TeloframeTeloframe
Product
The loopFor clubsPricingLibraryDrills
Sign inStart free
Feature · Player Development

One file per player.
Filled in by the work you already do.

Individual development plans with goals that carry real evidence. The session you rate on Tuesday and the match you log on Saturday land on the goals they were aimed at, so the review writes itself from the record instead of from memory.

Start a player file →See how evidence lands
teloframe.com / players / j-okafor · #10 · U15 Reds
OverviewPlanMatchesReviewsInsightsInjuriesTimelineAccess
JO
Jordan Okafor
#10 · AM·U15·RIGHT FOOT·JOINED 2023
Cycle active · 04 Feb to 18 MarReview 6 days overdue2 portal accounts linked
4 / 4
Active goals · club max 4
Needs attention
!Review was due 12 Mar (club cadence). Hold it and close the cycle, or set a target date.
↓"Scans before receiving" is trending down. Worth a look at recent evidence.
◷"Wins the second ball" has no evidence for 19 days.
Goals for this cycle · sorted by what needs you
Scans before receiving in midfield
▼
TacticalProcess14 EVIDENCE
6 FROM MATCHES · 7 FROM SESSIONS · 1 MANUAL72%
Plays forward on the first touch under pressure
▲
TechnicalPerformance9 EVIDENCE
3 FROM MATCHES · 6 FROM SESSIONS60%
Wins the second ball in the middle third
19d quiet
PhysicalProcess2 EVIDENCE
2 FROM SESSIONSNO RUBRIC YET
Leads the press from the number 10
Overdue
PsychologicalLearning5 EVIDENCE
4 FROM MATCHES · 1 MANUAL41%
✦
Review prep brief
GENERATED WITH AI · READ ONLY
Since last review: 14 observations logged, 9 of them linked to scanning. Evidence highlights: 6 of the last 8 match entries mention early body shape. Worth asking: what does he see before the ball arrives when the pitch is tight? Thin evidence: the second-ball goal has 2 observations in 19 days, which is not enough to judge yet.
NEVER FILLS IN THE REVIEW. THE COACH WRITES IT.
Player voice · from the portal
“I think I am better at turning out of pressure. I still forget to look before the ball comes when the game is fast.”
Player 3 / Coach 4Talk it through
◆IDP · cycles · carried goals⟳Auto-evidence · sessions and matches☷Reviews · locked · versioned · signed off⌂Portal · players and parents reply
5dimensions
Technical · tactical · physical · psychological · social
1-5rubric
All five scored before a review can be locked
4goal kinds
Process, performance, outcome, learning. Process is the default
Auto-evidence
Session and match logs write observations onto goals
Portal
Players and parents read the plan and reply to it
Handover
Every cycle and shared review exports as one PDF
01 · The player record

A squad list that already knows who needs you this week.

Every player has a record with eight tabs behind it: overview, plan, matches, reviews, insights, injuries, timeline and access. The list on top is filterable by review due, plan status, availability and position, so the coach opens the right file first.

24
Players
31
Goals logged
19
Active plans
3
Reviews due
88%
Avg availability
All positionsAvailableInjuredReview dueHas a planFormer playersSort · latest activity
PlayerPositionShirtPlanEvidenceNext review
Jordan OkaforAM#104 goals30 linked6d overdue
Ellis ProwseCB#53 goals18 linkedin 9 days
Marcus HaighGK#12 goals11 linkedin 21 days
Rio BennettRW#7No plan yet4 linkedNot scheduled
Identity and profile
·Full name, preferred name, date of birth, nationality
·Primary and secondary positions, dominant foot, shirt number
·Academy registration ID, joined club date, photo
·Pathway stage, registration, eligibility and movement status
·Contract and scholarship status with end dates
Care and safeguarding
·School name, year group and school notes
·Medical restrictions and rehab restrictions
·Guardian, emergency and host-family contacts with a primary flag
·Consent records held against the player, not a spreadsheet
·Coach-only notes that never leave the staff side
Squad and movement
·Assignment type: primary, training, guest or trial
·Play level: same age, playing up, playing down
·Movement reason on every change, from promotion to injury cover
·Joined and left dates per team, with full transfer history
·Availability status that feeds the board and the matchday sheet
02 · The development cycle

A plan built like a coach thinks, not like a form.

An IDP in Teloframe is a dated cycle with focus areas, a baseline, and a small number of goals. It opens on what needs attention today, saves section by section, warns you before you leave with unsaved edits, and refuses to let a second tab quietly overwrite the first.

