Reflections on this Summer's Camps

Conducting summer camps is, obviously, something I really enjoy doing. The hours are long. The days are hot. The travel can be exhausting. The players and coaches make it all worthwhile. And that is what I take from the camps we conduct - the relationships built with the people we meet.

On a personal level, I enjoy seeing teams improve under our tutelage.  It is rewarding to see the concepts and ideas about the game come to life for the teams that camp with us.  To see them take the pitch for a summer tournament and witness their excitement over improved play and success is heart warming. And still it is the relationships that leave an enduring impression.

This generation of young people are an amazing lot as I am sure each generation is. I marvel at their problem solving skills on the pitch and in life.  I am in awe of their time management skills. Astounded by the wide range of activities and interests they lend themselves to with dedication and discipline.

Brittany lives on a working cattle farm and rearranged her chore and work schedule to be able to attend goalkeeper training. Jacob worked 2 jobs and came to training over an extended lunch break having to make up the time at the end of his day. Brianna brought her baby sitting charges to training and those youngsters respected her so much they were hardly even noticed. Nick convinced his parents to allow him to stay home from vacation to attend our camp at his school.

When I see dedication to soccer on this level it sends vibes of positive energy throughout me. I literally get charged up with excitement to work with these young people. But let's remember how I learned of their stories - I engaged these young men and women in conversation.  I showed a genuine interest in them as people. In turn they shared with me and a bond developed. A working relationship centered round soccer was established and we learned a little about one another along the way.

Candace is a young woman who attend our camps in previous years. Now a graduate, I invited her back for this summer's camp with her old team.  No pay. No incentive other than to play some soccer and hang out with friends. She readily accepted and showed to camp despite having totaled her car and being banged up from an accident a few days prior.  That's dedication. That's following through on commitment.  That's working to establish a tradition and legacy in a young program.  I have to believe big things await Candace in her future.

My son Lance and two of his teammates, Hunter and AJ accepted my request to volunteer as instructors for a high school girls camp.  These young men are all 19 years of age and placing them in camp with high school aged girls might seem a cautionary tale, but I have known these gentlemen for years. They are trustworthy, honorable and will someday, imo, become very good coaches in their own rights should that be a path they choose to follow. It turned out to be one of our best weeks of camps ever.  From 9:00 am through 6:30 pm for five straight days we worked for this high school girls team ... and they worked for us.

"Team bonding" is the catch phrase often bandied about when people talk of uniting a team these days. Team chemistry is still an elusive intangible sought after in pursuit of making a good season a great one.  Whatever we call it, it still comes down to the most simple of concepts - building relationships with those we associate with,

I don't care if you like each other or not, but you will respect each other. This is a phrase I have heard repeatedly over the years. It is a phrase uttered by Coach Boone in Remember the Titans as he addresses the team after an early morning run through the Gettysburg battlefield.  In this instance the established relationships were of very poor quality and Coach Boone knew individual change must occur or they were collectively doomed.

With many of the teams we work with changing the way the team plays is the focus of what coaches ask us to work on during camp week. Relationship building with the members of the coaching staff and team is a crucial ingredient in our recipe for success. Establishing a foundation of trust rooted in honesty is our primary objective as camp clinicians. If we fail in this mission, the camp itself will be a failure.

This is the lesson Coach Boone sought to impart on the young Titan squad and his coaching staff. Liking one another is not a prerequisite.  Respect is. And the only path to respect is through honesty and trust.

I have recently written of the two greatest coaching tools being a chair to sit on and the ability to be silent during games.  Both were somewhat tongue in cheek ways of making the point that its a players game. Today I have identified the single greatest coaching tool in existence - the ability to build relationships. This also happens to be the secret to living a productive and happy life.  And for us here at CBA Soccer we enjoyed a wonderful summer camp season. One I would term our best ever for precisely this reason - the relationships established, developed and renewed while "working" in an environment of soccer.  Thank you to each instructor, coach and player who worked with us this summer! It was our best summer so far!

A Tale of Two Teams

I was reminded of an old tale this morning and decided to adapt it for this blog.  It is a simple tale involving perspective and many lessons. I hope you enjoy it.

There was to be a soccer match between two teams. One team represented Heaven and the other team represented Hell.  Perhaps we should call them the Angels and the Demons.  Both teams prepared  for the match by practicing regularly. Both teams were at full health. These teams were evenly matched in nearly every regard, but one.

The evening before the big match the teams were both treated to lavish dinners prepared by top nutritionist and chefs. There was present on their respective tables every manner of fuel that would be needed to put forth their best performance the next day,

As might be expected the Angels took a moment to give thanks for their meal. They were appreciative of the bounty set before them. The expressed their gratitude for the work put into preparing and serving the meal to them.  They asked Blessings for the meal and for participants in the match the next day.

Meanwhile, Demons went straight for the food before them only they encountered a problem - the utensils set before them to eat their meal with were extra-sized.  The forks and spoons were so long it was impossible for anyone to feed himself.  Some complained about this while others began using their fingers to feed themselves. Soon the Demon's table was utter chaos and quite the mess.

The Angles team were given the same type of silverware with which to feed themselves yet there was no complaining at their table. Instead there was a lot of relaxed conversation and a general jovial spirit throughout the team as they served one another their meals.  The Angels used the over sized utensils to feed the teammate across from them their food.  Working together with servant hearts each of the Angels enjoyed a balanced meal, good times and several hearty laughs as they went through the process of preparing for the next days match.

Of course, this is a story about life even more so than a story about soccer.  It's a story of WE being a much better option than ME.  In life we must work diligently on our relationship with God and in so doing find our servant heart towards all of mankind. A soccer team is not so very different as each player must work diligently on his relationship with the ball, but it is not until we learn to play the game for one another that it truly becomes a beautiful game.  We must take care of ourselves / our game first in order that we might be of service to others, but make no mistake about this - it is only when we are / play in service to others that we become all we should be as a person ... and as a player. When a group of individuals share and live out this philosophy they no know limits as to what they can achieve, together.

Team Chemistry

I've not been writing as much as I am actively involved as an assistant coach / GK coach with a high school team. It's difficult to write in-season and not use the team I am coaching as material for the articles so I have refrained from writing at all. I'm breaking away from that line of thinking today because I believe there is something happening worth sharing with you. It involves team chemistry.

