Great Coaches and Doubters

January 26th, 2010

In First Break All the Rules, What The World’s Greatest Managers Do Differently, Marcus Buckingham writes:

It turns out that great teachers say they love being doubted. They cherish those moments. Great teachers instinctively interpret the “doubters” as students, and they see doubting as a sign of an active, inquisitive mind. For great teachers, then, doubting means learning. Conversely, the average teachers say they don’t like to be doubted. Their first point of reference is their own competence, not the students’ learning. Being doubted means having their own competence challenged, and for them, there is nothing worse.

Since coaches are teachers, the same should be true for great coaches. If true, it’s impossible to find a great coach. Coaches tend to be absolutists, interested in doing things their own way, and they do not react positively to questioning. In fact, I met a coach who will not allow a question during practice; players write their questions on a piece of paper during a water break, and the assistants evaluate whether or not it deserves the head coach’s attention.

When I questioned a college coach on a message board over her unwillingness to answer a question during a game because she is “too busy,” many coaches rushed to her defense and agreed. These “coaches” expect college players to ask stupid questions, so they justify a no-question policy, a practice I find unacceptable in an educational capacity.

If coaches are teachers on the hardwood, their acceptance of questions and doubts by their players is a first step toward inspiring learning and thinking on the court, not just rote memorization of the coach’s demands.

By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League

Key Coaching Concepts with Mike Woodson

January 17th, 2010

Earlier this week, Henry Abbott linked to an article by Lang Whitaker about Atlanta’s Head Coach Mike Woodson. The article describes a scene that we rarely see (team meeting at the hotel on the morning of a game), but is an essential aspect of coaching, especially at higher levels.

This team has a chance to do something special if you believe in each other. If you feel like what we’re trying to do on the court isn’t going to work, speak up! I have zero ego as a coach, none. If you think you see something that’s going to work better than what we’re trying to do, speak up! Say something to me!

I take this approach though many coaches will not. I want my players to feel comfortable making decisions and making the play that they think is best. I want to run things that are comfortable for them. I have no problem discussing (arguing) with a player about something and I don’t hold a grudge. That would be silly. Coaching is not about job preservation: it’s about getting the most out of a group of players. Too many coaches seem to make adversaries of their own players.

But what I’m telling you guys is that if you guys will just consistently do what we’re asking you to do on defense, we’ll win games. I don’t give a s— about the offense; you guys can score more than enough points to win games. The offense isn’t the problem. But you have to get stops on defense, and if you’ll listen to what we’re telling you, I promise you’ll get stops. The s— works, okay? The s— works, but you guys just have to have the pride and the heart to buy into it and do what we’re asking you to do every time down the court. …

It’s not the X’s and the O’s, but the Jimmy’s and the Joe’s. I forgot who said that. However, in my league, coaches yell out play after play, but their players cannot shoot, dribble or pass. They play multiple defenses and none works. We run the same offense against man and zone, and it works becuse the players believe that it will work. I hear other teams telling their coach that “this play isn’t working” and they are right; however, it’s generally not the scheme, but the way they run the play. If they bought into the scheme, they would be fine. Seriously, we run a middle pick-and-roll against 2-3-zones and it works. Almost anything works if you have players who believe and players who can pass, shoot and dribble.

After a win against the Mavericks, the following transpires in the locker room:

“Guys, great win,” Woodson rasped. “Remember what I said? You can win playing defense! We struggled with the offense but your defense was terrific.”

“The s— works!” blurted out [rookie Jeff] Teague, cracking up the entire room.

“That’s right, it does, it works,” Woodson said, smiling. “Alright guys, let’s get home. You’ve got tomorrow off, and then we’ll come back in on Monday and get back to work. No more let ups, guys!”

“No excuses!” yelled [Al] Horford.

“No sir, no excuses, guys,” Woodson said. “Oh, and guys, today is Josh Smith’s birthday. Jeff Teague, get up here and sing Happy Birthday, rook.”

For some reasons, coaches often seem to think that humor is bad and that basketball should be a solemn experience. Why? A coach showing a sense of humor is humanizing and players develop a better relationship with the coach than one who stands aloof. It’s basketball. It’s a game. Players and coaches should have fun.