Anatomy of a goal
GoalScans over the shoulder before receiving in midfield
DimensionTactical
KindProcess
StatusActive
Target date18 Mar 2026
Success criteriaTwo scans before receiving, seen in 3 of the next 4 matches
Measurements4 numeric entries · charted as a sparkline
Evidence files2 clips · 1 board scene
Outcome on closeNot met · partially met · met · exceeded
Player reflectionRecorded in the portal, 1-5 confidence
Four kinds of goal
ProcessDefault
The repeatable action. Default kind, because it is the one the player controls.
Performance
A standard the player is held to, independent of the scoreline.
Outcome
A result. Available, but never the automatic choice.
Learning
Something to understand rather than execute. Useful in the foundation phase.
What the plan tells you without asking
Trend per goal. Up, down or flat, with a small dead zone so a rounding wobble is not read as a decline.
Days quiet. How long since any evidence landed. Past fourteen days the goal is flagged.
Where evidence came from. Split by matches, sessions and manual entries, because match evidence carries more weight than a drill rating.
Player against coach. The player's own rating sits next to your latest rubric score, and a wide gap is flagged as worth talking through.
The cycle, start to close
01
Set the cycle
Start date, target review date, and the focus areas the cycle is about. Minutes played is read back from your logged matches, not typed in as a target.
02
Capture a baseline
A short written baseline plus the dimension averages you already have. The plan shows the shift from baseline to now on every dimension.
03
Add one to four goals
Four active goals is the advisory ceiling, and clubs can set their own minimum and maximum per age band. Over the line, you get a warning, not a block.
04
Work the cycle
Evidence lands on goals automatically. Quick notes take one click from the goal card. Every section saves on its own, so nothing is lost to a half-finished form.
05
Close and carry
Closing the plan archives it, ties it to the review cycle, and lets you tick which goals carry into the next plan with a fresh target date. Progress history stays on the archived cycle.
03 · Evidence

The goal fills itself in from the week you already ran.

Most development tools ask the coach to log evidence twice: once as a session record, once as a development note. Teloframe treats the session reflection and the match log as the evidence. You point a block at a goal, and the rating you were going to give anyway lands on the player's file.

▤
Session blocks that name the goal
No extra admin
While planning a session, tick which players' goals a block is aimed at. When you complete the session reflection and rate that block, Teloframe writes one observation per player per goal, for the players who actually checked in.
AutomaticOne per session · player · goalIdempotent
⚽
Match logs
No extra admin
Per-player match entries carry a note plus performance and effort grades, and can be linked to goals. Saving the log writes a match observation onto the file. Match evidence counts double against session evidence when the trend is computed.
AutomaticWeighted 2:1Grades carried as evidence lines
✎
Observations you write
Coach writes it
A full observation form with the 1-5 rubric, strengths, priorities, next actions, notes, and the goals it evidences. Or a quick note straight from the goal card when you only have ten seconds on the touchline.
ManualQuick note popoverOptional rubric score
⎘
Files and board scenes
Coach writes it
Attach an image or PDF up to 10 MB, an mp4 or mov up to 200 MB, or link one of your saved tactic boards. Attachments hang off the goal or the evaluation, so the artefact sits next to the claim it supports.
ManualImage · PDF · videoLink a saved tactic
Tuesday session · what actually happens
Session blockRondo · 4v2 · targets 3 goals across 2 players
Who countsOnly players checked in to the session
On reflectionBlock rated 4/5 · drill marked would-repeat
Written3 observations, one per player and goal
On the goalEvidence count +1 · days quiet reset to 0
Re-run safeCompleting the session again updates, never duplicates
What we do not pretend to do
There is no computer vision watching your match footage and tagging clips by itself. Evidence is created by a coach rating a session, logging a match, writing an observation, or attaching a file. What Teloframe removes is the second entry: the part where you write the same judgement again on a development form.
No auto clip taggingNo GPS integrationNo invented data
Only where you pointed it
A block's dimension tags are classification, not evidence. Nothing is written on the basis that a drill was loosely “technical” and the goal happened to be technical too. Evidence only lands on the goals a coach explicitly named, for players who were actually there.
Explicit targeting · checked-in players only
04 · Reviews

A review that can be locked, signed and re-opened on the record.

Observations are cheap and frequent. Reviews are formal: scored on all five dimensions against written anchors, linked to the goals they judge, locked on submit, acknowledged by the family, and versioned if you ever need to change one after the fact.