To be honest, our team chemistry is average at best which is to say we have good days and some not so good days. I've been doing a lot of thinking of ways to improve the team's chemistry and I'm not talking about the ever popular team bonding activities although those certainly have value. If you are a regular follower of this blog you will appreciate that my mind often takes the path less traveled and perhaps that is the case in this situation as well.

Not to say that our team has a problem, but I believe it important to properly identify any situation before attempting to address the situation.  What factors are involved and at play influencing the situation? This is what I have come up with for team chemistry in our situation.

People
As individual members we are drawn together as a group by a common interest. In this case that common interest is soccer.  We are a diverse group in more than a few ways. This diversity brings a complexity dynamic to the group that I believe is a key to our team chemistry. As we witness in the world about us, diversity can tear us apart or make us incredibly strong.  I am not sure we as a team have fully determined which it will be for us at this point in time. Diverse team members will have diverse points of views based on their experiences, knowledge and skill levels. The respect afforded to each diverse opinion might actually be more important than the opinion itself which brings us to,

Interactions
How members of a group interact with one another directly impacts the efficiency and effectiveness of a groups performance. In a basic sense each player must have and accept a defined role. In a broader sense each player must embrace his role within the standards set by the team. There must also be appropriate enforcement of the standards set for the team.

The most prominent or noticeable role on a team is that of leadership.  When there is no formal leadership structure in a group setting different people will step in to fill the role of leadership at different times, If the group is blessed with a multitude of quality leaders this might be a good thing - I have been part of teams who operated under a leadership council rather than captains. It has been my experience teams operate best when there is a single unified direction for the team orchestrated by a single voice or perhaps two voices in harmony with one another.

Effective teams are not led by dictators.  Each individual of a team is equally important as any other individual. Therefore secondary leadership roles are important to acknowledge, foster and grow. In a high school setting, those filling secondary leadership roles are often next years leaders in waiting. It is important these secondary leaders accept their role as subordinate to the present team leaders,

A struggle for leadership of the team can be necessary at times, but be assured a team will not perform to its full potential during a time of struggle for leadership. There might be flashes or glimpses of what the team is capable of, but when the leadership voice is not unified peak performance will be difficult to sustain.

In a battle for leadership it is often an individual who feels slighted over not being a named leader who attempts to force his way into a leadership role by taking on responsibilities of leadership thereby intentionally intruding on the accepted and expected role of designated leadership. This is where established standards and accepted norms for the team must guide the process.

Standards are the written rules that every team member is expected to conform to while norms are the often unwritten or informal rules all team members are expected to conform to. The norms are a teams culture and whether the norms are functional or dysfunctional a team tends to sanction those who violate the norms. A sign of growth would be when a team member or members take a stand against a dysfunctional team norm and gets the team to change it, Such a person would be viewed as a team catalyst.

Catalysts
A team catalyst is usually someone in a leadership role on the team. It does not have to be a designated leader as a secondary leader can aptly fill this role as well, but it  is probably best if it is a leader - the teams coach or team captain. Leaders provide direction, structure activities, provide and share information, promote positive relationships, support and encouragement,

Motivation or Energy
Every team has an energy all its own.  It is defined by how the individual energy of its members interacts with that of other team members. When individuals are motivated by team goals energy tends to be very positive. When individual agendas permeate a team its energy is usually very negative.

I do believe there is a general misconception that good team chemistry is devoid of conflict. This goes back to our diversity as a team. We will have many different perspectives on any given situation and an honest open exchange of ideas and opinions should be encouraged. The difference between a healthy team chemistry and a toxic team chemistry is found in the level of acceptance to what is ultimately agreed upon by the team as a whole.

It might be individuals believe they should be designated leaders on a team, captains, but were passed over for others. How those individuals deal with this disappointment can be critical to identifying team chemistry.  If they actively seek to continue campaigning for a leadership role or attempt to sabotage the recognized leadership negative energy will be rampant on a divided team.

Negative energy clouds the vision of what a team aspires to be.

Therefore a primary responsibility of leadership is to promote positive energy. Goals to motivate both the individual team members and the collective team are necessary to focus our energy in a single direction much like a laser beam.  Goals are often specific and measurable, but a vision... a vision is a collective goal of what a team can aspire to be.  A vision is what a team draws its inspiration and passion from as a collective group. A vision can be what makes a team an attraction,

Attraction or Cohesiveness
Growth in team numbers occurs when the team is an attractive destination. Before this takes place team members must be appreciative of being a member of the team and feel an attraction and devotion to the team. This cohesiveness fosters and facilitates a spirit of collaboration, mutual support and an infectious spontaneity of positive energy while also reducing counter productive conflict rooted in personal agendas.

Adversity
Collectively overcoming adversity is the surest way to develop cohesiveness. Trust is the single most important ingredient to collectively overcoming adversity.  It is easy to trust one another in an atmosphere of positivity but can a team sustain its trust in one another when adversity is encountered?  Will blame be cast or excuses made when things go against us? Or will we look into each others eyes to find a determination, respect and truthful trust that we draw collective strength from?

Honesty and Trust
Trust is the glue of life, the most essential ingredient in effective communication. Trust is the foundational principal that holds all relationships together. And relationships is what team chemistry is all about.  Without honesty their can be no trust and the resulting poor relationship will negatively impact the quality of performance ... and life.  Differing opinions and even constructive conflict are healthy parts of honest and productive relationships. It's only when individual agendas refuse to yield to the collective good that things turn negative and destructive.

Simplicity
Like so many things in life team chemistry is a very simple thing.  When the focus is on WE rather than ME good team chemistry exists.  When ME is the individuals primary motivation conflict exists with WE and team chemistry suffers.  It really is that simple,

In conclusion it seems to me our diversity is not the strength it might be. The commonality we share is soccer in a general sense.  It appears to me we must find a way to share soccer in a deeper way.  I sometimes refer to a difference between playing at soccer and actually playing soccer. That could also describe our current team chemistry situation.  We say a lot of the right things when in the collective but are not completely honest with one another. There is a reluctance to call someone out when they deviate from team standards or expected norms. Consequentially individualism is allowed to flourish over an attitude and atmosphere of the team.

I am not being negative in this assessment.

I am being honest.

In simple terms, we need more people putting WE ahead of ME,

Never say never.

It is no secret that after having coached the Lima Central Catholic girls team I proclaimed I would never coach girls again,  Time passed has allowed me to gain better perspective and realize that one bad experience with a challenging group of players (and parents) should not be an indicator that all experiences coaching girls would be the same  These last two weeks of camp have been extraordinary and both involved coaching girls teams. 

