary.
The young players that have the ability to do this might be pushed ahead to become more challenged. Instead of dominating, and building confidence, at their age division is it possible that they are moved up to a premier level, or perhaps even up an age group? Now that the creative player is "playing up" and giving up size, can they continue to be encouraged to hold the ball? Or do they have to give it up because the game is now faster and more physical?

Just a thought.

Hurst
Simple answer. No, on 1v1, 1v2 and individual skills.
To give an answer I can only reference my little slice of the world.
Another factor is self play and small sided play.
I read an article in 4-4-2 a few years back they interviewed many top players about their early years. The most common factors were small games and a ball and a wall.
How is this for an idea. What if we didnt "coach" kids till they were 10. Meaning we "develop" them, let them play. I officiated a 5 year old game last fall. A coach had a player double teamed, imagine that idea. He was considered brilliant after the match. 5 years old.