In Federalist Paper 10 Madison addresses the existence and inherent dangers of factions. What does this have to do with the world's beautiful game?
Everything.
Madison warned of the dangers of factions and proclaimed there were limited ways of dealing with them. We could deny factions the liberty they need to exist or force everyone to believe the same way or manage the effects factions have on the whole. Madison argued in Federalist Paper 10 that the only viable solution was to manage the impact factions have on the whole and that the proposed constitution offered the best form of government to do so. Basically, factions exist so deal with them and limit their disruptiveness.
In soccer terms, a program must have a strong constitution or culture to deal with the factions that form within the group we refer to as a "team". Two of the most talented teams I have ever been associated with underachieved because of factions. Those two teams constantly fought among themselves. Conversely, two the best teams I have ever been associated with overachieved due to their ability to place the pursuit of a common goal above any factions that existed.
This is where the old "I don't care if you like one another, but we must respect one another" speeches coaches sometimes feel compelled to deliver originate from.
Dealing with factions. This was a primary concern of those who gathered in Philadelphia the summer of 1787. What was right and proper for the good of all the people was the over-riding concern. This led to the amazing order of checks and balances we operate and live under to this day. We coaches strive to establish similar order in our programs for the good of all involved. How we deal with factions is as important as the X's and O's we employ. Maybe more so.
Program
Team
Individual Player
This forms the template for the process of my decision making as a coach. The good of the program, the whole, takes first priority. Next, what is good for the team is considered. The individual player is third on the priority list of considerations. The individual as a player is third priority. The individual as a human being would, of course, take a higher priority. It is important to remember the context in which we are dealing with an individual.
Showing posts with label Culture. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Culture. Show all posts
Friday
Your expectations?
Anyone who coaches knows the off season can be even more hectic and stressful than the regular season. Amid scheduling scrimmages and matches, planning for camps, summer tournaments, fundraisers and the like I have also been considering the current state of our program and how to take the next step forward. The evolution of our culture must continue and to be perfectly honest this is the one facet of our program that concerns me the most. I keep coming back to one word -
This is a very serious question to consider for it has been my experience both individuals and teams usually get exactly what they expect.
I desire a team of individuals who expect to win every time they step onto the pitch. It might be the single most important characteristic I look for in an individual. This must be our expectation from the Head Coach through the coaching staff to the Captain(s) and extending throughout the team to the very last player on the bench.
For these reasons, the selection of Captains carries more importance this coming season than usual. Sometimes a strong culture can prop up a weak captain. This coming season my expectation is for a strong captain to advance the culture of the program.
Another consideration is, if I do not get what I expect from returning players, do I look to new players with the same expectations I have for the program? That would be a drastic short-term step, but one that might be necessary to advance the program in the long-term.
Let me be clear, my expectations are to be competitive in every match. I expect to win every time we step onto the pitch. I expect greatness. I expect championships.
EXPECTATIONS
In the context of sports we often see expectations framed in the idea of a team being able to handle high expectations for a coming season. Will they rise to the occasion or crumble under the pressure? But expectations come in many forms. For me, the most disconcerting moment of last season was hearing core players express their belief an opponent would kick our asses while they were still in the locker room before a match. Their sentiment about that day's match was in stark contrast to my own expectations which were to come out, compete and just maybe get the win!
This has been very much on my mind as I plan for the 2017 season. Some of these players might be back with us next fall. If they are, will their defeatist attitudes be back with them? Will their expectations have changed? Or will they continue to be a drag on the program?
What do they expect of themselves? What do I expect of them?
What will their teammates expect of them? What will they expect of their
teammates?
teammates?
Is there common ground to be found?
If not, is progress in the process of establishing a winning culture even possible?
This is a very serious question to consider for it has been my experience both individuals and teams usually get exactly what they expect.
I desire a team of individuals who expect to win every time they step onto the pitch. It might be the single most important characteristic I look for in an individual. This must be our expectation from the Head Coach through the coaching staff to the Captain(s) and extending throughout the team to the very last player on the bench.
For these reasons, the selection of Captains carries more importance this coming season than usual. Sometimes a strong culture can prop up a weak captain. This coming season my expectation is for a strong captain to advance the culture of the program.
Another consideration is, if I do not get what I expect from returning players, do I look to new players with the same expectations I have for the program? That would be a drastic short-term step, but one that might be necessary to advance the program in the long-term.
Let me be clear, my expectations are to be competitive in every match. I expect to win every time we step onto the pitch. I expect greatness. I expect championships.
Monday
Attitude. Commitment. Culture. What of it?
I suppose I should have included "Patience" in the title as well.
As I enter my third year (second as head coach) in the Lima Senior soccer program I find myself fixated on Attitude, Commitment and Culture as the areas key to the Spartans rising to another level. I am fond of saying "culture can win or lose you games" and am of the belief this was proven true this past season . Our culture did, in fact, both win and lose us games during the 2016 season. On the surface, that might seem like an odd statement, but just as technical skill and tactical understanding impact the game so too does a teams culture. Sometimes skill and tactics are enough to win games. Sometimes it is one teams culture that separates it from the opponent.
I want to be clear that the culture was not excessively poor when I took over the program. If we used Jannsen's Commitment Continuum to rate the culture of the program I took over last season we would find it in the compliant range.
That is, the team and individual players largely tried to do what was asked of them. They did enough to get by. Where they were lacking is in the areas of accountability and responsibility to one another, the team and the program as a whole. One year later we have made progress, but are still probably in the compliant range as a team.
As I ask myself why our progress has not been swifter or more dramatic I keep coming back to the three words in the title of this article - Attitude, Commitment and Culture. I think sometimes we use these words interchangeably and that does each a disservice. They are related and interconnected yet different and unique each in its own way.
Attitude alone is not a guarantee of a win or a loss. I have seen teams with great attitudes lose games to teams with lesser attitudes. And there are certainly teams with poor attitudes that manage to overcome them and win games. Still, there can be no doubting the importance good attitudes. This set me to thinking about what attitude can provide ... or deprive a team of.
Attitude is not static - that is, it must be nurtured to grow in a positive direction and if this is not diligently attended to one's attitude will surely regress.
Attitude is not a substitute for technical, tactical or physical competence.
Neither can attitude alone be substituted for experience.
In short, attitude cannot change facts, but attitude can change how we deal with facts.
For example, attitude can make the difference in how we deal with one another - our relationships with each other.
Attitude can also make a difference in how we deal with adversity and challenges.
One positive attitude can be a beacon shining bright that draws others to it. A team with a collective good attitude can become something greater than the sum of its parts. And that is what I am seeking to create at Lima Senior.
So, what are the obstacles slowing our progress?
Change.
More is being asked of individual players and the team alike. Everyone is being asked to step out of established comfort zones and embrace growth. This can be an intimidating task, especially if one's attitude is not positively energized.
Fear of change leads to indecisiveness, inaction, drains positive energy and generally inhibits potential from being reached. Fear also magnifies adversity, challenges and problems when affecting change. In the absence of a positive attitude discouragement can gain a foothold.
Energy is contagious whether it be of a positive or negative nature. So, how change is approached is of vital importance. Positive energy will allow for smoother transition than negative energy will. Those who are reluctant to change may have to be eliminated from the program in order to foster an overall positive energy. I faced and dealt with this problem last fall. There were a few stragglers with poor attitudes who refused to buy-in to the changes being made. They were energy drains to our positive attitudes. They have been removed from the program. More may yet decide to leave as they find their energy, their attitude to be in conflict with the growing majority.
The 85% rule.
The 85% rule refers to having 85% of your team members being either Compliant, Committed of Compelled on Jannsen's Commitment Continuum. This would represent 85% of your team having "good" attitudes. What I have done is to make a list of every player on our roster. Not as easy of a task as one might think in our situation. I had 57 student / athletes express interest in playing. Of those, we had 46 who actually participated at least one day. We lost several to academic ineligibility. Others were dismissed from the team due to disciplinary problems. Still others self-selected and just stopped showing up. We finished the season with 33 players. These 33 are the players I have on my list. Beside each of their names I have written their commitment level in my eyes. I have also asked each player how they would rate themselves. There are differences of opinions - some subtle and others quite dramatic.
