Daddy-Coach or Mama-Coach

I have a question for everyone out of curiosity. What are the good and the bad about daddy-coach in competitive soccer?

Definition: A daddy-coach/Mama-coach is a head coach of a soccer team that has a player on the team that is a daughter.

Usually more committed to the team due to the DD. Usually cheaper because they have a vested interest and its not just a job. However, sometimes not a qualified or competent coach

Could lead to conflict of interest. Coach's management of the team must be transparent beyond reproach. Put another way, the coach must ALWAYS put the TEAM'S interest first, otherwise he/she is not the TEAM's coach.

IF the coach has a quality background and treats ALL the kids equally, it can be a very good situation.

The "I'm-paid-to-run-this-team-and-that's-the-extent-of-my-investment" coaches are often too quick to dismiss the importance of building a connection with the kids on their roster. Some of those coaches treat the children like they're gaming chips. The daddy-coaches/momma-coaches seem a lot more likely to get invested in the team and it's players on a personal level. In general, the daddy-coach/momma-coach gives additional focus to building that team's camaraderie because it enhances their own child's experience.

Correct me if I am wrong, but in the '01's Solar Red, Kicks SC/Kicks Gold, and DT Red North are all examples of "Daddy-Coached" teams (although DTRN has just recently broken up, but JH had been coaching that team since at least U8). So it can't be all bad.

Bad idea. In most cases, especially at the younger age, the DD has a tough time separating Coach/Parent. Coach may be "coaching", but kid hears Daddy yelling.

bwgophers wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but in the '01's Solar Red, Kicks SC/Kicks Gold, and DT Red North are all examples of "Daddy-Coached" teams (although DTRN has just recently broken up, but JH had been coaching that team since at least U8). So it can't be all bad.

SRSA 00s and 03s started that way for the first 3 years before AS came in too. Those teams didn't end up too shabby.

the7wolf wrote:

bwgophers wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but in the '01's Solar Red, Kicks SC/Kicks Gold, and DT Red North are all examples of "Daddy-Coached" teams (although DTRN has just recently broken up, but JH had been coaching that team since at least U8). So it can't be all bad.

SRSA 00s and 03s started that way for the first 3 years before AS came in too. Those teams didn't end up too shabby.

As I recall in 01; Feet 01 started that way, Red Star, Diamonds all have or had that situation and all are good competitive teams in LH.

OutsideThe18 wrote:Bad idea. In most cases, especially at the younger age, the DD has a tough time separating Coach/Parent. Coach may be "coaching", but kid hears Daddy yelling.

Of course there can always be the case you are taking about, but NO WAY IMHO is it "in most cases". In any sport the benefits of direct family life long experiences of a parent coach easily trump the yelling concern you are mentioning above.

Many parents who are not even coaches go over the line at times with yelling and coaching there kids in an improper way. I have been guilty of that....

All depends, you have to evaluate the situation. At the end of the day the coach will always have the priority of his/her child. Doesn't mean your kid will not benefit. There are some great coaches coaching their children these days. I do know one very excellent coach with total opposite kids who play under his coaching under great teams. Do your research.

There are always pros and cons to this situation. My biggest concern is the parent/coach able to separate themselves given the situation. Ex: When little Jane (dd of parent/coach) is having a bad game (because they all do) will parent/coach pull their child and bench them for another child? Parent/coach needs not to show favoritism given the situation.

I have seen this work and I have seen this fail.

lovesoccer wrote:There are always pros and cons to this situation. My biggest concern is the parent/coach able to separate themselves given the situation. Ex: When little Jane (dd of parent/coach) is having a bad game (because they all do) will parent/coach pull their child and bench them for another child? Parent/coach needs not to show favoritism given the situation.

I have seen this work and I have seen this fail.

Totally agree with this statement.

IMHO, this fails more often than succeeds. I think age is a big factor. It may work when they are very young, but as they get into the middle school years when DD's are more proned to drama and sensitive to every comment that a parent makes about them or their friends (including teammates) -- I would think it would be difficult for a parent to coach their child's team, unless they have being doing so from a very early age. Starting to coach a DD's team for the first time when she is 13 seems like risky business. For me personally, we have intentionally steered clear of team's with parent coaches for all the reasons and conflicts already stated.

It can be done...I have seen it (as have others). I think it ends being fruitful in the early teen years, as the DD of the coach won't listen to the "coach", and brings the baggage from home to practice. It's really tough for a DD to understand that when Daddy is running practice, he is "Coach", not "Dad".

It depends on you as the parent. Knowing when you put your coaching hat down and be the parent and not the coach as well as your daughter or son knowing when those roles change. It can be a very positive experience but you as the parent will be put to the test of whether you can make those adjustments more than your child as your child respond dependent on your actions and reactions.