In this excerpt, Woodson shows a willingness to communicate openly with his team without ego, empowers his team to come to him with ideas, creates a sense of belief in their system and uses humor to relate to the players and develop a better bond.

By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League

Simplicity of Coaching

January 14th, 2010

In Wednesday’s Los Angeles Times, I read an obituary for legendary El Segundo High School baseball coach John Stevenson, who won over 1,000 games and coached George Brett, among others.

His long-time assistant coach, Craig Cousins, said:

“He felt if you could prepare your players to the best of your ability and they went about their actions thinking they knew exactly what to do, they would do exactly that.”

Basketball Coaches Learning from Artists

December 9th, 2009

What ultimately is the role of the coach? Is it to teach plays? Is it to win games? Is it to teach children to follow directions to pay attention to an authority figure? Is it to keep children in shape?

When we imagine an athlete, what do we imagine? What do we want young athletes to be?

In an article titled “Why Business Leaders Should Act More like Artists,” John Maeda argues that artists have three key attributes which business leaders should follow:

  1. Artists constantly collaborate.
  2. Artists are talented communicators.
  3. Artists learn how to learn together.

Athletes and coaches can learn from artists in these respects as well, as collaboration, communication and learning are important to the team environment and individual improvement.

Maeda writes:

When interviewed recently about the differences in her education at Brown and at RISD [Rhode Island School of Design], one student who is getting a dual degree from both institutions said, “At RISD there’s a lot of learning from your peers. Brown (in the classes I’ve taken so far anyway) is about listening and note-taking in class.”

A typical team is more like Brown with the coach talking and players listening. Great coaches, however, create environments that are more like RISD. Rather than talking, they listen to their players. They engage players in a conversation. They empower players to make decisions and take some control over their environment. They learn from their players.

Through this empowerment approach, they increase the collaboration between players and between the coach and players, improve the communication between coach and player and create more varied learning experiences.

To use this approach, one tool is to ask players for their thoughts before you offer your insight, especially in a post-practice or post-game situation. Also, a coach may ask the players what play they want to run or what defense they feel most comfortable playing rather than always making the decisions for the players.

By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching,
Playmakers Basketball Development League

The Teacher-Coach

November 8th, 2009

Motivating Players through Empowerment

October 28th, 2009

Chris Ballard penned an article titled “The Hoops Whisperer” in the October 26, 2009 Sports Illustrated about basketball trainer Idan Ravin. In it, Ballard writes:

“Failure to understand a player’s psyche is a flaw Ravin sees in the disciplinarian style of some coaches. Rather than empowering a player, they strip him of his authority. ‘At the end of the workout, I’ll give players the option to run,’ explains Ravin. ‘I’ll say, I think you’ve got more in you, but it’s your choice.’ They’ll always run if you present the option in a fair way. And then when they’re done, I’ll say, I’m impressed with you. I think you have half a tank of gas left. I think it’d be great if you did another one. And they’ll say, ‘Really?’ And they’ll do it. Players want to be part of the process.”

Now, Ravin works with NBA players, and coaching children differs. However, young players will often surprise you. Last week, with 15 minutes left in practice, I asked the team what they thought they needed to practice. Two girls said, “Running. We get too tired in the drills.”

Players run much harder when they choose the extra conditioning than if they view it as punishment.

The best coaches really understand their players and their psyches. Ballard’s article portrays Ravin’s ability to read and understand his players even though he has no significant playing experience. The ability to read and understand players is often more important than one’s knowledge or experience.

The old axiom is true: “They don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” Empowering players and showing concern for players beyond their ability to help the coach win games shows the players that you care.

By Brian McCormick
Founder, 180 Shooter

Great Coaching: A Classroom Lesson

October 16th, 2009

Last December, Malcolm Gladwell wrote an article in the New Yorker titled “Most Likely to Succeed” which compared teacher performance to NFL quarterbacks, because both are nearly impossible to predict in advance.

The article describes several commonalities used to identify great teachers.