Resistant: Complainers. They complain about coaching, teammates, program rules. They are generally selfish and against team goals and in favor of their own goals.
Reluctant: Skeptics. They are hesitant, wait and seers. Go through the motions but without much, if any conviction. Have not totally bought-in.
Existent: They are present but not completely engaged. They give little of themselves and expect little from others or the team as a whole.
Compliant: These student / athletes do what is asked of them, but give no extra effort. Generally not self-motivated. Not disruptive, but not fully engaged. They neither provide energy nor drain energy.
Committed: Self-motivated. They will do what is expected of them and then some. Take initiative to improve self and team.
Compelled: The Standard Bearers. No matter the adversity or challenge they are 100% engaged. They prepare, train and compete at the highest level. They are driven to achieve team goals and achieve team success.
In general, the 85% rule states a successful team needs 85% of its members in the Compliant, Committed and Compelled ranges in order to be successful. Obviously all of those falling in the Compliant range would not be satisfactory. There must be some in the Committed range and at least a few in the Compelled range. A balance among these three ranges is necessary with the more towards the top of the range the better. But I would submit there is value to each of the ranges being represented. Can you imagine the disconnect between 11 players in the Compelled range and a couple in the Compliant or lower ranges with no one representing the in between?
Culture.
Some combination of Attitude and Commitment define the culture of the program, team and its individual players. Where program rules meet team goals success if found. So it is moving forward we will continue to work on our attitudes and foster commitment in search of a winning team culture. That is a key consideration to take from this writing - attitude and commitment, culture, must be worked on. All coaches work on technique and tactics, physical conditioning. We must also give conscious effort to the psychological aspects of the game We must train attitude, commitment and culture until these things become second nature in the same manner as technical ability, tactical understanding and physical conditioning. This is our platform for success,
As I enter my third year (second as head coach) in the Lima Senior soccer program I find myself fixated on Attitude, Commitment and Culture as the areas key to the Spartans rising to another level. I am fond of saying "culture can win or lose you games" and am of the belief this was proven true this past season . Our culture did, in fact, both win and lose us games during the 2016 season. On the surface, that might seem like an odd statement, but just as technical skill and tactical understanding impact the game so too does a teams culture. Sometimes skill and tactics are enough to win games. Sometimes it is one teams culture that separates it from the opponent.
I want to be clear that the culture was not excessively poor when I took over the program. If we used Jannsen's Commitment Continuum to rate the culture of the program I took over last season we would find it in the compliant range.
That is, the team and individual players largely tried to do what was asked of them. They did enough to get by. Where they were lacking is in the areas of accountability and responsibility to one another, the team and the program as a whole. One year later we have made progress, but are still probably in the compliant range as a team.
As I ask myself why our progress has not been swifter or more dramatic I keep coming back to the three words in the title of this article - Attitude, Commitment and Culture. I think sometimes we use these words interchangeably and that does each a disservice. They are related and interconnected yet different and unique each in its own way.
Attitude alone is not a guarantee of a win or a loss. I have seen teams with great attitudes lose games to teams with lesser attitudes. And there are certainly teams with poor attitudes that manage to overcome them and win games. Still, there can be no doubting the importance good attitudes. This set me to thinking about what attitude can provide ... or deprive a team of.
Attitude is not static - that is, it must be nurtured to grow in a positive direction and if this is not diligently attended to one's attitude will surely regress.
Attitude is not a substitute for technical, tactical or physical competence.
Neither can attitude alone be substituted for experience.
In short, attitude cannot change facts, but attitude can change how we deal with facts.
For example, attitude can make the difference in how we deal with one another - our relationships with each other.
Attitude can also make a difference in how we deal with adversity and challenges.
One positive attitude can be a beacon shining bright that draws others to it. A team with a collective good attitude can become something greater than the sum of its parts. And that is what I am seeking to create at Lima Senior.
So, what are the obstacles slowing our progress?
Change.
More is being asked of individual players and the team alike. Everyone is being asked to step out of established comfort zones and embrace growth. This can be an intimidating task, especially if one's attitude is not positively energized.
Fear of change leads to indecisiveness, inaction, drains positive energy and generally inhibits potential from being reached. Fear also magnifies adversity, challenges and problems when affecting change. In the absence of a positive attitude discouragement can gain a foothold.
Energy is contagious whether it be of a positive or negative nature. So, how change is approached is of vital importance. Positive energy will allow for smoother transition than negative energy will. Those who are reluctant to change may have to be eliminated from the program in order to foster an overall positive energy. I faced and dealt with this problem last fall. There were a few stragglers with poor attitudes who refused to buy-in to the changes being made. They were energy drains to our positive attitudes. They have been removed from the program. More may yet decide to leave as they find their energy, their attitude to be in conflict with the growing majority.
The 85% rule.
The 85% rule refers to having 85% of your team members being either Compliant, Committed of Compelled on Jannsen's Commitment Continuum. This would represent 85% of your team having "good" attitudes. What I have done is to make a list of every player on our roster. Not as easy of a task as one might think in our situation. I had 57 student / athletes express interest in playing. Of those, we had 46 who actually participated at least one day. We lost several to academic ineligibility. Others were dismissed from the team due to disciplinary problems. Still others self-selected and just stopped showing up. We finished the season with 33 players. These 33 are the players I have on my list. Beside each of their names I have written their commitment level in my eyes. I have also asked each player how they would rate themselves. There are differences of opinions - some subtle and others quite dramatic.
Resistant: Complainers. They complain about coaching, teammates, program rules. They are generally selfish and against team goals and in favor of their own goals.
Reluctant: Skeptics. They are hesitant, wait and seers. Go through the motions but without much, if any conviction. Have not totally bought-in.
Existent: They are present but not completely engaged. They give little of themselves and expect little from others or the team as a whole.
Compliant: These student / athletes do what is asked of them, but give no extra effort. Generally not self-motivated. Not disruptive, but not fully engaged. They neither provide energy nor drain energy.
Committed: Self-motivated. They will do what is expected of them and then some. Take initiative to improve self and team.
Compelled: The Standard Bearers. No matter the adversity or challenge they are 100% engaged. They prepare, train and compete at the highest level. They are driven to achieve team goals and achieve team success.
In general, the 85% rule states a successful team needs 85% of its members in the Compliant, Committed and Compelled ranges in order to be successful. Obviously all of those falling in the Compliant range would not be satisfactory. There must be some in the Committed range and at least a few in the Compelled range. A balance among these three ranges is necessary with the more towards the top of the range the better. But I would submit there is value to each of the ranges being represented. Can you imagine the disconnect between 11 players in the Compelled range and a couple in the Compliant or lower ranges with no one representing the in between?
Culture.
Some combination of Attitude and Commitment define the culture of the program, team and its individual players. Where program rules meet team goals success if found. So it is moving forward we will continue to work on our attitudes and foster commitment in search of a winning team culture. That is a key consideration to take from this writing - attitude and commitment, culture, must be worked on. All coaches work on technique and tactics, physical conditioning. We must also give conscious effort to the psychological aspects of the game We must train attitude, commitment and culture until these things become second nature in the same manner as technical ability, tactical understanding and physical conditioning. This is our platform for success,
What does it mean to be coachable?
The latest high school season ended a month ago. After taking time off I am just now beginning to analyze our performance. I have found it prudent to allow time for the emotions of the season to pass and also for myself to become rejuvenated from the grind. How do I know when to begin again the process? When I start yearning to be actively coaching again, it is time.
As I have reflected upon the season just passed, the theme that has emerged is "coach-ability." This might seem a straight forward subject, but it is not. For example, is a player uncoachable or has the coach failed to find the best way to coach a player?
The hallmark of my teams has always been defense. They have always featured stout if not stifling defense that fuels a fast paced balanced counter-attacking offensive style. Not this past season. We allowed 2.12 goals per game which is abysmal by my standards. The most important question to be asked is, why?