Last week I worked with the Coldwater girls team whom I found to be sincerely polite, eager to learn and hard working. They were attentive and readily tried and bought into the ideas we presented. The improvement they made over 5 days of camp was noticeable to myself, the coaches and players alike. It is a good thing to see confidence blossom and grow throughout camp and manifest itself in their play during the Elida pre-season tournament this past weekend

This week I have been at Liberty Center. This is my third year in a row working with the Lady Tigers and the improvement has been startling over that time frame, but especially so this week.  The improvement is evident in technical and tactical ability, physical fitness and soccer IQ.  The girls have been a delight to work with and the team chemistry is at its best since I have been associated with the team.  I was granted permission to coach this team in camp as if they were my own team I was preparing for the season.  It has been a blast! I have thoroughly enjoyed myself.  Good players and better people. Great experience.

So it is that I have once again learned not to deal in absolutes.  The LCC experience, as I have come to refer to it, was not without its rewards or satisfying moments despite the difficulties and stress.  I found it easy to focus on the negatives of that situation allowing these to overshadow all the good that came from the experience.  These last two weeks have "restored my faith" in those that play women's soccer.  Two young and improving programs whose current teams hold the potential for record breaking seasons ... all due to the incredible young women who comprise their rosters. 

Thank you Lady Cavaliers and Lady Tigers!  You have been a blessing to me.  I sincerely hope you have benefitted from our camps and I wish you the very best in your 2015 seasons! 

Playing Time.

I have met a lot of people through soccer and over the years have become a resource person or sounding board for many of these. There are two main concerns people raise with me;  lack of playing time and the position being played.  In today's writing I will share my philosophy on playing time and how I arrived at it.

I remember being an assistant coach for my eldest son Grant's U10 club team.  The head coach was a local high school coach by the name of Dan.  At 11 years of age, Grant was pudgy and did not look the part of a soccer player. Even back then though Grant had a high soccer IQ.  Dan didn't play Grant much and at one point even suggested Grant should maybe think about playing football. Well, okay then.  To say that Grant did not get a lot of playing time would be an understatement.  I never made a big deal over the lack of playing time. I did observe closely how Grant and others who received a disproportionately low amount of playing time responded. 

One example remains in my mind to this day for two specific reasons.  In a tightly contested match that a lot of importance was placed upon Dan reluctantly sent Grant in to play as the left back.  Grant was admonished to "just stay in position and don't let them score against you."  Conversely, Grant and I had been discussing the importance of making the most out of every opportunity he did receive.  As the attack traveled up the right flank I noticed (and Grant did too) there was a lot of open space on the weak side.  Grant began inching forward and "out of position." It was okay though, because Dan was focused solely on the ball.  As the action played itself out there was Grant running full tilt toward the back post and when the shot / cross came he was there to make a play.  No goal. That would have been too perfect an ending.  But the run itself and the subsequent recovery run were brilliant.

Flash forward a few years and Dan is now coaching a different team.  I received a call literally the night before his team was to play in a tournament. Dan needed players.  He accepted my then U12 son Treg to play for his U14 team.  Treg acquitted himself well on a team that played with 9 men.  How does one enter a tournament and be so undermanned when it comes time to play?  

These two stories are related as we will discover. 

My philosophy on playing time is simple; if you attend and participate in training, I will play you in the match.  No guarantee of how many minutes, but you will have a defined role in terms of expectations for your play while in the game.

I have seen a lot of coaches get caught up in a singular expectation for winning the match.  They will use pursuit of a win as a reason to avoid playing those considered to be weaker players. High school coaches can be especially bad in this regard but so too can club coaches.  With unlimited substitutions allowed in both high school and club soccer I find this approach to be reprehensible.  If a player is good enough to make your roster, he is good enough to play in matches for you.

Dan and I later crossed paths when I was the head coach for a U12 team and he served as my assistant. We each had a son on this club team. If you know anything about prepubescent boys you appreciate how they can run like a deer one day and stumble around like a new born foal the next as their bodies undergo the change.  I was observant of the players and when they looked like deer they got a lot of playing time. When they looked like a new born foal they received less. But everyone played.  I spoke with both players and parents alike about the fluctuations in playing time and counseled patience as these prepubescent growth spurts were temporary and in no way indicative of what type of an athlete the player would be when he emerged on the other end of puberty. Most bought into this reality in the moment. Some it took a couple of years to appreciate and understand. 

I limited the roles of the foals but not the significance of their contributions.  My guiding light is a firm belief that it is the responsibility of the coach to place players in positions and situations from which they enjoy a reasonable expectation for success. If a player was struggling to run due to "growing pains", it simply made no sense to play him on the flank where a lot of running would be necessary, right?  Why frustrate the player by placing him in a position where he was likely to struggle?

These lessons I carried with me when I took on the head coaching job at Lima Central Catholic.  This program was moribund having never had a winning season and really struggling for enough players to field a team.  That first year we had 17 players total. In all honesty, about 6 were of varsity caliber with another handful of junior varsity caliber. It would have been difficult to justify keeping the rest on a high school roster were the numbers in the program better.

I played everyone who was healthy in every game that season.

The next season our numbers in the program jumped to 29 girls and we fielded a junior varsity team for a limited schedule. That set a record for number of players in a season. Playing every girl in every match and placing them in positions / situations from which they had a reasonable expectation to experience success built a chemistry in the program that others wanted to be a part of.  That we had the best season in school history while doing so was even more incentive for others to come out for the team.

The curious case of Adam.

The head coach at our local high school was something of a legend having accumulated 330 wins over the course of his career.  I got my start in high school soccer as a goalkeeper coach under him and am eternally grateful for having had the opportunity.  Dick topped out as a coach the year the team made it to the state semi-finals.  It was viewed as a deep and talented roster with as many as 20 players receiving playing time regularly.  From that point on getting back to state consumed him and players suffered for it.

The season after having gone to state we had 53 athletes come out for soccer.  There were 36 spots available between the varsity and junior varsity teams.  Dick told me he lobbied to some extent for a third team, but was denied. He eventually kept 40 players in the program.  Fast forward a few years and we find his last season saw 32 players in the entire program and many of those would have been cut in previous years.

Why?  What changed?  It's more a matter of who changed; Dick had.