Review · Jordan Okafor · spring cycle
Linked to 4 goals · 30 observations in the window
Submitted
Score each area · 1-5 · all five required
Technical4/5 +1
12345
Tactical3/5 =
12345
Physical3/5 +1
12345
Psychological4/5 =
12345
Social5/5 +1
12345
Each level can carry a written anchor set by the club, so a 3 in the U12s means the same thing whoever scores it. Anchors are held on rating templates and matched to the player by age group and position.
StrengthsPrioritiesNext actionsLinked goalsAttachments
The lifecycle of one review
Draft
Written and saved as often as you like. Nothing is shared, nothing is locked.
Submitted
All five dimensions must be scored before it will lock. Submitting locks the review and notifies the linked family in the portal, and by email if they opted in.
Acknowledged
The player or parent marks it read from the portal, or the coach records the acknowledgement. The date is stamped on the record.
Unlocked
Needs a written reason. The old version is superseded but kept, and a new version opens. The version history stays on the file.
Cycle coverage · U15 Reds1 missing
Jordan OkaforAcknowledged
Ellis ProwseSubmitted
Marcus HaighDraft
Rio BennettMissing
Review cycles are created on the team, with a window, a due date, and an optional section template. The coverage table is the answer to “who have we not done yet”, and every row opens that player's review.
Compare two reviews
Pick any two submitted reviews and read them side by side: dimension by dimension, with the deltas. The player's file also charts dimension progression across every cycle so a three-year arc is one glance, not a spreadsheet.
Observations grouped by cycle
The history list groups every observation and review under the cycle it belongs to, filterable by type, source, dimension and date, so “what did we see in the autumn” is one filter away.
Printable per review
Any single review prints on its own, as a page or a PDF, for the meeting, the file, or the club's records. The plan, the report card and the full development record print too.
05 · Standards and cadence

The club sets the bar once. Every plan is measured against it.

A club can write its development standards per age band: how many goals, which dimensions, how often reviews happen, whether the player's own voice is mandatory, and what each rubric level means. Plans are checked against those standards as the coach types, and nothing is blocked. The coach is warned, not stopped.

Club standards · set per age band
Required dimensionsEvery plan must carry a goal in these areas
Minimum goalsBelow this, the plan is flagged as thin
Maximum goalsAbove this, the plan is flagged as overloaded
Review frequencyWeeks between formal reviews for this age band
Observation frequencyHow often evidence should be landing
Require player voiceA plan is incomplete without the player's words
Require goal outcomesClosed goals must record met, partially met or not met
Rubric anchorsWhat 1 to 5 mean in writing, per dimension
No standards set yet? Sensible defaults apply
Until a club writes its own cadence, Teloframe derives the next review date from the age band using EPPP-informed intervals, and caps the advisory goal load at four. A coach working alone gets the same rhythm as an academy without configuring anything.
U6 to U812 weeksFoundation phase
U9 to U1012 weeksFoundation phase
U11 to U126 weeksYouth development
U13 to U146 weeksYouth development
U15 to U166 weeksYouth development
U17 to U196 weeksProfessional development
Reminders, free on every plan
Once a week, not once a day, Teloframe nudges the coach about players whose review has gone past its due date and goals that have passed their target date. It arrives in the notification bell, and by email if that category is switched on. Every reminder deep-links straight to the plan it is about.
Review overdue: Jordan OkaforGoals need attention: Ellis Prowse
What a warning actually looks like
!This plan has 5 active goals. For this age group we suggest at most 4 so each goal gets real attention.
!Club standard requires goals in: psychological.
!Club standard requires player voice. Plan is missing a self-assessment.
!Review was due 12 Mar (club cadence). Hold it and close the cycle, or set a target date.
Plain sentences, in the language a coach would use, on the plan itself. Not a compliance score, not a red cross, and never a save button that refuses to work.
06 · Player and parent portal

The plan stops being a document nobody outside the club reads.

Invite the player, a parent, or both, by email. They get their own read-only view of the plan and the report card, and four things they can write back. Access is revoked in one click, and what they see is a whitelist, not the coach screen with a few fields hidden.