In analyzing the goals we allowed certain trends become apparent. First, our backs were overly aggressive at times - they often dove in or stabbed at the ball instead of containing the attacker. This was something we addressed in training on a regular basis to little avail. Secondly we were caught very flat or lacking defensive support on a far too regular basis - death to a zonal defense. Again, this is something that was addressed on a regular if not daily basis in training.
So, now the question becomes, were the players uncoachable or did the coaching fail to reach the players? I know from experience my coaching methodology has worked in the past. Was my approach with this group of individuals off or were they simply uncoachable?
Mistakes are welcomed if we learn from them. And this is where we begin to uncover where the problem lay this past season. Repeated mistakes become bad habits and we repeated the same mistakes in our back line on a regular basis. No matter the approach in training the mistakes remained the same and constant. We simply could not overcome established bad habits.
I submit there are varying degrees of coachability
Not coachable: The know it all. Not receptive to instruction. Listens only to his own voice.
Selectively coachable: Does what is asked but only when it is self-serving. Mostly does whatever he wants.
Reluctantly coachable: Goes through the motions but doesn't fully embrace coaching. Reluctantly committed.
Coachable: Does everything asked of him. Surrenders self to the TEAM. Trusts and empowers coaching.
When our performance is looked at in the context of the above scale, it becomes abundantly clear why we struggled defensively this past season. Team Culture was and will continue to be a frequent topic of conversation. In some ways, this past team was extremely selfish. That might sound harsh, so, in simpler terms, we had players whose excellence was defined by their arms and legs more so than by their heads and hearts. And let there be no doubt about it, this was apparent whenever we encountered adversity this season.
Now in my third decade of coaching I have seen my fair share of players who refused to take coaching, rejected instruction and eschewed the earned experience of those who would help them. Mostly I have seen the game pass these players by or seen them languish in mediocrity due to their arrogance, anger, subversion or low self-esteem. I have also seen plenty of players make transformative changes in their approach to the game that lead to TEAM success and earned them the individual accolades they had so desperately sought on their own.
How does a coach overcome a players inability or reluctance to take coaching?
I can identify "problem players" at the moment when I intervene with advice, instruction or criticism. It is at that moment when the athlete makes a choice between responding positively or reacting negatively that determines his destiny as a player. This can also be said of a team as a whole. Unless a coach can somehow influence a change from negative to positive in the player and or team
Can coachability be developed?
I have had some past success with this. Discovering a players motivation to learn and improve - what buttons to push to energize the players learning process is a key. The individuals goals as a player are another. What does the player wish to achieve and can he be convinced the coach holds the best interests of the player in mind as well? Which leads us to the player / coach relationship. This is where I failed with some individuals and therefore for the team this past season.
To be honest, the culture shift we implemented in the program this season was drastic and there was a certain (and expected) level of backlash against new rules and standards. The demand of players that they be subservient to TEAM instead of self was difficult for some to grasp let alone adhere to. Our disciplinary issues mostly fell into this realm.
In the Mel Gibson movie "The Patriot" the militia are an undisciplined lot who break ranks and flee in retreat at the first sign of adversity. They must learn to trust one another and band together tactically to become greater than the sum of their individual parts before they can turn the tide of battle in their favor and rout the British. It took time, but they eventually found their way.
So, yes, coachability can be developed. Learning to trust one another is the foundation that must be established. Making self subservient to TEAM is a major step. The simple proposition that an individual will sacrifice his own selfish desires, needs, wants for the good of the TEAM is what must be brought forth. This can best be accomplished through building relationships that help the student athlete buy in to the TEAM philosophy. This is what occurs in the movie "Remember the Titans" where a diverse group of high school athletes overcome social differences and selfishness to become a TEAM far greater than the sum of its individual parts.
Coachability is a state of mind. It is about having the internal strength to trust teammates and coaching to achieve more together than the individual can achieve on his own. The transformation that must sometimes occur is about learning to willingly allow one's self to be subservient to the TEAM's whole. Developing an understanding that excellence is defined by head and heart even more so than by legs and arms must occur. When these things are allowed to blossom and grow transformative change from selfishness to selflessness can occur. That's when I have seen an uncoachable player turn into a coachable player.
As I have reflected upon the season just passed, the theme that has emerged is "coach-ability." This might seem a straight forward subject, but it is not. For example, is a player uncoachable or has the coach failed to find the best way to coach a player?
The hallmark of my teams has always been defense. They have always featured stout if not stifling defense that fuels a fast paced balanced counter-attacking offensive style. Not this past season. We allowed 2.12 goals per game which is abysmal by my standards. The most important question to be asked is, why?
In analyzing the goals we allowed certain trends become apparent. First, our backs were overly aggressive at times - they often dove in or stabbed at the ball instead of containing the attacker. This was something we addressed in training on a regular basis to little avail. Secondly we were caught very flat or lacking defensive support on a far too regular basis - death to a zonal defense. Again, this is something that was addressed on a regular if not daily basis in training.
So, now the question becomes, were the players uncoachable or did the coaching fail to reach the players? I know from experience my coaching methodology has worked in the past. Was my approach with this group of individuals off or were they simply uncoachable?
Mistakes are welcomed if we learn from them. And this is where we begin to uncover where the problem lay this past season. Repeated mistakes become bad habits and we repeated the same mistakes in our back line on a regular basis. No matter the approach in training the mistakes remained the same and constant. We simply could not overcome established bad habits.
I submit there are varying degrees of coachability
Not coachable: The know it all. Not receptive to instruction. Listens only to his own voice.
Selectively coachable: Does what is asked but only when it is self-serving. Mostly does whatever he wants.
Reluctantly coachable: Goes through the motions but doesn't fully embrace coaching. Reluctantly committed.
Coachable: Does everything asked of him. Surrenders self to the TEAM. Trusts and empowers coaching.
When our performance is looked at in the context of the above scale, it becomes abundantly clear why we struggled defensively this past season. Team Culture was and will continue to be a frequent topic of conversation. In some ways, this past team was extremely selfish. That might sound harsh, so, in simpler terms, we had players whose excellence was defined by their arms and legs more so than by their heads and hearts. And let there be no doubt about it, this was apparent whenever we encountered adversity this season.
Now in my third decade of coaching I have seen my fair share of players who refused to take coaching, rejected instruction and eschewed the earned experience of those who would help them. Mostly I have seen the game pass these players by or seen them languish in mediocrity due to their arrogance, anger, subversion or low self-esteem. I have also seen plenty of players make transformative changes in their approach to the game that lead to TEAM success and earned them the individual accolades they had so desperately sought on their own.
How does a coach overcome a players inability or reluctance to take coaching?
I can identify "problem players" at the moment when I intervene with advice, instruction or criticism. It is at that moment when the athlete makes a choice between responding positively or reacting negatively that determines his destiny as a player. This can also be said of a team as a whole. Unless a coach can somehow influence a change from negative to positive in the player and or team
Can coachability be developed?
I have had some past success with this. Discovering a players motivation to learn and improve - what buttons to push to energize the players learning process is a key. The individuals goals as a player are another. What does the player wish to achieve and can he be convinced the coach holds the best interests of the player in mind as well? Which leads us to the player / coach relationship. This is where I failed with some individuals and therefore for the team this past season.
To be honest, the culture shift we implemented in the program this season was drastic and there was a certain (and expected) level of backlash against new rules and standards. The demand of players that they be subservient to TEAM instead of self was difficult for some to grasp let alone adhere to. Our disciplinary issues mostly fell into this realm.
In the Mel Gibson movie "The Patriot" the militia are an undisciplined lot who break ranks and flee in retreat at the first sign of adversity. They must learn to trust one another and band together tactically to become greater than the sum of their individual parts before they can turn the tide of battle in their favor and rout the British. It took time, but they eventually found their way.
So, yes, coachability can be developed. Learning to trust one another is the foundation that must be established. Making self subservient to TEAM is a major step. The simple proposition that an individual will sacrifice his own selfish desires, needs, wants for the good of the TEAM is what must be brought forth. This can best be accomplished through building relationships that help the student athlete buy in to the TEAM philosophy. This is what occurs in the movie "Remember the Titans" where a diverse group of high school athletes overcome social differences and selfishness to become a TEAM far greater than the sum of its individual parts.