Adam played on an elite club team. He started every game and played dang near every minute as a center back on a team that won nearly 90% of its games. Adam rode the bench and often did not play for Dick as a high school senior that final season.  Why?   Only Dick can answer that but the impact of allowing players to sit the bench with no chance of playing continued to drive numbers down in the program. 

There is a direct correlation between playing time and numbers in the program. It extends to the quality of the program as well.  By the time Dick finally walked away the high school program was in a shambles having been decimated both of talent and of numbers participating.

By the way, Adam went on to play in college.   Yep, he couldn't buy playing time on a mediocre high school team yet found a spot on a college team.  That's just difficult to explain.

Now, I am sure both Dan and Dick in defense of their decision making would suggest players need to earn playing time.  This is likely a ruse to deflect away from an issue of trust, or lack thereof.  Did Dick trust Adam to play for him?  Obviously not.

And I think playing time as well as the path of the various programs mentioned here comes down to that one word, trust as was written about in Truth. Trust. Belief.  A coach can give these things to players and teams or he can deny them to players and teams.

When players or parents come to me with issues about playing time my response is to work on the player / coach relationship. Come early and stay late. Work hard. If a role is not defined for you, attempt to identify what your team needs and strive to provide that. Talk with the coach about what you need to do to improve and earn their trust to gain more playing time.  It's a shame the onus for developing a trusting relationship sometimes falls upon the player, but it is also a reality of sports.  In some instances, nothing can be done to change a coaches perception of a player. That's when it is time to change clubs, refrain from playing high school soccer or transfer to a different school if playing high school soccer means that much to you. 

All great teams play for one another.

Each new season starts anew the process of becoming a team.  A group of individuals gathers, some familiar and others new, to share a path for awhile.  Will they travel that path as individuals, in small groups or cliques, or will they learn to travel the path together as a band of brothers?

Some of my earliest memories of participating in sports revolve around the idea of "team".   In fact my first two experiences in sports were defining moments for me.  One was a basketball team and the other a baseball team. The basketball team was ultra successful.  I suppose we had the best talent, but what I remember most about that group was how we all got along.  It showed in how we played the game.  In contrast, that baseball team was not very good and to be quite truthful although we were in elementary school, we just didn't like one another. Teamwork was always secondary to personal agenda.  In elementary school?

Yes.

Now, the personal agendas on that baseball team were fostered by the coaches who were fathers of players on the team. Their kids played the "key positions" and batted lead off or cleanup whether deserving of doing so or not. And trust me, even at a young age players detect favoritism.

The basketball team was coached by a former major college player who enjoyed working with kids. He did not have a son on the team. Everyone earned their spot and had to work to keep it.  Certainly a pecking order was established in terms of best to worst players, but also a recognition that each player was important to the team in their own right.

I grew to love basketball and became largely disinterested in baseball. 

As a 10 year old I did not appreciate these things even though I did recognize on a certain level what was happening. It really wasn't until my family moved to a new location that some of these lessons began to be driven home to me.  At the new school I had a terrible experience with basketball. Despite being a talented group, wins were few and far between. This became the norm for my experiences with team sports throughout my school years.  Talented individuals, but poor teams.

Two different other teams from my teenage years really standout in my memories.  One was a basketball team that to this day was as talented a group of individuals as I have ever seen at the high school level. They had good skill sets and the physical attributes required for success, yet they struggled to reach a .500 record. Height, size, speed, athleticism... they had it all in abundance. Ball handling, shooting, passing, game intelligence... it was all present.  They could never move past their disdain for and jealousy of one another. Instead of competing against other teams that were constantly in competition with one another. To say they underachieved would be an understatement and I really struggled with this.

The other team was a men's softball team.  Now, softball was huge in the area during those years. I began playing with a church team in an church league. We won and won a lot. We moved on from church competition to playing any and all comers... and still we won, a lot.  We did not even have all the best softball players from the congregation playing on this team. Some played for their work based teams or on teams with friends they socialized with.  What was the key to our success?  We liked playing the game together. 

That is far different from liking one another.

In all honesty, there were some people on that team that forced me to struggle upholding my Christian beliefs at times. I just did not care for them as individuals, but I certainly appreciated their abilities as ball players.  As individual players some of us were quite talented and others not so much, but everyone was valued as equals for what they brought to the team. Appreciation of and for one another was our most valuable trait.

Now some 30+ years later as I coach teams I find myself putting a lot of effort into recreating the team atmosphere of those successful teams from my youth.  There is an understanding of  team building being a process and team bonding a critical part of that process. 

It's been a few years now that I have participated in email groups with other coaches.  A couple of these groups have had profound impact on how I approach team bonding. I found that some coaches have made a science of team bonding. They have studied it, defined it and developed methodology to develop and nurture it.  I have learned from them.

I am not about to tell you that I can take any group and mold them into a successful team. No, that remains largely dependent on the players that comprise the team. What a coach can do is make the individual players and collective group aware of the necessity of sacrificing individual agendas for the common good of the collective team. 

"Buy in" is the term I hear used often these days.  Coaches speak to the importance of players buying into the philosophy or system.  Just another way of stating the need to put personal agendas aside for the good of the team.  I refer to this as the need to play for one another. In soccer, we ask players to make a run for a teammate.  I implore ball carriers to pass the ball to the second runner - the first runner manipulates defenders away from an area allowing a teammate to run into the space just vacated to receive the pass.  That's an example of playing for one another.

It goes beyond simply making runs for one another. Another aspect of becoming a team is the defining and accepting of roles on a team.  Coaches often speak of starting the 11 best instead of the best 11.  This is an acknowledgement that the 11 most talented are not always the 11 who work best together.  Sometimes a more talented player is passed over for a player who recognizes, accepts and fills a role on the team. This might be a player who sacrifices his favored position to play where needed.  Sometimes the motivation to do so may well be selfish in the sense the individual just wants to play, but the sacrifice is still very real and tangible to and appreciated by teammates.

It's the attitude of gratitude.

Whether consciously recognized or not players on great teams consistently ask of themselves "what can I do for my team?" instead of approaching things with an attitude of "what can this team do for me?"

In this sense, the decision to be a great team is a choice made by each of its individual players. Buy in or team chemistry is a product of those choices, those decisions. In you are not for your team, for your teammates, then you are surely against them. Even one dissenter can hold a team back from achieving to its full potential.  So, what is your decision?  Are you for yourself or are you for your team?

For the Good of the TEAM.

