Theory, intent and execution — FAJ #2

Theory, intent and execution are my personal labels for instilling an idea into a football team.

As usual, any feedback, discussion and/or expansion of ideas are welcome and appreciated!

Theory

Theory is self-explanatory — it’s a coach's ideas for a team.

For example, the coach of team A notices that many opposition sides in the league struggle to play under pressure.

Therefore, they create a pressing strategy against a 4–2–3–1, which is the most favoured formation across their league.

They opt for a 4–1–3–2 intense press, with the three consisting of hybrid wingers and an 8 following the closer pivot.

The overarching theory is that they look to vigorously press each opponent to win back the ball in dangerous areas and to control the match.

The specific theories are how they do that — the in-depth features of the 4–1–3–2; whether they press the GK, how they block angles forwards, where they look to pinch, and so on.

Intent

Intent is what is coached into players.

For team A, this includes positioning, but also intensity, angle of running and where you’re pressing for the ball to end up.

Intent is about not just transferring theory to a player, but about making a player buy into your given philosophy or way of thinking.

For example, say team B’s coach wants to play vertically through central areas, with an emphasis on finding players in tight pockets and having them dribble and combine to progress.

The coach can make an optimal structure to do so and teach that to the players, which in itself is an achievement.

However, beyond the structure, the players need to be genuinely looking for the ball between the lines, which stems from a broader confidence instilled by the coach.

Team B could have an excellent theory for playing through the lines, but it won’t work if there is a lack of intent — a belief from players to buy into and play the way the coach wants.

Execution

But team B’s issue with playing through the lines could be an issue beyond intent.

When not having the right profiles or quality, players may either avoid receiving between the lines, or buy into the philosophy but execute it poorly.

Execution doesn’t just relate to the quality of players, but the profiles a team has.

With perfect theory and intent, team A can press in a cohesive, meaningful manner in attempt to disrupt opponents.

However, with slow, sluggish profiles and poor ball winners, the press will be executed poorly; structure is crucial, but it’s intensity and duel-winning that establish a truly vigorous press.

It’s the players who fail the execution, but it’s the coach who has created the collapse, neglecting the profiles of team A.

Thus, to create the theory — whether it be an overarching game model or a particular strategy to counter an opponent — any good coach will look at the projected execution of the idea, which is driven by the profile and quality of players.

Conclusion

• Theory: The ideas of a coach
• Intent: Coaching said ideas into a team
• Execution: How the theory and intent translates to success on the field