Coachability is a state of mind. It is about having the internal strength to trust teammates and coaching to achieve more together than the individual can achieve on his own. The transformation that must sometimes occur is about learning to willingly allow one's self to be subservient to the TEAM's whole. Developing an understanding that excellence is defined by head and heart even more so than by legs and arms must occur. When these things are allowed to blossom and grow transformative change from selfishness to selflessness can occur. That's when I have seen an uncoachable player turn into a coachable player.
Thursday
Culture can win OR lose games.
I have not written much these past few months as I have returned to coaching high school. I find it difficult to write in-season for a couple of reasons. One, I just don't have a lot of free time. Coaching high school soccer is a full time job in and of itself. Secondly, most of what I would write about would be about the team I am coaching and because there would exist a need to be critical I do not believe it would be productive to do so. Today I am going to tackle the broad subject of culture. And, yes, I will be using my current team to illustrate some of the points made. I will also be using former teams to tell this story.
Some years ago I became a member of an email group of coaches from around the country. This group has been a wonderful resource for me. They have been mentors to me and perhaps I to them as well. Upon joining the group one of the first things that struck me was how much of the discussion was devoted to team culture. I will admit I found this a bit of a turnoff at first as I was looking for tidbits on technical and tactical issues. As I read through the discussions on culture I began to understand the importance of team culture and the reason this group of successful coaches devoted so much time to it. I have since become a student of team culture and advocate of working to develop a strong positive one in the teams I coach.
It doesn't happen overnight.
I took over a club team a few years ago. They had not had much success in terms of won / loss record and were looked upon as a team whose players could not make the team of the best club in the area. That first season we went .500 and most were ecstatic with having achieved that. The parents attributed it to my coaching. While grateful of their acknowledgement of my contributions I knew I had made some difference but not enough. And so the transformation of that teams culture begun.
I knew from past experiences in college, club and even high school that when a coach recruits players to the team it can be difficult to find the right mix for team chemistry. Most coaches select team members on talent alone and give little consideration to how team members interact with one another, with coaches, with referees and others in general. This is the lesson I was learning through interaction with the email group of coaches.
The second year with that club team saw about a 30% turnover in players. We held "tryouts" and found a few players who were both more talented than the ones they replaced and were better fits to the team culture I was striving to develop. The team improved their on-field results that year actually winning a league title. It was a lower level league, but a title nonetheless.
This is where things began to get very interesting.
It was apparent to me our culture needed strengthening. We would need to lose some players who did not fit with what we were building. I put it to the team to recruit teammates they thought could raise the team to another level. A very interesting thing happened. The players recruited some of the very best players from the region. They also refused to recruit some of the very best players from the region. They were very discerning about who they wanted to join the team. Even beyond that, they recruited players to certain and specific positions with the intent of replacing soon to be former teammates who were not interested in buying in to the rapidly developing team culture.
The result of their efforts was a group of 40 players trying out for one team. We quickly made a decision to form two teams - an "A" team and a "B" team. After some realized they would no longer be a member of "the" team they had been playing on, they sought greener pastures elsewhere. Not surprisingly these were the players who were disruptive to the team culture being established. They were offered spots on the second team but declined because they viewed themselves as better than that. Within a years time most either sought to rejoin our program or had given up the sport of soccer,
This brings us to present day.
I am now coaching a high school team that has experienced some modicum of success in past high school season. One of the things that has blunted or perhaps even stagnated the changing of culture is the fact the seniors of this group won a recreational state championship when in middle school. To call it a state championship is even a bit of a misnomer as only a portion of the state was represented at these championships. Nonetheless, this is what they have hung their hat on and have stubbornly refused to embrace advancement of culture that could take them to the next level. As a high school team they are as physically gifted and technically talented as any I have been associated with. Tactically they still have proclivity to play as they did in 8th grade which consisted to being bigger faster stronger than other teams their age. I know because I watched them play when they were in middle school.
While we have made some advancements in play this season their old comfort zone beckons frequently. Against a weaker team they will goal hunt reverting to playing dump and run with little to no regard to actually doing so in a constructive and productive manner. Our center midfielders become forward as do our outside backs. Players almost completely and totally abandon positional responsibilities in search of goal scoring opportunities. As a result, we have struggled in games we should have dominated and had some unexpected, even unpleasant results.
One the other hand, we did find out early in the season that this team was capable of playing with some of the very best in the state. Although excited about this at the time I am now not sure this was such a good thing. After playing with the eventual league champions for the entire game early in the season we took a huge step backwards against the other two perennial league powers getting blown out by both. All the brilliant play from early in the season completely disappeared in those two matches as players reverted to a previous comfort zone.
Team culture can win games for you.
Team culture can lose games for you.
Both of the above statements are abundantly true. It was a three to four year process with club team to develop a strong culture of like-minded athletes capable to facing adversity, sticking together with one heartbeat and overcoming that adversity as a united team. My current high school team is not remotely close to having this type of string positive team culture. Seeing this senior class graduate will be a good thing overall for our program. That's not to say I dislike this class or any of its members. They are good kids by and large. I like each of them. They have just been resistant to change. I consider them stuck in their ways with little interest in changing even if it were of benefit to them to do so. I understand this. This team's culture has cost them results this season. I'm not sure they realize this and if they do realize it, they don't seem to mind. They are comfortable with who they are and what their culture is.
The challenge from a program standpoint is to make incremental improvements in the programs culture moving forward. Can we develop a stronger positive team culture with next years team? This is the key to making progress in the process. Some refer to it as getting a program over the hump or taking a team to the next level. I am confident that with the right attitude, the right team culture, next seasons team will be better than this seasons team has been. The 2017 team can achieve to greater heights than this years team dared to dream of provided the team culture makes advances, If the team members are devoted to making team culture work for us instead of against us great things await.
Some years ago I became a member of an email group of coaches from around the country. This group has been a wonderful resource for me. They have been mentors to me and perhaps I to them as well. Upon joining the group one of the first things that struck me was how much of the discussion was devoted to team culture. I will admit I found this a bit of a turnoff at first as I was looking for tidbits on technical and tactical issues. As I read through the discussions on culture I began to understand the importance of team culture and the reason this group of successful coaches devoted so much time to it. I have since become a student of team culture and advocate of working to develop a strong positive one in the teams I coach.
It doesn't happen overnight.
I took over a club team a few years ago. They had not had much success in terms of won / loss record and were looked upon as a team whose players could not make the team of the best club in the area. That first season we went .500 and most were ecstatic with having achieved that. The parents attributed it to my coaching. While grateful of their acknowledgement of my contributions I knew I had made some difference but not enough. And so the transformation of that teams culture begun.
I knew from past experiences in college, club and even high school that when a coach recruits players to the team it can be difficult to find the right mix for team chemistry. Most coaches select team members on talent alone and give little consideration to how team members interact with one another, with coaches, with referees and others in general. This is the lesson I was learning through interaction with the email group of coaches.
The second year with that club team saw about a 30% turnover in players. We held "tryouts" and found a few players who were both more talented than the ones they replaced and were better fits to the team culture I was striving to develop. The team improved their on-field results that year actually winning a league title. It was a lower level league, but a title nonetheless.
This is where things began to get very interesting.
It was apparent to me our culture needed strengthening. We would need to lose some players who did not fit with what we were building. I put it to the team to recruit teammates they thought could raise the team to another level. A very interesting thing happened. The players recruited some of the very best players from the region. They also refused to recruit some of the very best players from the region. They were very discerning about who they wanted to join the team. Even beyond that, they recruited players to certain and specific positions with the intent of replacing soon to be former teammates who were not interested in buying in to the rapidly developing team culture.
The result of their efforts was a group of 40 players trying out for one team. We quickly made a decision to form two teams - an "A" team and a "B" team. After some realized they would no longer be a member of "the" team they had been playing on, they sought greener pastures elsewhere. Not surprisingly these were the players who were disruptive to the team culture being established. They were offered spots on the second team but declined because they viewed themselves as better than that. Within a years time most either sought to rejoin our program or had given up the sport of soccer,
This brings us to present day.