Much has been written of TEAM chemistry.  In recent years a cottage industry has arisen to help coaches address team bonding. The market is seemingly flooded with books, videos, webinars and seminars devoted to promoting effective TEAM leadership through education and TEAM bonding exercises. Almost all of this information is directed at players. 

What about coaches?

Coaching is all about REALTIONSHIPS

I recently spoke with a coach who expressed concern that he didn't have the teams undivided attention as it concerned soccer.  Tom related although the boys were attentive while he addressed them a couple seemed to take the first opportunity to consult with their parents about what was just discussed.  Tom went on to tell how he first noticed this during a match when after the half time discussion a player turned to his father in the stands behind the bench and asked for input - both for himself and his team.

This is a tough one.

I'm not sure I have a standard answer ... or remedy... to offer on this subject.  Instinct tells me to return to asking questions. And again, the most important question is probably going to be "why?" 

I have seen this happen before.  Most recently this past fall with my son, Lance.  His high school program had long since lost energy and momentum as a legendary coach hung on far too long. It was with excited anticipation that Lance embraced the new coach.  I watched that excitement lose its luster and fade quickly as Lance realized he knew more about the formation and system of play the new coach was implementing than the new coach himself did.  As the season wore on, Lance began turning to me, in the stands, looking for ... I'm not entirely sure.  Support, I suppose.

I was myself very uncomfortable with Lance, in full view of coaches, parents, teammates turning to me in the stands.  To begin with, I simply gave a thumbs up and clapped my hands in encouragement.  These were delaying tactics on my part. I don't think I fooled anyone, especially Lance.  There came a point in time when Lance did not hide his disdain or frustration any more and simply asked out loud after the coach's half time discussion what he and his team needed to do.

Well, that certainly put me on the spot. 

It also was a clear single that the coach had lost, if not the team, then certainly its best player.

(We later discussed this situation in private as a family and modified behavior accordingly.)

Now, I am unsure of the exact circumstances surrounding Tom's situation, but it sounded to me like certain players, if not the entire team, had lost confidence in his abilities as a coach.  I know Tom to be more knowledgeable than the average high school coach. He's a bit inexperienced but is finding his way. Tom is very open to asking for help in seeking to improve his own abilities and those of his team.  So, where the disconnect with players / his team originated from, I am not sure.

I believe Lance's perspective in his own situation was basically two-fold.  First, he felt his coaches underestimated the team.  At one point early in the season Lance stated he felt they were being coached like a U12 team.  Secondly, Lance believed the coaches lack of experience in coaching the system they were installing hampered the teams ability to an extreme degree.  I would concur on this second concern.  The correct strategies were in evidence but the timing and rhythm in the execution of these were quite off.

Attempting to figure out how to advise Tom while these thoughts are caroming about my mind was difficult enough, but my mind also wandered back to my stint at LCC. That girls team was rolling and, I believe, on its way to playing for a state championship at Crew Stadium in Columbus.  Then the wheels fell off.

There were parents of a couple of players who did not want me coaching.  They did not like the hire. They did not like that I was brought back for a second year despite having guided the team to its first ever winning season and rewriting the school record book in both offensive and defensive categories.  That's ok.  In fact, it's part of coaching. Some like you as a coach. Some don't.

I "lost" two key members of that team who then openly and actively sabotaged the teams efforts.  Why did it come to this?  I put the programs interests first, the teams interests second and the interests of individual players third. The players in question were third and that resulted in bruised egos and hurt feelings. They, and one specific parent, made it a priority to win a battle not caring about losing the war.

I felt I could not allow this to become the situation with Lance and his team.  It was not an easy thing to do.  I could not simply support the coaching staff because Lance would know I was being disingenuous - after all, over the past three club seasons I had taught Lance (and several of his high school teammates) the formation and system his high school team were attempting to play.  My strategy as a parent was to cheer what was being done correctly - positive reinforcement.  Of course, this was avoidance of the issue - those simple things that needed to be corrected to achieve success on the field.  It's a helpless feeling.

Lance's coach lost the team. The team lost the season.  The coach took it out on Lance.  It was a disaster.  Somewhere between Lance's situation and the LCC situation lay the answer, imo.  In fact, I knew what the answer was - cut the players who did not buy-in to the coaches vision. 

After an in-season drinking party on the LCC practice field, several inappropriate pictures posted on social media and one player telling me to "go fuck yourself" I went to the athletic director to have the trouble makers removed.  This was a private Catholic school dependent on tuition and donations to survive.  I lost that battle due to fear the school would lose the student / athletes in question and the associated revenue.  The team lost an opportunity to play for a state championship.  Individual awards were lost or diminished.

Lance's approach was to stick it out and be the best captain on and off the field he could be.  Lance was moved from position to position as the coach attempted to "stick a finger in each new leak" that sprung open.  Lance went willingly along with this even while he knew this was not the proper way to address the teams issues. Unlike with the girls at LCC, there were no grounds for the coach to dismiss Lance other than possibly for seeking in-game advice from his father.  The season was lost.  The boys had a chance to win a league title, but ended with the worst season in decades at the school.  Lance was passed over for awards. It was a disaster.

That old coach who over stayed his welcome and usefulness?  He used to cut talented players in the preseason. I never understood why... until recently.  This is my advice Tom - if he knows a player / parent will be trouble, cut the player and move on.   This would have even worked in Lance's predicament. Lance would have moved and transferred schools. He might have had to sit out a few games but the happiness factor would have more than made up for that.  Instead, the rookie coach could not let go of his most talented player, but also could not fully embrace him. 

I believe coaching is ALL about building relationships.  That is what we are discussing in this article. Failed relationships to be exact.  Here's a secret, no coach has a perfect record in the area of coach / player or coach / parent relationships.  Coach / assistant coach relationships also fail. This is why it is necessary at times for coaches to cut talented players or fire competent assistants.  It can be a simple matter of addition by subtraction.  And this is not necessarily an indictment of player, parents, assistant coach or coach - it just means the fit was not right.  We have all seen the coach who moves on from one failure (Bill Belichick with the Browns moving to the Patriots) to success somewhere else or the underachieving player who changes teams and suddenly begins realizing his potential (David Oritz moving from Minnesota to the Boston).  Or in life, a first marriage ends in divorce, but a second marriage celebrates a 30 year anniversary. Not every relationship can be saved, nor should every relationship be saved. Sometimes the parties just need to go their own ways for the benefit of all.

