媒体人:中国退役球员当教练是恶俗圈子,应让草根教练来竞争(媒体人批评中国足坛教练成退役球员小圈子,建议向草根开放竞争)
栏目:一号娱乐 发布时间:2026-01-23

Considering user request

The user posted a Chinese sentence that translates to a media figure criticizing retired players becoming coaches, suggesting grassroots coaches should compete. They haven't asked a specific question, so they might want a summary, translation, or analysis. I think it's best to ask for clarification on how they'd like me to respond—whether they'd prefer a translation, a brief analysis, or examples from other countries. I'll keep my tone friendly and concise, suggesting possible ideas to make it easier for them.Analyzing coaching dynamics

I need to provide a balanced analysis regarding the claim that former players becoming coaches is a "vulgar clique." I can suggest mechanisms for open competition, like implementing licenses, transparent hiring practices, and performance metrics. It’s also essential to discuss mentorship and anti-nepotism policies.

I could include examples from other countries, plus pros and cons of ex-players versus grassroots coaches. Evaluating coaches through specific metrics is crucial, and I’ll emphasize meritocratic processes while steering clear of political content. It’s all about sports here!Preparing a concise response

First, I want to clarify what the user wants: a translation, summary, or analysis. It might be best to start with a brief analysis and then offer to expand on specific points. I can recommend measures like licensing, open recruitment, and trial periods with KPIs.

here

I’ll also include comparative coaching examples from Germany, Spain, England, and Japan. Keeping a neutral tone is essential, and I’ll finish by asking what specific angle they’d like—whether it's for debate prep or data on coaching in the Chinese Super League.Crafting a response in Chinese

Since the user wrote in Chinese, I can reply in the same language to enhance communication. I’ll keep my response concise and offer an op-ed outline that provides a balanced view along with actionable reform steps.

that

I’ll start with a brief summary on the topic, highlighting the issues with retired players transitioning to coaching versus grassroots coaches.

Then, I’ll present the pros and cons for both sides, followed by strategies for fair competition, like unified licensing and transparent recruitment processes. Lastly, I’ll offer to help with deliverables like outlines or templates if the user needs further assistance!

这是个老话题:名宿“顺位上岗” vs 草根“难见天日”。关键不在出身,而在培养—准入—竞聘—评估是否公开透明、以绩效为先。

观点速析

  • 退役球员优势:顶级对抗经验、换衣室威望、人脉资源;风险:教学法薄弱、用人保守、裙带与光环免检。
  • 草根教练优势:训练设计与学习动力强、接受新技术/数据;短板:缺少高强度赛级经验与管理大牌的历练。
  • 正确问题:如何让两类人“凭能力同台竞争”,而非互斥贴标签。

怎么让竞争更公平(可落地的机制)

coach

  • 统一牌照与进修:对标 UEFA A/Pro,公开课时、考核标准与通过率;强制继续教育学分。
  • 公开招聘与评分:岗位说明书、胜任力模型、结构化面试与案例作答;公布候选短名单与评分要素。
  • 分级试用与KPI:先带U21/B队/助教,达标再升;明确KPI如预算校正后的积分、xG差、U23出场、定位球产出、伤病率。
  • 数据+过程评估:不只看名次;看工资-积分效率、球员增值率、战术适配与梯队输送。
  • 反裙带与回避:亲属/经纪关联需披露;引入第三方评审与外部技术委员。
  • 人才梯队:分析师/体能/青训主任到一队教练的晋升通道;名宿也须补课教学法、训练学、心理与科技应用。

他国做法参考

the

  • 德国(DFB学院):高门槛教练教育+青训到一队的台阶化任职,名宿与草根并存但都要拿证+实绩。
  • 西班牙(RFEF):系统化执照+战术训练学传统,B队/青训是主教练“试金石”。
  • 英格兰:执照体系+EPPP青训考核,公开招聘日益常态化;名宿也从助教/青年队做起。
  • J联赛/K联赛:混搭用人,青训绩效与一线队任职强绑定。

如果你要展开这个话题,我可以继续帮你:

  1. 写一篇评论稿提纲(立场、证据、反驳、结论)
  2. 做一页对比表:名宿 vs 草根的胜任力与常见偏差
  3. 提供俱乐部主教练招聘与KPI模板
  4. 整理几家联赛的教练培养与准入要点

你更想做哪种?或给我具体场景(职业队/青训/校园足球),我按场景细化指标与流程。