Transatlantic youth development: differences in approaches between Sweden and the U.S.
by Justin Berry, TBE workshops director
@jbtweetsyall / IG: the_jb_adventure
Basketball truly is a global game.
Its reach and popularity has made it the fastest-growing sport in the world, in addition to the places where it already has an established tradition. However, the way the game is coached and developed can vary greatly from country to country.
There’s much we can learn from these differences, even if the places in question differ greatly in size and/or level. During the last seven months, I observed various youth levels in Sweden as I worked in player development for a large club in Stockholm. In doing so, I witnessed the significant separation in the way teams are managed and developed there in contrast to the United States.
There are certain similarities, but in this case, it’s more constructive to highlight the differences.
Sports in the school system and club summer
Perhaps the largest difference between the two countries lies in the amount of time players spend within a club each year. Unlike the U.S. and similar to the rest of Europe, schools in Sweden don’t feature their own athletic teams. As a result, clubs are the only option when it comes to participation in team sports.
This amounts to less practices and games available to Swedish youth in comparison to their American counterparts. For example, most US middle-schoolers will have practice every day of the school week unless it’s a game day. In Sweden, the majority of youth players only get to have practices with their team two to three times a week, and usually only play one game per weekend.
With an entire school season to go along with the basketball-heavy summers, American youth players have access to a significant number of games per year. While this isn’t everything, it certainly contributes to development. More practices. More games. More chances to learn, compete, and improve.
Scheduling
In the US, gyms are often much more numerous and accessible than in Sweden/Europe. Within the American school system, volleyball is often the only indoor competition for court time. Community centers, private facilities, and fitness centers all have courts specifically intended for basketball. In contrast, European clubs face much more competition for time slots; they must share public facilities/courts (often schools or community gyms) with handball, indoor soccer, floor hockey, gymnastics, volleyball, and other sports teams. As a result, time for training is considerably less available. It’s important to note this doesn’t imply a lack of intent to put in the time, but more often a lack of the opportunity to do so.
Strength and conditioning
In Sweden as well as most of Europe, mandatory weights and agility training aren’t commonplace outside of sport-specific academies and professional teams. In the U.S, it’s not uncommon for kids to be introduced to the weight room and sport-relevant mobility work as early as the U13 level.
This has become the norm, both within school athletic programs, as well as with private training entities. While it would aid in development for strength and conditioning to be utilized more in Europe, it’s also important American youth are educated properly on technique to avoid strain and injury.
Shot clock and ball movement
In Sweden and most all of Europe, all high school-aged leagues (and some middle school-aged levels) play games with a 24-second shot clock – in the U.S, use of a shot clock at all varies from state to state. For example, Texas doesn’t use a shot-clock, while in California it has been in use for some time. In the club season during the summer, a vast majority of tournaments do not feature it at all.
The effect this has on not only tactics and coaching, but on individual basketball IQ is tangible. With a shot clock dictating pace of play, decent-level European youth players are encouraged to move the ball at an early age, and to value (rather than overuse) the dribble. In the U.S, the delay in introducing the shot clock (if at all before the college level) sometimes produces teams that play at extremely slow paces, players that over-dribble, players that don’t understand clock management situations, and coaches that would struggle to adapt to its use.
Staffing
Because of the school athletic system and widespread competitive club circuits, full-time youth coaching positions exist in the U.S, where individuals can devote much (if not the majority) of their time on preparation, planning, and training. In Europe within normal club settings, youth coaches are often part-time employees. Many do an outstanding job, but the amount of time they can dedicate to the sport is often secondary in comparison. Budgets usually play a significant role in the types of coaches that can be hired—in Sweden and the rest of Europe, clubs typically invest the most resources in coaches for their men and/or women’s senior teams—meanwhile in the US, high school and club teams are completely unaffiliated with adult teams, and have budgets of their own to work with.
Skills training
Differences in accessibility come into play again when it comes to skills training. In the US, in addition to the coaching available in both schools and at the club level, players very often receive additional practice with personal skills trainers. Though the level of coaching can vary greatly, these individual and small group sessions are seen as being almost a necessity for players to reach their potential.
In Sweden, this market is nearly non-existent for numerous reasons. Gyms aren’t often rented to individuals, there is little demand for it, and at the moment basketball’s popularity is not at a level where skills trainers can make a dependable income, as the number of serious players actively seeking extra training is relatively low (not from lack of desire).
In contrast, nearly every city in America has a slew of skills trainers who compete with one other for the business of nearly every ambitious and serious player in town. These players get valuable repetitions outside of their team practices. With practice times of only an hour to an hour and a half on average, it presents a challenge to coaches in Sweden – do they spend more time with team concepts, or individual skill development? Coaches everywhere must make similar decisions, but in this scenario there is often a large gap in basic abilities between the top players on a Swedish team and the rest of their peers.
More talented players will always stand out, but when skills training is more accessible, the overall level of role players (and developing players) is higher, and coaches can focus on more advanced concepts/competition rather than dealing with a large disparity in basic skills.
Summary
This comparison is strictly meant to highlight some differences in youth development in two different places. To expect a country where basketball is not a premier sport to be comparable to the system in the U.S. is just as misguided as expecting American youth handball or soccer to be on the same level as it is in Europe.
With that said, we can learn from one another and strive to raise the level of the game. The allure of the idea of earning an athletic scholarship has created an ultra-competitive youth basketball atmosphere in America; within this market, people can make a living solely on youth basketball. In Sweden and throughout Europe, youth coaching is in most cases a part-time occupation (and secondary source of income).
Though disparities exist in the overall structure, the primary suggestions for improvement are quite similar. In the US, ample gym time and accessibility should have tangible results for nearly every level—if this time is utilized with quality coaching and material, it should produce skilled, competent players regardless of athleticism and natural talent. In Sweden where gym time and accessibility are issues, the need for quality coaching, instruction, and efficiency is amplified.
Regardless of our location, it’s important to identify these needs and address them to further advance the game.