“Among them is ‘regard for student perspective’; that is, a teacher’s knack for allowing students some flexibility in how they become engaged in the classroom. ..’These are three and four-year-olds. At this age, when kids show their engagement, it’s not like the way we show our engagement, where we look alert. They’re leaning forward and wriggling. That’s their way of doing it. And a good teacher doesn’t interpret it as bad behavior.”

The first lesson is to allow the freedom to engage with the learning without automatically dismissing the players’ behavior as “goofing off.” Kinesthetic learners, for instance, tend to stand in the back and mimic the action of the coach.

Many see this as disruptive or even disrespectful. However, a good coach understands his players’ learning styles and knows who needs to feel their way through the learning, rather than just hearing instructions or seeing a demonstration.

“Of all the teacher elements analyzed by the Virginia group, feedback – a direct, personal response by a teacher to a specific statement by a student – seems to be most closely linked to academic success.”

The second lesson is that making a specific, individual response to a player’s action enhances the player’s learning.

Finally, anchoring the instruction around the children enhances their learning. Rather than randomly instructing a skill, anchor the skill in terms of their performance. If you want to practice help defense, show a small bit of film covering help defense in a previous game to illustrate the need for the instruction and personalize it.

A coach’s ability to instruct and meet the players’ learning needs has a great impact on a coach’s success, and these three ideas should enhance a coach’s effectiveness.

By Brian McCormick
Director of Coaching, Playmakers Basketball Development League

UCLA’s Norm Chow Illustrates Great Coaching

October 8th, 2009

norm chowUCLA Offensive Coordinator Norm Chow is known as an offensive guru, the coach who has tutored multiple Heisman Trophy winners and directed many high-powered offenses.

According to UCLA fullback Tobi Umodu’s article “What Makes Norm Chow Norm Chow” in the New York Times, Chow’s greatness goes beyond pure knowledge of offensive sets and throwing technique:

  • The main thing Coach Chow tries to teach us is attention to detail. He knows that if we do all the little things right everything else will take care of itself.
  • Another aspect of him he tries to pass on to us is his genuine passion for the game…He is always the most animated person out there during practice. It could be him trying to get us hyped up for practice, wanting us to put more effort into a play, or just being excited about how a play worked out. Whatever it is, his main goal is to try to get us to love the game as much as he does and to try and have fun while we are out there…he always says that we don’t work football, we play football.
  • What I admire the most about Coach Chow is how much he cares about the players he coaches. He is one of the coaches that you know has your back even if the problem you are having doesn’t have anything to do with football. Coaching is more than a 9-to-5 job to him. He loves being around us, joking with us, or just talking to us about being more than just a good football player, but also being a good man.

Three important things that any coach, regardless of knowledge, level of play or experience, can do:

  1. Attention to detail (process goals)
  2. Passion
  3. Caring about players as people, not just players.

Basketball Coach Development: The Stages of a Coach’s Career

September 18th, 2009

Patrick Hunt is the Head Coach of the National Intensive Training Center Program at the Australian Institute of Sport. In Developing Sport Expertise by Damian Farrow, Joe Baker and Clare McMahon, Hunt describes the stages of a coach’s career:

Beginning Coach

  • Looking for textbook drills
  • Looks for textbook plays

Intermediate Coach

  • Developing acceptable standards of skill execution at practice
  • When to call a time out, player match-ups, strategic changes: game-coaching techniques
  • Using succinct coaching terms
  • Using different coaching methods as required
  • Using anecdotes as another means of getting a message across

Advanced Coach

  • Imparting necessary but large amounts of information pitched to an individual’s skill level
  • Does practice transfer to the game?
  • Knowing how to change behavior at an individual and group level
  • Recognition of “teachable moments”
  • Use personal coaching and playing experience

Defining and Explaining Great Coaching

September 12th, 2009

We typically base our perceptions of great coaching on the images that we see on television. The media tends to emphasize game-coaching skills like calling timeouts or switching defenses at the appropriate times.

However, another way to measure great coaching is through the eyes of the athletes. Andrea Becker, a professor at Cal State Fullerton, published a paper titled, “It’s Not What They Do, It’s How They Do It: Athlete Experiences of Great Coaching,” in the International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching Vol. 4, No. 1 (2009) that used athlete questionnaires to explain great coaching.