I am now coaching a high school team that has experienced some modicum of success in past high school season. One of the things that has blunted or perhaps even stagnated the changing of culture is the fact the seniors of this group won a recreational state championship when in middle school. To call it a state championship is even a bit of a misnomer as only a portion of the state was represented at these championships. Nonetheless, this is what they have hung their hat on and have stubbornly refused to embrace advancement of culture that could take them to the next level. As a high school team they are as physically gifted and technically talented as any I have been associated with. Tactically they still have proclivity to play as they did in 8th grade which consisted to being bigger faster stronger than other teams their age. I know because I watched them play when they were in middle school.
While we have made some advancements in play this season their old comfort zone beckons frequently. Against a weaker team they will goal hunt reverting to playing dump and run with little to no regard to actually doing so in a constructive and productive manner. Our center midfielders become forward as do our outside backs. Players almost completely and totally abandon positional responsibilities in search of goal scoring opportunities. As a result, we have struggled in games we should have dominated and had some unexpected, even unpleasant results.
One the other hand, we did find out early in the season that this team was capable of playing with some of the very best in the state. Although excited about this at the time I am now not sure this was such a good thing. After playing with the eventual league champions for the entire game early in the season we took a huge step backwards against the other two perennial league powers getting blown out by both. All the brilliant play from early in the season completely disappeared in those two matches as players reverted to a previous comfort zone.
Team culture can win games for you.
Team culture can lose games for you.
Both of the above statements are abundantly true. It was a three to four year process with club team to develop a strong culture of like-minded athletes capable to facing adversity, sticking together with one heartbeat and overcoming that adversity as a united team. My current high school team is not remotely close to having this type of string positive team culture. Seeing this senior class graduate will be a good thing overall for our program. That's not to say I dislike this class or any of its members. They are good kids by and large. I like each of them. They have just been resistant to change. I consider them stuck in their ways with little interest in changing even if it were of benefit to them to do so. I understand this. This team's culture has cost them results this season. I'm not sure they realize this and if they do realize it, they don't seem to mind. They are comfortable with who they are and what their culture is.
The challenge from a program standpoint is to make incremental improvements in the programs culture moving forward. Can we develop a stronger positive team culture with next years team? This is the key to making progress in the process. Some refer to it as getting a program over the hump or taking a team to the next level. I am confident that with the right attitude, the right team culture, next seasons team will be better than this seasons team has been. The 2017 team can achieve to greater heights than this years team dared to dream of provided the team culture makes advances, If the team members are devoted to making team culture work for us instead of against us great things await.
Championships or Champions?
The University of Michigan and the University of Notre Dame are the two winingest major college football programs in the history of the sport. The two schools are linked throughout their storied histories. The Wolverines taught the sport to the Irish way back in the 1887. Notre Dame stadium is modeled after Michigan Stadium. The Wolverines colors are Maize and Blue while the Irish colors are Gold and Blue. What does this have to do with soccer?
The two universities also share similar ideas about champions and championships that have served them well through the years.
At Michigan, "Those who stay will be Champions"
At Notre Dame, "Play like a Champion"
It is important to note that neither schools key slogan mentions championships, only Champions.
Both sayings deal with the process rather than the outcome or goal of the process. How to become a champion must be discussed on a regular basis. The details of the process adhered to, nurtured and grown. Sometimes what was once an admired detail must be tweaked, modified or perhaps even stored away as a cherished memory of a tradition of yore replaced by a more pertinent or relevant new tradition.
At Michigan it is believed that Defense wins Championships and I will not dispute that point. However, it is the process of building a champion, a team's culture that puts players in position to compete for championships.
The two universities also share similar ideas about champions and championships that have served them well through the years.
At Michigan, "Those who stay will be Champions"
At Notre Dame, "Play like a Champion"
It is important to note that neither schools key slogan mentions championships, only Champions.
Both sayings deal with the process rather than the outcome or goal of the process. How to become a champion must be discussed on a regular basis. The details of the process adhered to, nurtured and grown. Sometimes what was once an admired detail must be tweaked, modified or perhaps even stored away as a cherished memory of a tradition of yore replaced by a more pertinent or relevant new tradition.
At Michigan it is believed that Defense wins Championships and I will not dispute that point. However, it is the process of building a champion, a team's culture that puts players in position to compete for championships.
Just as we must win first, then play the game,
we must become champions before
we can win a championship.
Wednesday
Culture eats strategy for breakfast.
I saw this quote on twitter a couple of days ago and it struck a chord with me. Culture does indeed eat strategy for breakfast provided the team culture is healthy, positive and strong.
Every team has a culture.
It is most unfortunate that many coaches do not recognize the importance or full impact a team's culture has on its performance. The culture of a team defines who the team is and permeates every aspect of the program. The culture is the standards the team adheres to, its attitude and commitment level. The culture is found in the teams degree of competitiveness and resiliency. As such the team culture needs to be defined and nurtured on a continuous basis. It is a process.
The process begins by honestly and accurately evaluating where your team culture currently stands. The next step is to set a goal for where you want your culture to be. Finally, establish a plan that will take you to there.
Here's a secret, your captains must embody the team culture you seek to establish. Contrary or negative leadership can destroy team culture before it has a chance to blossom. It can be better to purge contrary or negative leadership from the roster than attempting to bring such into the fold... unless of course you prefer a corrosive, self destructive culture to be representative of your team.
When I take over a program or a team the first thing I do is stress timeliness and punctuality. The next thing is to make it mandatory to dress appropriately. All required equipment will be worn. Standards for what is considered appropriate training attire will be established and this always includes having shirts tucked into the waist band of shorts. From here we can begin establishing standards for training and playing the game. It is a daily process that must be nurtured and cared for in order to take root, grow and blossom. And deviation, any sign of weakness in your steadfast adherence to the goal for the teams culture can set things back to square one.
In short, establishing a winning team culture is built around truth, trust and belief in one another. Winning team cultures see players playing for one another. The team, is greater than any individual. No one is irreplaceable. Resiliency is found in a next man up attitude. Expectations are for positions on the field and for the individuals in their comportment always.
It's not always the most talented team that wins the match, but it is rarely the team with the best culture that loses a match.
Every team has a culture.
It is most unfortunate that many coaches do not recognize the importance or full impact a team's culture has on its performance. The culture of a team defines who the team is and permeates every aspect of the program. The culture is the standards the team adheres to, its attitude and commitment level. The culture is found in the teams degree of competitiveness and resiliency. As such the team culture needs to be defined and nurtured on a continuous basis. It is a process.
The process begins by honestly and accurately evaluating where your team culture currently stands. The next step is to set a goal for where you want your culture to be. Finally, establish a plan that will take you to there.
Here's a secret, your captains must embody the team culture you seek to establish. Contrary or negative leadership can destroy team culture before it has a chance to blossom. It can be better to purge contrary or negative leadership from the roster than attempting to bring such into the fold... unless of course you prefer a corrosive, self destructive culture to be representative of your team.
When I take over a program or a team the first thing I do is stress timeliness and punctuality. The next thing is to make it mandatory to dress appropriately. All required equipment will be worn. Standards for what is considered appropriate training attire will be established and this always includes having shirts tucked into the waist band of shorts. From here we can begin establishing standards for training and playing the game. It is a daily process that must be nurtured and cared for in order to take root, grow and blossom. And deviation, any sign of weakness in your steadfast adherence to the goal for the teams culture can set things back to square one.
In short, establishing a winning team culture is built around truth, trust and belief in one another. Winning team cultures see players playing for one another. The team, is greater than any individual. No one is irreplaceable. Resiliency is found in a next man up attitude. Expectations are for positions on the field and for the individuals in their comportment always.
It's not always the most talented team that wins the match, but it is rarely the team with the best culture that loses a match.
Sunday
Have you ever purposefully played a game with 7 players?
One of our readers messaged me last night with this question; Have you ever purposefully played 22 minutes of a game with 7 players on the field and 8 subs on the bench?
I have in fact done this a couple of times. In each instance it was because the opponents could not field enough players. After establishing a two goal lead we withdrew players to play even sided. There have also been a couple of times when I intentionally played down a man because we were lacking subs and an individual player believed I would not. When the player abandoned our team's system to do his own thing he found himself seated on the bench next to me while his teammates played a man (or two ) down. This is where today's story begins.
