At halftime of a recent college game, two youth teams played at halftime. The children were tiny, and the crowd loved it, and everyone went crazy when a player finally scored as they were leaving the court after 10 minutes. In 10 minutes of fullcourt 5v5 basketball, more children face-planted by tripping on their own feet than made a shot! (more…)
Posts Tagged ‘small-sided games’
Kobe Bryant ignited a great deal of discussion about basketball development in the United States. I only wish that he had made those statements in 2006 when I first published Cross Over: The New Model of Youth Basketball Development. (more…)
A coach sent me the following questions about using small-sided games during practice:
When you play small-sided games (2 on 2, 3 on 3), do you play continuously on a full court or do you play half court? (more…)
I always have played a lot of one-on-one with my teams, as I tend to see the game as a number of one-on-one battles. However, as I re-wrote the curriculums for the Playmakers Basketball Development League and began to plan for the up-coming season, I realized two-on-two is the optimal starting point. (more…)
I watched the end of a college basketball practice yesterday and spoke to a college assistant from a different program. At the practice, I saw the team play two one-minute games in the last 20 minutes of practice; the coach spent the rest of the time talking or instructing (I could not hear as I was at the opposite basket). When I spoke to the assistant coach, he emphasized the importance of repetitions and doing things (running the plays) over and over again so that the players learned. (more…)
This weekend marked the first Change the Game conference sponsored by Boston University’s School of Education, Edgework Consulting, and Up2Us Sports. The idea behind the conference was to examine Sports System re-Design (SSrD). (more…)
Originally published in Los Angeles Sports & Fitness, September 2011.
When Massachusetts had a five-year period where 16,000 youngsters quit youth hockey before they turned 8, USA Hockey re-evaluated its programming. Roger Grillo, regional manager for USA Hockey’s developmental program and a former coach at Brown University said in a Boston Magazine interview that “The research shows that it’s burnout. It’s too serious too soon.’’ USA Hockey adopted the American Development Model to guide the development of its young players through a long term athlete development plan. (more…)
Here are the notes from my presentation at the Boston University Sports Psychology for Coaches Conference presented by BU’s Institute for Coach Education.
Small-sided games provide more on-ball activity for players, meaning more opportunities for technical and tactical skill development. However, the perception is that small-sided games are easier than full-sided games or that they fail to reproduce the same physiological responses as a full-sided game.
In a recent study in Revista de Psicología del Deporte by Jaime Sampaio, Catarina Abrantes & Nuno Leite (2009) studied the heart rate of 15-year-old boys in 3v3 and 4v4 games. First, they used a yo-yo intermittent test to find the players’ maximum heart rates. Then, during the 3v3 and 4v4 games (25-minute games), the players’ heart rates were over 80% of HRMax with the 3v3 games posting slightly higher heart rates.
The researchers wrote that these games produce “similar cardiovascular stress as other intermittent exercises specifically designed to improve athletes’ endurance.”
Therefore, small-sided games are not easier than full-sided games and provide a comparable physiological stress for young athletes.
By Brian McCormick
Author, Cross Over: The New Model of Youth Basketball Development
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League