Becker’s paper broke down over 60 different characteristics of great coaching into six general themes: Coach Attributes, The Environment, The System, Relationships, Coaching Actions, and Influences. In most cases, the great coaches were college or professional coaches, so not everything is applicable to youth coaches, but the following characteristics offer many examples of great coaching at any level.

Coach Attributes

  • Coaches were more than just a coach: athletes viewed coaches as teachers, mentors, friends and parental figures.
  • Coaches were described as experts – knowledgeable about up-to-date techniques, strategies and tactics. Coaches were “always learning and bringing information back to the team.”
  • Coaches described as human - unafraid to make mistakes, show faults or admit that they did not know all the answers.
  • Coaches demonstrated passion for the game and the people.
  • Coaches were viewed as inspirational and enthusiastic.
  • Coaches were viewed as emotionally stable.
  • Coaches were genuine, honest and loyal.
  • Coaches were patient and non-judgmental.
  • Coaches were committed and disciplined. “The coach was always the first to arrive and the last to leave.”
  • Coaches described as driven by their competitive attitude.
  • Coaches described as perfectionists and very organized.
  • Coaches were professional - they acted with character, class and respect for others.
  • Coaches were consistent.
  • Coaches had the ability to evaluate player potential.
  • Coaches had the ability to read and analyze – “exceptionally good at evaluating performance techniques, processing tactical strategies and scouting opponents.”
  • Coaches possessed the ability to overcome short-comings.
  • Coaches integrated their staff.
  • Athletes “granted an automatic level of credibility to coaches who were well known or had positive reputations.

Environment

  • Coaches created an athlete-centered environment.”Every single day you could tell that they were putting their best out for you.”
  • The general environment was team-centered: always did what’s best for the team.
  • Coaches had a structured environment – no room for breaking the rules.
  • Coaches created a family-like team environment.
  • Coaches made themselves accessible and approachable and were good listeners.
  • Coaches created an atmosphere that was comfortable for the athletes.
  • Practice environment was well-planned, highly structured and game-like: everything has a purpose.
  • Practices were intense and competitive; however, “athletes experienced a sense of security and were unafraid of losing their spot due to a mistake.”

The System

  • Coaches used great systems and believed in the systems.

Relationships

  • Coaches developed professional and personal relationships with players.
  • Players developed strong and lasting relationships with the coach.
  • Coaches managed boundaries by being objective.
  • Personal relationships predicated on trust, confidence and respect.
  • Coaches were honest, loyal and treated the athletes with kindness.
  • Coaches showed an interest in the athletes as people not just players.
  • Athletes viewed coaches as people they could relate to.
  • Coaches provided care and support.
  • Coaches took responsibility for team’s performance when things went bad.
  • Coaches also encouraged players to take responsibility and hold themselves accountable.
  • Coaches built on players’ strengths.
  • Athletes felt that coaches believed in them.
  • Coaches involved players in the decision-making process – empowered players.

Coaching Actions

  • Great coaches teach the details.
  • Great coaches communicate honestly.
  • Great coaches prepare meticulously.
  • Great coaches develop high expectations and help players reach them.
  • Coaches taught cognitive, physical, mental and life skills.
  • Coaches used a combination of instructional methods: verbal, visual and physical methods.
  • Coaches exhibited a high quality of coaching and focused on details.
  • Coaches simplified the process.
  • Coaches pace their instruction according to each athlete’s learning curve.
  • Coaches used direct and indirect communication methods.
  • Coaches communication was clear, consistent and honest.
  • Communication was appropriate and positive.
  • Communication was well-timed.
  • Coaches motivated their athletes.
  • Coaches emphasized the importance of staying fit.
  • Coaches utilized mental skills training.
  • Coaches preparation was consistent.
  • Coaches remained confident, calm and emotionally stable under pressure.
  • Coaches ignored the irrelevant.

Influences

  • Coaches influenced the athletes’ self-perception, development and performance; more importantly, they influenced desire to be the best.