When I intentionally removed a player from the pitch with no sub available you can be assured I was plenty upset. It is a drastic move and a decision to be made with all due and proper consideration. In sending a message to the offending player in this manner the coach is also in effect punishing the innocent remainder of the team by making them unnecessarily play down a man. That is a slippery slope to walk. In the best case scenario the offending player receives the message with peer pressure being a part of the delivery method. At worst, team morale and chemistry is weakened to the point of impacting not only the game at hand, but future play as well.
As it pertains to the question posed to me last night the issue is apparently attendance at practice sessions.
Here in west central Ohio we do not have a large pool of athletes who specialize in soccer as their only sport. Many of our club soccer players are multi-sport athletes at their high schools. This is both by choice and in some cases by necessity. My philosophy has always been that school sports come first. Practice and even match attendance sometimes suffers because of this, but with careful planning it can be effectively managed.
The team in question is a U16 team so there are plenty of other factors that can impact attendance. Driver's Education courses is a primary one at this age. School choir and band rehearsals and performances are another. Church holidays and festivals should always come before soccer. Family gatherings for weddings, funerals, baptism, confirmation, first communion, spring vacations all take precedent over attending a soccer practice. Players of this age may be working to help pay for a car or to save for college. What of the player who misses training because of illness or doctors appointment?
I understand from a coaching standpoint wanting everyone in attendance at every team function, but it simply is not realistic in our environment ... and quite frankly, it is not necessary for success. I offer my own spring teams of the last several years as examples. We have been ultra successful while abiding by the mantra that family / church / school come before soccer.
Forcing seven players to play against eleven opponents while eight healthy teammates watch from the bench because they missed training is punishing the seven, is it not? And if the coach is asking players to chose soccer training over family, church or school obligations it is really problematic. Let's face it, there is not a single player on this team likely to play professionally and therefore soccer should not be the main priority for any of them.
And place yourself in the boots of those who will be forced to sit out a portion of todays match while their teammates play down. If I chose church, school, family over soccer and then was punished by the soccer coach for doing so? Soccer would move down on my priority list. If I knew I had to miss soccer practice in the future, I might not even bother showing for the next match just to sit the bench and spectate. How many players can the team afford to lose before it becomes completely dysfunctional?
This subject matter ties in nicely with the recent articles on playing time and where elite kids shouldn't meet and rules While our family is undoubtedly and without dispute soccer fanatics our mantra is "soccer is something we do, but it does not define who we are." We live a balanced life placing God first. Family, school, work, and other aspects of our lives are prioritized somewhere after God ... and before sports. Not only are these kids not going to play professionally, but none are going to earn a full ride to play soccer in college either.
So, perhaps the coach is attempting to teach a lesson on honoring commitment? If so, I wonder if the coach has considered the conundrum he is placing kids and families in who have committed to family, church and school activities and events ... often times prior to the spring soccer commitment and almost certainly before spring soccer schedules have been released?
When it comes right down to it, this is all about the coach who is butt hurt that he is not at the top of the priority list for these kids and their families. He is attempting to exert control that he might not be embarrassed by the product he puts on the field. Yes, playing down to seven men is a temporary matter and short term solution for getting his way for the (relative) long run. In a word, selfish. He wants and is taking ownership of the team. This is foolish for the team belongs to the players. The players are the only ones who can truly take ownership of themselves.
So, shouldn't it be the players who decide the standards for participation in today's match?
After all, it is the players who must play for one another on the pitch in order to be successful and so it is the players who should decided the standards by which they do so.
In conclusion what we have been addressing is where on the commitment continuum various members of this team fall. Obviously the coach is compelled whereas at least 8 players in his judgment are not. The coach might view these 8 as resistant and is attempting to force them to be reluctant, maybe in a best case scenario, compliant. This is not the way to achieve buy-in to the team's culture. In fact, it is a dangerous way of defining team culture in a negative sense. Here's a secret all successful coaches must appreciate - while a coach can present a vision for a program's or team's culture it is the players who will actually define that culture. It is only through the coach's sales tactics that he can bring to bear any influence their culture.
I have in fact done this a couple of times. In each instance it was because the opponents could not field enough players. After establishing a two goal lead we withdrew players to play even sided. There have also been a couple of times when I intentionally played down a man because we were lacking subs and an individual player believed I would not. When the player abandoned our team's system to do his own thing he found himself seated on the bench next to me while his teammates played a man (or two ) down. This is where today's story begins.
When I intentionally removed a player from the pitch with no sub available you can be assured I was plenty upset. It is a drastic move and a decision to be made with all due and proper consideration. In sending a message to the offending player in this manner the coach is also in effect punishing the innocent remainder of the team by making them unnecessarily play down a man. That is a slippery slope to walk. In the best case scenario the offending player receives the message with peer pressure being a part of the delivery method. At worst, team morale and chemistry is weakened to the point of impacting not only the game at hand, but future play as well.
As it pertains to the question posed to me last night the issue is apparently attendance at practice sessions.
Here in west central Ohio we do not have a large pool of athletes who specialize in soccer as their only sport. Many of our club soccer players are multi-sport athletes at their high schools. This is both by choice and in some cases by necessity. My philosophy has always been that school sports come first. Practice and even match attendance sometimes suffers because of this, but with careful planning it can be effectively managed.
The team in question is a U16 team so there are plenty of other factors that can impact attendance. Driver's Education courses is a primary one at this age. School choir and band rehearsals and performances are another. Church holidays and festivals should always come before soccer. Family gatherings for weddings, funerals, baptism, confirmation, first communion, spring vacations all take precedent over attending a soccer practice. Players of this age may be working to help pay for a car or to save for college. What of the player who misses training because of illness or doctors appointment?
I understand from a coaching standpoint wanting everyone in attendance at every team function, but it simply is not realistic in our environment ... and quite frankly, it is not necessary for success. I offer my own spring teams of the last several years as examples. We have been ultra successful while abiding by the mantra that family / church / school come before soccer.
Forcing seven players to play against eleven opponents while eight healthy teammates watch from the bench because they missed training is punishing the seven, is it not? And if the coach is asking players to chose soccer training over family, church or school obligations it is really problematic. Let's face it, there is not a single player on this team likely to play professionally and therefore soccer should not be the main priority for any of them.
And place yourself in the boots of those who will be forced to sit out a portion of todays match while their teammates play down. If I chose church, school, family over soccer and then was punished by the soccer coach for doing so? Soccer would move down on my priority list. If I knew I had to miss soccer practice in the future, I might not even bother showing for the next match just to sit the bench and spectate. How many players can the team afford to lose before it becomes completely dysfunctional?
This subject matter ties in nicely with the recent articles on playing time and where elite kids shouldn't meet and rules While our family is undoubtedly and without dispute soccer fanatics our mantra is "soccer is something we do, but it does not define who we are." We live a balanced life placing God first. Family, school, work, and other aspects of our lives are prioritized somewhere after God ... and before sports. Not only are these kids not going to play professionally, but none are going to earn a full ride to play soccer in college either.
So, perhaps the coach is attempting to teach a lesson on honoring commitment? If so, I wonder if the coach has considered the conundrum he is placing kids and families in who have committed to family, church and school activities and events ... often times prior to the spring soccer commitment and almost certainly before spring soccer schedules have been released?
When it comes right down to it, this is all about the coach who is butt hurt that he is not at the top of the priority list for these kids and their families. He is attempting to exert control that he might not be embarrassed by the product he puts on the field. Yes, playing down to seven men is a temporary matter and short term solution for getting his way for the (relative) long run. In a word, selfish. He wants and is taking ownership of the team. This is foolish for the team belongs to the players. The players are the only ones who can truly take ownership of themselves.
So, shouldn't it be the players who decide the standards for participation in today's match?
After all, it is the players who must play for one another on the pitch in order to be successful and so it is the players who should decided the standards by which they do so.