Everyone Loves an Underdog

I have debated over titling this article with an "underdog" theme or with a "Cinderella team" theme.

A Cinderella team is one that surprises competition and fans alike by advancing further in a tournament than anyone anticipated they would or even could.  The classic example of over achieving.

Underdog teams are thought of as being inferior to its opposition usually in both God-given ability and technical excellence. Perhaps the very definition of underachieving.

I suppose it is possible a team can fit in both categories, but then again, maybe not. 

My son's team plays their first, and quite possibly only, tournament game tomorrow on the home pitch of a team that thumped them 1 - 4 just 16 days ago.  They will enter this match as underdogs hoping to exit it as a Cinderella team.

As I searched the recesses of my mind for examples of teams who had found themselves in similar situations for my son and his teammates to draw inspiration from I kept running into coaching as being a constant in such stories.  Cinderella teams tend to have great coaching that helps to propel them beyond expectations.  Underdog teams often rise above inferior coaching when a perfect storm of circumstances conspire to allow them to overachieve beyond wildest expectations.

Therefore I am pretty sure my sons team should be depicted as an underdog team going into tomorrow nights match against Celina.  Their rookie head coach and his rookie assistants have experienced a very steep learning curve this season. The team is lacking in basic fundamentals, especially from a tactical standpoint. Celina is a well coached technical team with a sound understanding of who they want to be tactically. Yeah, Shawnee is an underdog going into the match tomorrow night. 

The question is, can they become a Cinderella team by the time the match is over?

That is going to depend on the players psychological approach to the match.  If they step onto the pitch truly believing they can win, Shawnee will have a chance to do just that. 

I am reminded of the 1989 NCAA basketball champion University of Michigan Wolverines. By all accounts they were underachievers throughout the season.  When their coach decided to leave for Arizona at the conclusion of the season the legendary Bo Schembechler, then the schools athletic director, stepped in and famously said "A Michigan Man will coach this Michigan TEAM."  He fired Bill Frieder on the spot and named assistant Steve Fisher the coach of the Wolverines for the NCAA tournament.

That Michigan team went on to win 6 straight games and the 1989 NCAA National Championship.  In a sense they made the transition from Underdog to Cinderella. 

Now, that 1989 Michigan team was loaded with future NBA talent. Why they underachieved throughout the regular season is open to debate. What is not open to debate is the stunning turnaround they made in the week leading up to their first game in the tournament.

Part of the answer can be found in quotes from the various players on that Michigan team. To paraphrase the collective, "We just went out and balled. No sets. No plays. It was just us playing ball."

If Shawnee is to be successful in transitioning from Underdog to Cinderella tomorrow night I think this is the attitude they must take - they just need to go out and play soccer.  Will they find the type of bond the coaching change at Michigan forged for the Wolverines in 1989?   I don't know if such a catalyst exists for the Indians.  That's going to be their challenge.  Can they unite and find the elusive team chemistry that can carry the day tomorrow?

They have nothing to lose and so nothing to fear.

My encouragement to these young men is to step onto the pitch and stand shoulder to shoulder in battling Celina tomorrow night. Have one anothers backs as players.  Block all else out.  When you walk off the field at the end of the match, do so with heads held high with the knowledge you gave the best performance possible under the circumstances. 

Good Luck Indians!


Update:  The slipper did not fit. 

Ask for help.

One thing I have learned from coaching is the necessity and benefit of asking for help. The more perspectives on a matter, the better in many cases.  I value assistants who will speak up and offer input even when... perhaps especially when... their opinion differs from my own. That has never been more true than this spring.

In coaching two teams I am sometimes spread pretty thin. Admittedly this accentuates the tunnel vision I am prone to during a season anyway.  In recent matches I asked assistants to manage the game for me, give the half time talk and generally assume the responsibilities of a head coach in the game.  I learned a lot through how they interpreted the games they managed.  Their substitution rotations and patterns differed from my own.  The positions they played some in differed as well. Not only did I take notice of all this, but I embraced some of the things the assistants did and incorporated them into my own management of games.

Another thing I do is to seek input from players on a wide range of matters. I will ask players to suggest starting line ups.  I seek their input on positions.  I encourage their input during matches, at half time and in post game evaluations. I have found a players perspective can be among the most enlightening.

I will also ask coaching peers for their input. Sometimes I ask someone to come observe a match. Other times I will send video of a game to colleagues and ask for their impressions.  I did this very thing recently as I struggled to find the 11 best to start games and the substitution rotations that would keep us well balanced throughout the game. I went so far to seek input on who the 10 best field players were on the team and how they might fit into a lineup.

One observation from a group of colleagues was that opponents seemed to pick on our left back position.  I knew this was happening, but assumed it was because most teams are right foot dominant.  My peers thought that was not necessarily the case and suggested I move the left back(s) to the right back spot to see what happened. It did not take long to discover teams were "picking on" players more so than the left back position.  One player really struggles with first touch and opponents seem to sense they can pressure him into mistakes.  The other was very offensive minded and slight of build. Opponents seem to think they can out-muscle him and take advantage of his aggressiveness in attack.

An associated observation was that we were wasting the talent of the player manning the right back position. It was suggested he needs to get a lot more touches on the ball.  That was one I had wrestled with quite a bit as it was my son manning the right back position.  We were told he is the best right back in the state by ODP coaches. So, right back seemed to make sense, but it appears it really doesn't in this case.  We were probably wasting his talent at right back when he could use it as a center mid.

Fitting a formation to the talent on hand can also be a difficult.  In terms of center midfielders the talent we have suggests playing 3 of them.  We tried this early in the season and it was a disaster. I perhaps abandoned the 4-5-1 formation to quickly, but the team settled in pretty well in a 4-4-2 before opponents began exploiting our aggressive attacking mentalities at the position by counter attacking directly down the middle of the pitch.

To say the team was underachieving and that my inability to uncover the 11 who would play best together was a root cause would be a significant understatement.  So, as I have already stated, I asked for help.  I spoke with coaching colleagues and peers. I shared match video with them. I spoke with players. I asked referees I know and who had officiated our matches for their input.

Position and personnel changes have followed.  We now play a 4-1-4-1 having inserted my son in as the one holding midfielder. We had one very accomplished forward and playing him as a lone forwarded opened space for him to play in.  We have strengthened the back line and improved the defensive presence in the midfield. And tonight the final piece may have fallen in place for us - thanks to input from an assistant coach we found a second player more than capable of playing the target forward position.  The team is beginning to play closer to their potential. Possession and ball movement has improved. Varied attacks and multiple goal scorers are becoming the norm.

