A professional footballer named Marcus came to watch one of my sessions.
He was doing community work with his club and I had invited him to observe my U14s. I thought I was showing him what grassroots coaching looked like. Instead, he showed me what I was getting wrong.
After the session, I asked for his honest feedback.
“The players like you,” he said. “They are engaged. But they spent twenty minutes standing around waiting for turns. In professional training, that would never happen.”
I started making excuses about equipment and numbers. He stopped me.
“It is not about resources. It is about design.”
Then he told me what he valued in training. What made sessions worthwhile. What separated good coaches from average ones.
What Marcus Noticed
Marcus pointed out that my players were active for perhaps thirty-five of the sixty minutes. The rest was waiting, listening to instructions, or transitioning between activities.
“In professional training, we are moving constantly,” he explained. “Not because the coaches are cruel. Because that is what matches demand. You do not get standing breaks in a game.”
He watched my passing drill where players queued in lines of six. Each player got about eight touches over twelve minutes.
“That is not intensity,” Marcus said. “That is babysitting with footballs. Make it smaller groups, more balls, constant movement. Same skill, completely different experience.”
I had thought I was running a high-quality session. Through Marcus’s eyes, I saw the reality.
What Professional Players Actually Want
Over the following months, I talked to other professionals about what they valued in training. Their answers were remarkably consistent.
“High intensity,” said one. “Not running for the sake of running. Decision-making under pressure. Technical execution at speed. Concentration throughout. Competitive elements that drive effort.”
“Very technical,” said another. “I want sessions that challenge my technique, not just my fitness. Specific skill focus. Progression through levels. Immediate applicability to matches.”
“Match realistic,” said a third. “Drills that do not transfer to games waste time. Game-like speeds. Actual game situations. Relevant pressure. Decision points that mirror what I will face on Saturday.”
“Position specific,” said a fourth. “Generic sessions develop generic players. I need work that addresses the specific demands of my role.”
These were not complaints. They were standards. Professional players know what quality looks like because they experience it daily.
Translating To Grassroots
Marcus had anticipated my objection.
“You cannot train U14s like professionals,” he said. “But you can apply the same principles at their level.”
Intensity looks different for younger players. But appropriate intensity still means competitive elements, time constraints, quick transitions, and minimal standing around. Intensity is relative to age and ability, not absent.
Technical focus remains essential regardless of level. Young players benefit from technical depth even more than professionals because they are building foundations. Technical does not mean boring. It means clear focus, lots of repetition, immediate feedback, and visible progress.
Realism scales appropriately. Match realism for young players means right-sized goals, appropriate space, game-like activities over drill-like activities, and opposition and pressure.
Position specificity develops over time. It matters less at younger ages where general development comes first. But even young players can benefit from understanding different roles, experiencing various positions, and recognising their strengths.
What I Changed
After Marcus’s feedback, I redesigned my sessions around his principles.
I audited my time. How long were players active versus waiting? How many touches per player? Was every activity purposeful?
I reduced group sizes. My six-player lines became pairs and threes. Players went from eight touches in twelve minutes to forty touches in the same time.
I added competition and consequences. Every activity had a winner. Every drill had stakes. Players who coasted started caring because coasting meant losing.
I connected everything to matches. “Why are we doing this?” became a question I could answer for every activity. “Because this happens in games” became my design principle.
The Feedback That Mattered
Weeks later, a parent approached me after training.
“The sessions feel different lately,” she said. “My son is exhausted when he gets home, but he cannot wait to come back.”
Another parent mentioned that her daughter had asked to practice at home for the first time. “She said she wants to be ready for training.”
The players themselves noticed. One told me the sessions felt “more like real football” even though we were doing similar skills to before. The difference was the design, not the content.
The Standard Worth Aiming For
Marcus gave me a phrase I have remembered ever since: “This is all a player can ask for when they are looking to improve their game.”
That is the standard. Sessions that challenge players appropriately. Sessions that develop real skills. Sessions that transfer to matches. Sessions that respect everyone’s time.
Whether you coach professionals or U8s, players want the same things. They might not articulate it like Marcus did. But they know quality when they experience it.
They are more engaged in good sessions. More focused. More likely to return. More likely to improve.
The design creates the experience. The experience creates the development.
Marcus showed me what I could not see myself. Now I design sessions for the standard professional players expect, adapted for the players I actually coach.
Every minute matters. Challenge creates growth. Players know quality.
Design for that standard.
Want sessions that meet professional standards?
The Football Coaching Academy includes session designs built on professional principles, adapted for grassroots realities. Join 1,600+ coaches raising their standards. $1/month to start.