In conclusion what we have been addressing is where on the commitment continuum various members of this team fall. Obviously the coach is compelled whereas at least 8 players in his judgment are not. The coach might view these 8 as resistant and is attempting to force them to be reluctant, maybe in a best case scenario, compliant. This is not the way to achieve buy-in to the team's culture. In fact, it is a dangerous way of defining team culture in a negative sense. Here's a secret all successful coaches must appreciate - while a coach can present a vision for a program's or team's culture it is the players who will actually define that culture. It is only through the coach's sales tactics that he can bring to bear any influence their culture.
Thursday
If you want something you have never had,
then you must do something you have never done
Changing the culture of a program or team can be among the most difficult tasks a coaching staff takes on. It can also be the most important task to take on.
"It's amazing what you can get used to."
We all know of programs / teams who endure loss after loss after loss. We think it must be humiliating to everyone in those programs. The sad truth is there is a certain comfort in knowing what to expect from day to day even if those expectations are for continued losing.
I love rebuilding programs / teams and turning them into winners. It is a difficult task but also so very rewarding. Breaking individual players and teams from their established comfort zones is not a smooth process for everyone. Some will embrace change. Some will resist change. Eventually all who remain will accept change.
Monday
More Soccer (and a basketball) Memories - Tim II
A few more of my favorite memories from coaching
These first two revolve around young players with disabilities. Both were such neat kids from loving homes wanting to play sports like their siblings, friends and classmates. I was blessed to be able to coach Eric and John.
Eric played soccer for me one season. If I recall correctly the team was a group of U12 boys. Eric might have been slightly older. I don't know the correct term for Eric's disability. Suffice it to say he was mentally challenged in some ways. Eric was also very bright in some ways and could be a bit of a prankster. One of the challenges I faced were complaints from a couple of players / parents of how Eric's presence on the team and especially in the game put our team at a competitive disadvantage. My approach with those people was to cheerfully reply "Of course, it does! But it also makes us a make stronger team!" It was enough to defuse potentially ugly situations if only because it stunned them into silence.
I made no exceptions for Eric, expecting him to attempt everything his teammates did. I worked with Eric the same I would with any other players. I acknowledged and cheered his successes and when necessary corrected his mistakes. I did notify opposing coaches and referees that we had a special needs kid on our team, but asked no favors on his behalf. If Eric were offside, call it. If Eric committed a foul, call it. If Eric handled the ball, call it. I even played Eric in goal a bit. I, and his teammates, strove to treat Eric as we would any other member of the team.
Eric, for his part seemed to have a great time. The kid was always smiling and often times I spotted a twinkle in his eye that belied a mischievous streak. For instance, we sometimes finished practice with an exercise known as butts up! This usually involved the coaches or a birthday boy standing in the goal with hands on knees and their back to the field. Players would each have a turn to "shoot the ball" at the coaches butt. If they hit the coach, no running. If they missed the coach, they ran half a lap. Eric didn't have much luck hitting the coaches butt until late in the season. I had seen that twinkle in his eye before we started butts up that evening but was unprepared to actually be hit by the ball when it was Eric's turn! He had picked up the ball, snuck up behind me, threw the ball and hit me in the butt! Much laughter ensued! I pretended to be upset that he had "cheated" but Eric didn't care, he had hit coach in the butt! Secretly I beamed at his ingenuity.
And there's the lesson to be learned. Soccer is a game about solving problems encountered on the pitch. That's exactly what Eric had done! In his own unique way and to the best of his ability he solved the problem. Love, Love, LOVE that kid. Such an inspiration to the rest of us. I cannot begin to remember what our record was that season, but I will always remember Eric was on our team.
John was a sports aficionado. His special needs were both physical and mental in nature. Great kid who smiled a lot. I was privileged and honored to coach John in 7th grade basketball. Anyone that has been around 7th grade boys knows their competitive nature really begins to emerge in middle school. Having a special needs kid on your team can be a difficult situation.
I made no exceptions for John. I expected him to attempt everything his teammates were asked to do. To John's credit he dribbled and shot fairly well all things considered. Certainly not at a competitive in-game level but competently nonetheless. He wasn't much of a defender and playing man to man defense with John on the court was never a consideration . Of course, there were one or two players / parents upset about the competitive disadvantage John placed the team in when he was on the court.
My solution with John was to play him in the middle of a 2-1-2 zone whenever he was on the court. On offense he played "high post". As I recall we actually had one player / family become very frustrated and leave the team over John's presence. We were struggling through the season, losing games we "should have" or at least "could have" won except for John. An amazing thing happened as the post season tournament began - the team went on a winning streak that carried them to the championship game! And yes, John was involved in each of those games.
We didn't win the championship, but I'm not sure anyone aside from John really cared. As I said, John is a sports aficionado. He recognizes his limitations but that makes him no less competitive. I remember overhearing him talking with his father about if he had only done "this or that" a little bit better. Never blaming his disabilities, only lamenting that perhaps he had not played as well as he was capable of playing.
My own son said something to the effect, "If it weren't for John we could have won, but I think we got a better prize than a trophy by having John play on our team." And he was absolutely correct. The lesson here is about making the most of what God has blessed us with. John certainly did this on a daily basis. His positive attitude was contagious to the point that he was inspirational to his teammates. I myself don't know if we would have won that championship or not, but I do believe firmly that we would not have played for one without John leading the way.
When I took over the Lima Central Catholic girls program I knew we had to change a culture of losing. What I did not realize was how deeply ingrained the culture of losing was. That first summer with the girls I remember getting incredibly frustrated with teaching the girls to give intelligent effort. The idea of less physical exertion in favor of more mental exertion was struggling to find a foothold. It seemed at some point in the past a coach had told them they were not as talented as opponents and the only way they could compete was to outwork the other team. I took the team off the pitch and we sat in the shade along the St. Gerard's school building. I told the girls they were a good team and it was time to start playing like it. ... there was a collective look on the players faces ... I'm not quite sure how to describe it. I recall looking over my shoulder because I thought something might be seriously wrong. I thought back over what I just said to ascertain if I had somehow been out of line in my speech. I finally asked what was wrong and Sarah spoke up. Of course, it would be Sarah. She is one of my all-time favorite players. A royal pain in the butt and her own worst enemy, but nonetheless one of my all-time favorites and likely in part because of her response that day. "No one has ever told us we are a good team." I was incredulous. I know my mouth gaped open and I asked "What?!" Sarah responded with "You're the first coach to ever tell us we are a good team." As I looked around at the girls I saw heads nodding in agreement, but there was something else visible as well. There was a physical transformation and a changing of attitude happening right before my eyes. In 60 seconds we changed the culture of the program. I gave them my belief, my confidence in them and they knew I was sincere. One of the truly unforgettable moments in my coaching career.
The last memory I will share today is actually a product of the saddest experience I have ever had in sports. A good friend and volunteer assistant to me committed suicide in mid-season. It happened on a Friday night. I spent much of that night with Justin's family and especially his son, Kaleb who was on our team. The next day Lance and I took Kaleb with us to a tournament in Glandorf. Kaleb wanted to be with us and it seemed like the thing to do. Scott Bentz was the coach for the team Lance was guest playing for and when he learned of the circumstances he graciously allowed Kaleb to come along and play that day as well. The next day our own team was scheduled to play the ISC Storm in Botkins, Ohio and I just didn't know if Kaleb and his family would be up for it. I called to warn the ISC Storm coach, Terry Paulus, of what we were dealing with and he graciously said he would go along with whatever we thought would be best. We decided to go ahead and play that Sunday. The sun shone through cloudy skies but there was a bitterly cold wind blowing. We scored first and I began to think of how good it would be to win that day. The Storm tied the game late and, oh, I don't know ... the result just didn't seem to matter much at all. Unbeknownst to me, Terry and the parents from the ISC Storm team had taken up a collection for Kaleb and his family. Now, the first time I ever spoke with Terry Paulus was the day before when I informed him of the tragedy that had struck our team. I didn't know the guy from Adam. It wasn't just a few bucks they collected either. It was a sizeable amount given to complete strangers. ... now good friends. Both Kaleb and Lance have guest played for Terry and the ISC Storm on numerous occasions. This is of course a bitter sweet memory, but Terry Paulus and the ISC Storm made a lasting impression on us that day and provided a memory that will last a lifetime. The money, while a wonderful gesture, is not the memory though. The memory is of others in the family of soccer stepping in to do what they could when it was most needed.. Scott, Terry, all the kids who played in those games that weekend let Kaleb know they had his back and were there to help as they could. Can you imagine having over a hundred people, many whom you never knew before that weekend embracing you with their love? That's a pretty special memory, in my book
These first two revolve around young players with disabilities. Both were such neat kids from loving homes wanting to play sports like their siblings, friends and classmates. I was blessed to be able to coach Eric and John.