Portal · phone first
HomePlanReportScheduleExplainers
Development plan
STARTED 04 FEB · REVIEW 18 MAR
TacticalTechnical
Scans over the shoulder before receiving
Tactical · Active · target 18 Mar
Two scans before receiving, seen in 3 of the next 4 matches.
Latest score 4/5Trend: up14 observations
Your reply
“Getting better at it in training, harder in games.” · confidence 3/5
When a parent writes on the player's behalf, the record says so. Every portal write is attributed and audit-logged.
Four things they can write back
Self assessmentPlayer or parent
Strengths, areas to improve, and where the player wants to get to. It appears in the coach's plan as player voice and is never overwritten by a stale coach tab.
Goal reflectionPlayer or parent
Per goal: what the player thinks, plus a 1-5 confidence rating. The coach sees it beside their own rubric score, and a wide gap is flagged as worth a conversation.
Acknowledge a reviewPlayer or parent
One tap to confirm the review has been read. The date lands on the record, so the club can show the conversation happened.
Tick off next actionsPlayer or parent
The next actions from the latest review become a checklist, each with an optional 1-5 self rating. The coach sees done, rated, and that it came via the portal.
Shared with the family
✓Focus areas for the cycle
✓Baseline and latest summary
✓Every goal, its criteria and its status
✓Evidence counts, latest score and trend per goal
✓Dimension bars from the review rubric
✓Strengths and priorities from the latest review
✓Season stats: appearances, minutes, goals, assists, attendance
✓Past plans from earlier cycles
Never leaves the staff side
✕Coach notes on a goal
✕Draft reviews that have not been submitted
✕Internal observations and quick notes
✕Care, safeguarding and admin notes
✕Squad averages for U12 and below
Squad averages only appear on report cards for U13 and above. If the age band cannot be read, they stay hidden.
Told, not chased
Submitting a review notifies the linked family in the portal, and by email for accounts that opted in. There is no separate publish step to forget: locking the review is the publish.
More than the plan
The same login carries the schedule with RSVPs, club announcements, tactical explainers shared by the coach, a notification history, and a calendar feed families can subscribe to.
On the paid plans
Player development itself is on every plan, including free, with one active plan at a time. The portal, unlimited active plans and the club standards layer come with Pro and Club.
07 · AI, on a short leash

Three assistants. None of them writes the review.

Every AI surface in player development reads the record you built and hands you language back. It never scores a player, never sets a goal, and never fills in a form on your behalf. The industry position is that AI should inform and not author, and that is exactly where the line sits here.

✦
Progress report
Player overview · Narrative summary
A written account of where the player is, drawn from their evaluations, goals, match logs and season context. Useful for a staff handover or your own read of the file.
Grounded in the record. No invented events or statistics.
✦
Parent summary
Plan tab · 6 sections
Greeting, strengths, areas for growth, recent highlights, next steps, closing. Plain language for a parent meeting, with football terms explained rather than assumed.
You read it, edit it, then choose to send it to the family.
✦
Review prep brief
Reviews tab · 5 sections
What changed since the last review, evidence highlights with counts and dates, one talking point and one question per active goal, growth areas, suggested next actions.
Read only. It cannot fill in the review form.
·
It informs, it never authors
No AI writes a plan, sets a goal, scores a rubric, or submits a review. Those are coaching judgements and they stay with the coach whose name is on the file.
·
Thin evidence is a finding
Where the record is too sparse to say anything, the brief says so plainly instead of padding. A gap you can see is more useful than a paragraph that sounds confident.
·
Cited, not asserted
The prep brief is instructed to say what the evidence shows, with counts, rather than deliver verdicts. Six of the last eight entries mention body shape, not he has good body shape.
·
Labelled everywhere it appears
Anything generated carries a generated-with-AI mark on screen, in the modal and in the card it lives in. Nothing is passed off as written by hand.
08 · Signals around the plan

Development does not happen in a column on its own.

The same file holds the things that explain a plateau: training load, wellness check-ins, minutes played, injury episodes, and every event that has ever touched this player, in one filterable timeline.

Rubric trend · every cycle
TECH4.0
TACT3.0
PHYS3.0
PSYC4.0
SOCI5.0
One rubric snapshot per review cycle, charted per dimension with the change since the previous cycle. Two reviews is the minimum before a line is drawn, because a single point is not a trend.
Load and wellness
ACWR
1.08
RPE avg
6.2
Sleep
7.8
Wellness
4.1
Built from the check-ins captured during session reflections: perceived exertion, sleep and a wellness score. Acute against chronic load is charted week by week, alongside the minutes the player has actually played inside the current cycle, read back from your logged matches.
Weekly load chartRecent sessionsMinutes this cycle
One timeline, twelve kinds of event
ObservationReviewMatchPlanInjuryTransferConsentCareProfileAssignmentEvidenceDrill
Filter by kind and read the player's history as one thread. An injury in November next to a plan that stalled in December usually explains itself.
Injury episodes with stages
Active
Rehab
Return to training
Return to play
Closed
An injured player is skipped when the board builds a starting eleven, so availability and development stay in step.
Compare two players
Put two files side by side: dimension averages head to head, match and training stats, and each player's evaluation trend. Useful for a selection conversation, a position debate, or checking whether a whole age group is drifting in one dimension.
Head to head dimensionsMatch and training statsCompare tray on the squad list
09 · Handover and history

When the player moves on, the file goes with them.

