Fundamentals Are Only a Stepping Stone
The organization of the sport is riddled with political problems, from grassroots youth leagues all the way up to FIFA. And yet the beauty of the game itself still captivates the hearts and minds of more people than any other game there is. That gap between the institutions and the game is worth keeping in mind, because it shows up in player development too. A lot of what gets sold to parents as training has more to do with the business of soccer than with how players actually learn.
So with hope and a critical eye, we want to lay out a few beliefs we hold about skill acquisition. If you want to go deep on the research, the podcast episodes with Mark O'Sullivan cover the nature of kinetic skill acquisition in detail. The Insight philosophy does not align with Mark on every point, but there are two takeaways we want every parent to consider.
1) Fundamentals Are Only a Stepping Stone Toward Function
The thousands of unopposed passing patterns and cone dribbles you see on Instagram or TikTok are good warmups, and little more than that. They look impressive because they are clean. Nobody is closing you down, the ball arrives at the same speed every time, and the next action is decided before the ball even gets there. Take away the pressure and you take away the part of the skill that actually matters.
Without context and decision-making, predetermined drills do little to further player development. A touch is not a skill on its own. A touch that buys you a half-second against a defender who is arriving on your shoulder is a skill. The fundamental is the raw material; the function is what the player does with it when the game is moving.
This is not an argument against technique. Players still need a reliable first touch, a clean framing of the body, weight on a pass. We spend real time on all of it. The point is that technique is the floor, not the ceiling, and too many players spend years polishing the floor.
How That Looks in a Session
At Insight, we ask players to make decisions, even in a private coaching session with no opponent on the field:
- Scan, then act: we ask players to scan and perform various actions based on Blazepod colors, so the action is chosen in the moment rather than rehearsed.
- Film review: we watch clips together and discuss decisions in different areas of the field. Why that pass, why then, what else was available.
- Micro-goals in context: the goals we set with a player are to be completed in a practice or a game, not in the session where we introduced them.
Functional players are creative and can execute actions under pressure. Unopposed passing patterns rarely replicate that. If a player can only do it when the picture is perfect, they cannot yet do it.
2) Every Player Acquires Skill Differently
Players differ in how they pick up skills and in how they execute them. Two players can arrive at the same outcome through completely different mechanics, and coaching both of them toward one model usually costs more than it gains.
We get to know the quirks and strengths of the players we work with and build on those rather than teach a "textbook" way of doing things. One player shields the ball with their body and beats people in tight space. Another sees a pass three seconds early but hates contact. Those are not flaws to be corrected into sameness, they are the beginnings of a style. If players do certain skills well, they likely do those things well in competition, as a function.
Our job is to widen the range around what a player already trusts, and to be honest about the gaps that are genuinely holding them back.
What to Look For
Parents ask us how to tell good training from good content. A simple filter: watch what the player has to decide. If the answer is nothing, you are watching a warmup.
← All PostsNext time you see a video of a player dribbling around a cone, skip to the one of a player learning with decision-making, or beating an opponent on the field. That example is much better for development.