Empower the Players

I want you to consider for a moment the term "my team."

It is an oxymoronic term, is it not?

Team by definition is a group of people who strive for a common goal often in competition with a different group striving for the same result.  Teamwork is stressed and thought of as being the difference between success and failure.  We are all familiar with the adage there is no "I" in team.  But as coaches, do we practice what we preach?

Most typically American sports are coach driven.  It is the coach that dictates how a team will deploy its assets, the coach calls the plays, the coach decides when to use timeouts - in short, the coach is the key decision maker and as such it is his team. The coach has ownership of the decision-making and by extension, "the team."

One of the most important lessons I have learned as a coach is to think of any group I work with as being our team...  even going so far as to refer to the collective as your team.

I once had an athletic director whose background was in team sports. Ron had played football in college and coached basketball on the middle school level.  To say we had different ideas about coaching would be an understatement.  A couple of different discussions we had really drive this home and emphasize the point I am making here.

One discussion involved Ron chastising me for not using my timeouts.  Now, I do not relate this to you with the intent of portraying Ron as being uneducated or uninformed about the sport of soccer - there are obviously no time outs in soccer - but that was not the real point he was attempting to make either.  No, what had prompted the discussion was my encouraging players to coach one another on the pitch and my relaying adjustments through substitutes to players already on the pitch.  Ron was aghast that I asked high school athletes to interact in this manner. He thought it was the coaches role to communicate directly to players what adjustments needed to be made. His idea seemed to be that in allowing players to interact in such a manner placed them in conflict with one another?

There was also an instance where a player exiting the field asked a question about a problem she was encountering in the game.  I responded by asking Shayna to explain the problem and then asked what suggestions she had to solve the problem.  This exchange made its way back to the athletic director and another lecture ensued centered on a coaches responsibility to solve the in-game problems encountered by players. I realized then and there the athletic director was still thinking in terms of using timeouts to communicate with players. His perspective was that the coach should be solving the problems the opponent was presenting in the game, but the sport of soccer does not readily allow for this except at halftime. The reality is, soccer is a player driven sport unlike most "American" sports which are coach driven..

At the time of these exchanges I had long ago realized the necessity of empowering the players. This revelation took place after I had experienced the game from the perspectives of a coach, referee, player and parent all within a rather short period of time.  Each perspective is different than the others.  I can only relate this to a group of people who are involved in or witness an accident - each gives a slightly different version of what happened and offer different interpretations of why it occurred.  Are any of them wrong?  Not necessarily.  This is why investigators deem it so important to gather as much information as necessary. They need as complete a picture as can be obtained in order to render their findings

The following is an excerpt from an interview given by renown basketball coach Gregg Popovich of the San Antonio Spurs.

"I can’t make every decision for you. I don’t have 14 timeouts. You guys got to get together and talk. You guys might see a mismatch that I don’t see. You guys need to communicate constantly — talk, talk, talk to each other about what’s going on the court.

"I think that communication thing really helps them. It engenders a feeling that they can actually be in charge. I think competitive character people don’t want to be manipulated constantly to do what one individual wants them to do. It’s a great feeling when players get together and do things as a group. Whatever can be done to empower those people.

 

"Sometimes in timeouts I’ll say, ‘I’ve got nothing for you. What do you want me to do? We just turned it over six times. Everybody’s holding the ball. What else do you want me to do here? Figure it out.’ And I’ll get up and walk away. Because it’s true. There’s nothing else I can do for them. I can give them some 'bull,' and act like I’m a coach or something, but it’s on them."

 

Although this interview occurred rather recently it is a coaching philosophy I have  followed for some time now.  At half time of our matches I allow the players to talk about the opponents strengths and weaknesses. Sometimes I have to prompt them with questions. What problems are they presenting to us that we must address and how do we address those problems?  What matchup can we isolate and seek to take advantage of when we are attacking? 

 

What I have found is the players are very astute in their observations and often identify different issues or identify issues differently than I had from the sidelines.  The real key in these short half time discussions is the solutions and suggestions the players offer.  When we heed their input and implement their suggestions it not only empowers the players but it also makes them responsible for their play. In short, it gives them ownership of their team.

 

Just as we coach or teach fundamentals of skill and tactics in practice we must also train the players ability to identify problems and find solutions in the game.  To this end I often give the players a poorly constructed or incomplete practice game to play.  The premise is sound and purpose is clearly identified, but the way we are going about trying to achieve the desired result is faulty.  After allowing them to play in this manner for a few minutes I call them in and ask them to set it straight or put it right.  

 

Invariably before we ever reach that point suggestions have already been floated on the pitch.  These tend to be knee jerk reactions - we need more space so let's make the grid bigger is a common one.  Our discussion then becomes about whether a larger grid is needed OR if we can better utilize the space that is available?  This coaching tactic forces players to identify the problem and then discuss the problem in a group setting.  They offer possible solutions, discuss these and then implement the consensus they reach.  Again, it gives the members of the team ownership.

 

It says to them that this is not my team, it is your team and even better yet, our team.

 

It might be that we have to stop the game again, and even again, before we put it right but we always get it resolved.  And that is the key consideration in this process for when the players can solve the problems presented in practice it provides then with the hope that they can do so in a match. Once they do so in an actual match, confidence soars and so too does the quality of their play. 

 

As coaches we are tasked with providing players with the tools to solve the problems they encounter on the pitch.  Technical skills.  Tactical awareness.  Individual decision making on and off the ball.  Identifying and solving the problems opponents present to them.  Let go of the reins and trust the players to be fully vested members of the team. Empower them to take responsibility for their play and the team will be greatly rewarded. 

Former Shawnee player Alex Clark came to our Grand Lake United team last spring.  Alex was a good player and a better leader for us from his center midfield position.  I will always remember the look on Alex's face they day I shared with him that he could make in-game changes to what we were doing on the pitch. I gave Alex and our other captains full control in-game decision making - formation, strategy, personnel.   They were not only an extension of the coach on the pitch, they were the coaches on the pitch. His expression was one of shock, glee and excitement all rolled into one. I briefly described the reasoning outlined in this article and ended with "What's the worst that can happen? We mess up and maybe it costs us a result. If so, we'll learn from it, put it right the first chance we get and move on being better for it." 

I am sure Ron would believe I was abdicating my authority as coach. I would counter with the idea that I was empowering the athletes by delegating in-game authority to them.  Given our ultra successful season, I'm not sure even Ron could argue with the results?