Grassroots and academy coaching turns over. New coach, new age group, new club. The development record is one document holding every cycle a player has ever had and every review that was shared with the family, so the next person does not start from nothing.

Development planPage or PDF
The current cycle: dates, focus areas, baseline, every goal with its criteria and evidence counts.
Report cardPage or PDF
Season stats, dimension averages against the rubric anchors, focus areas and the latest review.
Single reviewPage or PDF
One formal review on its own, for the meeting or the club's file.
Development recordPage or PDF
Every plan cycle across every season, plus every shared review, in one document. The handover file.
Moving between teams and age groupsNothing is left behind
Move or add a team
A player can move permanently to another team, or be added to a second one without leaving the first. Guest, trial, training and primary assignments are all first-class.
Say why
Every movement records a reason: promotion, demotion, playing up, playing down, trial, injury cover, admin correction. Next season, nobody has to guess.
History stays attached
The plan, its goals, the evidence and the reviews belong to the player, not to the team sheet they were on when the goal was written. Joined and left dates are kept per team.
When a player leaves
Departed players drop out of the working roster but stay reachable under the former filter, so the record survives the exit and the development record still prints.
Seasons, not one long list
Plans, reviews and stats are scoped to a season, so last year's cycle does not clutter this year's file. The development record deliberately ignores the season filter and prints everything.
Carried goals, not copied plans
Closing a cycle lets you tick which goals continue. They arrive in the new plan with their wording intact and their progress reset, while the evidence and history stay on the cycle where they happened.
Owned by the club, not a person
On a club workspace, plans and reviews sit in the club, not in one coach's account. Staff changes do not take the development history with them.

Player development feature FAQs

Short answers on IDPs, goals, evidence, review cycles, the family portal, and where AI stops.

What is in a Teloframe individual development plan?
A dated cycle with focus areas across five dimensions, a written baseline, and one to four goals. Each goal carries a kind (process, performance, outcome or learning), success criteria, a target date, optional numeric measurements, attachments, and the player's own reflection.
How does evidence get onto a player's goals?
Point a session block at specific player goals, and completing the session reflection writes one observation per checked-in player per goal. Match logs write observations too, weighted more heavily than session evidence. Coaches can also write observations, add a quick note from the goal card, or attach images, PDFs, video and saved tactic boards.
Does Teloframe auto-tag video clips for player evidence?
No. There is no automatic video analysis. Evidence is created when a coach rates a session, logs a match, writes an observation, or attaches a file. What Teloframe removes is the duplicate entry, not the coaching judgement.
How do formal reviews work?
A review scores all five dimensions from 1 to 5 against optional written anchors, links to the goals it judges, and locks on submit. The linked family is notified and can acknowledge it from the portal. Unlocking requires a reason and creates a new version, with the previous one kept on the record.
What can a club standardise across age groups?
Required dimensions, minimum and maximum goals, review and observation frequency, whether player voice and goal outcomes are mandatory, and what each rubric level means in writing. Plans are checked against those standards and the coach is warned, never blocked. Without club standards, EPPP-informed defaults apply.
What do players and parents see?
An invited player or parent gets a read-only view of the plan, goals, progress and report card, plus the schedule and announcements. They can write a self assessment, reflect on each goal with a confidence rating, acknowledge a review, and tick off next actions. Coach notes, draft reviews and care records are never shared, and squad averages only appear for U13 and above.
Does AI write the plan or the review?
No. AI produces a progress report, a parent meeting summary, and a read-only review prep brief, all grounded in the record and labelled as generated. It never sets a goal, scores a rubric, or fills in a review form.
Is player development available on the free plan?
Yes, with one active development plan at a time. Pro and Club remove that limit and add the player and parent portal. Club adds shared club standards and workspace-owned records.
The development loop

Name the goal. Let the week evidence it. Hold the review.

Teloframe links the sessions you already run and the matches you already log to the goals you set for a named player. Development stops being a feeling and starts being a record.

Start a player file →See the club workspace
Teloframe

The Coach OS for football. Plan, run, observe, reflect, develop, one loop, one tool.

Product
Tactics boardDrill editorSession plannerMatch dayPlayer developmentClub workspaceAI assistantExport and sharingAll features
Explore
Tactics librarySession plansDrill libraryFormationsGuidesVideo tutorials
Use cases
Coaches and academiesContent creatorsSession planner softwareTactics board software
Company
PricingFAQContactOpen Teloframe
© 2026 Teloframe. Built for serious staff.PrivacyTermsSafeguardingSecurityDPASubprocessorsCookies All systems normal