Some feathers have been ruffled. With every decision there are consequences and as I alluded to earlier some players have lost starting positions leading to dissatisfaction with my decision-making. I have had to speak with some individuals about accepting new roles for the good of the team. Some embrace this idea while others are more selfish in pouting about the change in their role perceiving it as a demotion or a reduction of their importance to the team which isn't the case at all. It's nothing other than a change - no more and no less.

However, there have been rewards as well.  The former left back who struggled with first touch has had much better touch as a midfielder and forward.  I am not yet quite sure how to interpret this.  He had several "whiffs' in the games before the position switch and not a one since?  He has played as defender for a couple of seasons and I wonder if he became bored with the position or perhaps merely wanted to play a different position? It might be that I rarely substitute backs and he has been fresher physically and mentally in playing fewer minutes thereby reducing mistakes caused by fatigue.  He is now playing in 12-15 min shifts with short breaks between them and making far fewer mistakes. 

The new right back has a tremendous leg he is using to switch fields and explosive speed he is using in combination play with midfielders to get himself into the attack.  The new left back has given us a physical presence, improved and increased distributions in starting the attack.  Our new holding mid is protecting the center backs, providing the pivot in transition, switching play and distributing the ball extremely well. A former forward is being allowed to play to his strengths as a midfield wing.

Overall the team is beginning to click. I take the blame for it taking this long, but also accept the credit in the sense that I am the one who ultimately makes the decision. However the real credit goes to Steve, Marc, Phil, Bruce, Randy, Keith, Mac, Billy, Kyle, Dave, Greg, et al. and our players who have provided input and insight. Without contributions from our coaches, colleagues, peers, players and officials I fear my tunnel vision would still be inhibiting the teams ability to play closer to their potential.  So it is, that on behalf of our team, I thank each and every one of you who have shared thoughts and suggestions with me to date. Please, please, please keep up the good work!

Extraneous Intrusions

Extraneous:  introduced or coming from without; not belonging or proper to a thing; external; foreign.

As a coach of soccer teams I cherish and treasure those seasons when extraneous intrusions are limited or even absent, rare though those might be.  This season, dealing with two U19 Men's teams I anticipated and expected there would be some extraneous intrusions to deal with.  In truth, we have had few distractions but of those we have had a couple were far more serious than I imagined.

What I expected was some who would be dissatisfied being placed on what they perceived to be the "B" team. That has happened in a three instances.  In one case, I discussed the situation with player and parent before a final determination was made. Everyone was in agreement, the fees were paid, uniforms ordered and then the player never showed to a single practice or game. In another instance a player was coming off injury and unsure if he would be able to play. Deadlines for registration forced our hand. In a third case the player and his parent greatly overestimated his talent relative to others trying out for the team.  These last two instances are typical in the sense we as coaches deal with them on a routine basis.

We have had two players run foul of their parents resulting in their being pulled from the team. I am not a big proponent of this type of punishment for a player in a team sport. Yes, taking away something the individual loves to do is an attention getter, but in a team setting it impacts the entire team and that is not fair to those left to carry on.

Then we had an issue of racism rearing its ugly head.  I was not a first hand witness to what was said and allowed our teams leadership committee to deal with in under my guidance and watchful eye.  I had no illusion of a miraculous transformation in attitude taking place, but had believed such behavior could be curtailed for the course of the season.  Today, the question was raised of a recurrence.  So, I am again investigating what might have occurred as once again I am not a direct witness to what has been alleged.

There is also the curious circumstance of a clique of players who believe themselves to be something they are not and who want to all be on the field together.  Last fall, this was an underachieving group on their high school field of play, imo.  They didn't win games they should have and even when they did win it was sometimes a struggle.  Team chemistry can sometimes be an issue.  Coaching can sometimes be an issue. I thought spring would be different for them.  Interestingly enough the second chance provided to them has largely been ignored. They are a separate entity within the team who seem to believe the team is subservient to them.

All of the instances described above concern outside influences impacting the quality of the soccer performance. These are things that have direct impact on the ever elusive team chemistry that is prized and the great teams are recognized for having.  With as much lip service that is given to the subject one would think its importance would be understood by all players.  Still, we find some who see the team revolving around themselves as opposed to being an entity that they are privileged to be a small yet significant part of.

I am reminded of Coach Boone from Remember the Titans walking out onto the lighted stadium field and proclaiming; "Hmm... This is my sanctuary right here.  All this hatred and turmoil swirling around us, but this... this is always right."   And this is what sport always was for me.  It's what I think it should be for players and coaches alike.  Not an escape from the world, but a sanctuary from the extraneous intrusions that mar the world.  At it's best, sport provides a glimpse of a better world... at least when done right.

Coaching is one of the most difficult things I do.

Aside from the effort I put into my relationship with my wife and parenting our children, coaching is probably the most difficult thing I do.  Coaching involves the teaching of fundamentals and tactics, sportsmanship, life lessons, and so much more. The bottom line with coaching is relationships though.

This spring my challenge has doubled as I have 36 players on two different teams. I was speaking with a coaching colleague recently who also is coaching two teams and about the same number of players.  His philosophy seemed to be "focus on winning games" because with that many players it is too difficult to spend enough quality time with them all.  I disagree, at least in part.

It is true, that 36 players is a lot to work with during a soccer season.  It is also true that it is important to build a relationship with each one of them.  It takes a lot of work so the key is to work smarter rather than harder for there is indeed limited time.  Working smarter is also necessary in maintaining relationships that have been established. 

I am not sure why, but I continue to be amazed when God stands my well laid plans on their ear.  That God's will prevails is a lesson I have learned repeatedly.  Even so, I do plan meticulously for each season, each team and each player. There is a certain amount of anticipation involved in the planning for both season and individual players.  Just as I implore players to expand their play from "one-decision" soccer to "multi-decision" soccer I must do this in my coaching.  In the context of coach / player relationships this involves putting the TEAM first while also being ever mindful of the individual players that comprise a team.

In spring club soccer there are usually limited disciplinary actions required. I am very flexible about players who must miss for a school sport or school activity. The same holds true for players who miss due to work.  Church and family always come before soccer. The point being absence is not usually an issue. It was in one instance this spring when a player elected to referee a match a couple of fields over while his teammates played a match at the same time.  In this instance I turned to the team leadership to resolve the issue and they did so in an amazingly mature and fair fashion.