Eric played soccer for me one season. If I recall correctly the team was a group of U12 boys. Eric might have been slightly older. I don't know the correct term for Eric's disability. Suffice it to say he was mentally challenged in some ways. Eric was also very bright in some ways and could be a bit of a prankster. One of the challenges I faced were complaints from a couple of players / parents of how Eric's presence on the team and especially in the game put our team at a competitive disadvantage. My approach with those people was to cheerfully reply "Of course, it does! But it also makes us a make stronger team!" It was enough to defuse potentially ugly situations if only because it stunned them into silence.
I made no exceptions for Eric, expecting him to attempt everything his teammates did. I worked with Eric the same I would with any other players. I acknowledged and cheered his successes and when necessary corrected his mistakes. I did notify opposing coaches and referees that we had a special needs kid on our team, but asked no favors on his behalf. If Eric were offside, call it. If Eric committed a foul, call it. If Eric handled the ball, call it. I even played Eric in goal a bit. I, and his teammates, strove to treat Eric as we would any other member of the team.
Eric, for his part seemed to have a great time. The kid was always smiling and often times I spotted a twinkle in his eye that belied a mischievous streak. For instance, we sometimes finished practice with an exercise known as butts up! This usually involved the coaches or a birthday boy standing in the goal with hands on knees and their back to the field. Players would each have a turn to "shoot the ball" at the coaches butt. If they hit the coach, no running. If they missed the coach, they ran half a lap. Eric didn't have much luck hitting the coaches butt until late in the season. I had seen that twinkle in his eye before we started butts up that evening but was unprepared to actually be hit by the ball when it was Eric's turn! He had picked up the ball, snuck up behind me, threw the ball and hit me in the butt! Much laughter ensued! I pretended to be upset that he had "cheated" but Eric didn't care, he had hit coach in the butt! Secretly I beamed at his ingenuity.
And there's the lesson to be learned. Soccer is a game about solving problems encountered on the pitch. That's exactly what Eric had done! In his own unique way and to the best of his ability he solved the problem. Love, Love, LOVE that kid. Such an inspiration to the rest of us. I cannot begin to remember what our record was that season, but I will always remember Eric was on our team.
John was a sports aficionado. His special needs were both physical and mental in nature. Great kid who smiled a lot. I was privileged and honored to coach John in 7th grade basketball. Anyone that has been around 7th grade boys knows their competitive nature really begins to emerge in middle school. Having a special needs kid on your team can be a difficult situation.
I made no exceptions for John. I expected him to attempt everything his teammates were asked to do. To John's credit he dribbled and shot fairly well all things considered. Certainly not at a competitive in-game level but competently nonetheless. He wasn't much of a defender and playing man to man defense with John on the court was never a consideration . Of course, there were one or two players / parents upset about the competitive disadvantage John placed the team in when he was on the court.
My solution with John was to play him in the middle of a 2-1-2 zone whenever he was on the court. On offense he played "high post". As I recall we actually had one player / family become very frustrated and leave the team over John's presence. We were struggling through the season, losing games we "should have" or at least "could have" won except for John. An amazing thing happened as the post season tournament began - the team went on a winning streak that carried them to the championship game! And yes, John was involved in each of those games.
We didn't win the championship, but I'm not sure anyone aside from John really cared. As I said, John is a sports aficionado. He recognizes his limitations but that makes him no less competitive. I remember overhearing him talking with his father about if he had only done "this or that" a little bit better. Never blaming his disabilities, only lamenting that perhaps he had not played as well as he was capable of playing.
My own son said something to the effect, "If it weren't for John we could have won, but I think we got a better prize than a trophy by having John play on our team." And he was absolutely correct. The lesson here is about making the most of what God has blessed us with. John certainly did this on a daily basis. His positive attitude was contagious to the point that he was inspirational to his teammates. I myself don't know if we would have won that championship or not, but I do believe firmly that we would not have played for one without John leading the way.
When I took over the Lima Central Catholic girls program I knew we had to change a culture of losing. What I did not realize was how deeply ingrained the culture of losing was. That first summer with the girls I remember getting incredibly frustrated with teaching the girls to give intelligent effort. The idea of less physical exertion in favor of more mental exertion was struggling to find a foothold. It seemed at some point in the past a coach had told them they were not as talented as opponents and the only way they could compete was to outwork the other team. I took the team off the pitch and we sat in the shade along the St. Gerard's school building. I told the girls they were a good team and it was time to start playing like it. ... there was a collective look on the players faces ... I'm not quite sure how to describe it. I recall looking over my shoulder because I thought something might be seriously wrong. I thought back over what I just said to ascertain if I had somehow been out of line in my speech. I finally asked what was wrong and Sarah spoke up. Of course, it would be Sarah. She is one of my all-time favorite players. A royal pain in the butt and her own worst enemy, but nonetheless one of my all-time favorites and likely in part because of her response that day. "No one has ever told us we are a good team." I was incredulous. I know my mouth gaped open and I asked "What?!" Sarah responded with "You're the first coach to ever tell us we are a good team." As I looked around at the girls I saw heads nodding in agreement, but there was something else visible as well. There was a physical transformation and a changing of attitude happening right before my eyes. In 60 seconds we changed the culture of the program. I gave them my belief, my confidence in them and they knew I was sincere. One of the truly unforgettable moments in my coaching career.
The last memory I will share today is actually a product of the saddest experience I have ever had in sports. A good friend and volunteer assistant to me committed suicide in mid-season. It happened on a Friday night. I spent much of that night with Justin's family and especially his son, Kaleb who was on our team. The next day Lance and I took Kaleb with us to a tournament in Glandorf. Kaleb wanted to be with us and it seemed like the thing to do. Scott Bentz was the coach for the team Lance was guest playing for and when he learned of the circumstances he graciously allowed Kaleb to come along and play that day as well. The next day our own team was scheduled to play the ISC Storm in Botkins, Ohio and I just didn't know if Kaleb and his family would be up for it. I called to warn the ISC Storm coach, Terry Paulus, of what we were dealing with and he graciously said he would go along with whatever we thought would be best. We decided to go ahead and play that Sunday. The sun shone through cloudy skies but there was a bitterly cold wind blowing. We scored first and I began to think of how good it would be to win that day. The Storm tied the game late and, oh, I don't know ... the result just didn't seem to matter much at all. Unbeknownst to me, Terry and the parents from the ISC Storm team had taken up a collection for Kaleb and his family. Now, the first time I ever spoke with Terry Paulus was the day before when I informed him of the tragedy that had struck our team. I didn't know the guy from Adam. It wasn't just a few bucks they collected either. It was a sizeable amount given to complete strangers. ... now good friends. Both Kaleb and Lance have guest played for Terry and the ISC Storm on numerous occasions. This is of course a bitter sweet memory, but Terry Paulus and the ISC Storm made a lasting impression on us that day and provided a memory that will last a lifetime. The money, while a wonderful gesture, is not the memory though. The memory is of others in the family of soccer stepping in to do what they could when it was most needed.. Scott, Terry, all the kids who played in those games that weekend let Kaleb know they had his back and were there to help as they could. Can you imagine having over a hundred people, many whom you never knew before that weekend embracing you with their love? That's a pretty special memory, in my book
Thursday
Building a culture is like tending a garden.
You are constantly weeding.
Because 1 person can upset the whole thing."
Anson Dorrance, UNC
Personal experience has proven this to be an ultimate truth. On what could have been a state championship team the administration forbid me from weeding out two individuals who quite literally and with purposeful intent upset the whole thing with their personal agendas. Such a sad and uneccessary situation for the rest of the team.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)