Rather, in spring club soccer the bigger issues can be of players buying into a teams philosophy and system of play.  Sometimes a lack of time to devote to the team can be an issue in this area. Other times it can be a lack of humbleness in a player that detracts from team play.  Being humble does not entail thinking less of yourself so much as it entails thinking less about yourself and more about your team. I suppose President Kennedy would have put it, "Ask not what your team can do for you, but what you can do for your team".

At a recent match involving our "A" team I made both a formational change and personnel changes to address on-going concerns in our play.  In short, we were lacking consistent back to goal target play, were clogging the face of the goal in out attacking third and were poor in our transition from attacking to defending especially in the center midfield.  So, we switched from a 4-4-2 to a 4-1-4-1.  The initial results were mixed. The general comments were largely supportive of the formational change.  As might be expected, other areas of concern arose. Somewhat unexpectedly was the fact some of the areas of concern were still personnel based as could be witnessed on the first goal we allowed.  In general, the first half of play was different than what we had been experiencing although I would not say it was fundamentally better overall.

I pondered what to address as half time approached.  There was just so many things to select from I was feeling overwhelmed in identifying 2 or 3 to really bring focus on.  We were down 0 - 1 to a weaker team.  The mistakes made on the goal the opponents scored encapsulated the way the entire half had been played by our team.  I preach "attention to the details of the process" as a king consideration to success in sports and in life. This was severely lacking in our play on the field by a majority of the team.  Missed assignments. Mental errors. Selfish play.  One-decision soccer.  Multiple touches on the ball when 1 or 2 would have sufficed. Self-inflicted pressure. Basically we were still underachieving and this was largely due to individuals self-inflicting pressure on themselves and by extension the team at large.

To be honest, what I witnessed was an accumulation of factors that had been building over the course of the season. This team has 16 players capable of starting. It is an area all-star team. There are many players who were captains of their high school team, the go-to guy on their high school team, all-league, all-district and all-state players.  The key to the season would hinge on their willingness to sacrifice for each other.  From a team perspective we had been failing miserably in this regard.

Too many individuals playing for themselves is a recipe for disaster on any team. The truth of the matter is, one player playing for himself on a team is too many.  We have had several this spring.  So while we have won some games we have also lost some that we should not have.  In those tight games when we needed to rely on one another, we had individuals playing outside their roles and generally trying to do too much on their own.  We were unable to trust one another because we had yet to sacrifice and embrace one another.

As a coach there is an acknowledgement that sometimes team chemistry just isn't what it should be and however unfortunate this might be there is precious little a coach can do about it.  Team chemistry is largely outside the realm of control of the coach.  Yes, team bonding can be worked on and enhanced, but the responsibility rests largely with the individual players buying into the teams philosophy and system of play.  There are seasons when team chemistry never establishes itself to a satisfactory level. Those seasons tend to long, very long, for everyone involved and are blemished with underachieving play and results. As half time approached during this recent game I felt we were on the precipice of that type of season.

The challenge then was to uncover enough players willing to play for one another.  A couple of weeks ago there was a parent who complained I didn't have the best 11 players on the pitch.  I would largely agree with that statement.  Reality tells us it is not about having the best 11 players on the pitch at the same time but having the 11 who play best together on the pitch at the same time.  This is the approach I took for the second half of this recent match.

I selected a starting 11 whom I believed would play for one another.  Even more than that, I felt the starting unit I put on the pitch would not want to let one another down. I attempted to select 11 who would raise each others level of play and by doing so would raise the teams level of play. 

We went "ironman" which is tantamount to the U.S. military's "broken arrow" call sign in terms of my coaching philosophy.  I would not specifically call for substitutions. That responsibility would remain in the provenance of the individuals who started the second half. If they wished a break, they would ask out. I would name a substitute to replace them. When rested and ready to return to action the starter would sub himself back into the game for the player who had replaced him.  In the world of free / unlimited substitution soccer this is a drastic, even extreme measure.

I struggled with which eleven to name. Two players in particular were worthy of consideration for the 11 who would start the second half, but were ultimately left off that unit primarily as a function of positions played. The risk involved in this strategy was immense and dependent almost entirely on those 11 who would be taking the field. In them, I put my trust as a coach.

Would these 11 individuals come together to play as a team? 

Just as importantly, would be how these 11 individuals would respond to the responsibility of calling for their own substitutions. That is, which of the 11 would trust a teammate to play in their stead.

The results were a bit mixed. We scored in the first few minutes of the second half to even the score at 1- 1 only to allow a second goal against due to poor decision making. Down 1-2 the next few minutes were dicey until we evened the score on a PK. From that point forward we began playing as I had envisioned we would when this team was assembled. On the other hand, to say there had been limited substitutions would be an understatement. This is something that will bear very close scrutiny going forward.

There was one bench player in particular who I felt was slighted in the amount of playing time he received in the second half.  The question I have been pondering is why of the five players he could have subbed for positionally only one elected to take a break and that for 5 minutes.  Is there a trust issue with his teammates in regards to his play?  Is he not viewed as a team player?

None of the bench players played extensively in the second half. Two did come off the bench to score goals for us in limited action which is good. To illustrate where we are I will share a comment made about the proper perspective of scoring goals;  "Scoring goals will be used to justify why they should be on the field while the reasons they aren't in the game are completely ignored."  An extremely interesting observation and telling commentary from a teammate.  It tells me we have a ways to go yet in this process of buying in.

So, a formational change and personnel change failed to initially stimulate play to the degree hoped for. It took an extreme change in game management to generate positive on-field results.  Now the question becomes the response of those players who were left on the bench for the majority of the second half. Will they began to take ownership of why they sat or will they blame the coach or their teammates? 

For me to think we have everything solved or worked out would be foolish. This team and this season could still go down the tubes in a hurry.  Just under four weeks to go in the season and I am left to wonder if they will go painfully slow or exquisitely fast?

As the season hangs in the balance it is ultimately the relationships that will determine which way it falls.  Discovering who is willing to put forth the effort to build relationships between players and between coaches and players will be key.  It is sometimes said a team is only as strong as its weakest player. In this case, the teams strength will be measured by the quality of relationships. Are we willing to work, to put intelligent effort into establishing better relations?  Are we willing to sacrifice the Me for the We?