Attempting a Resolution

To address the debate over certain coaching styles, let's ask the question "Why does this debate about over-coaching exist?" Over-coaching can result from several different factors, some of which I mentioned in previous postings. It can result from a lack of coaches training, misunderstanding of the athletes strengths and weaknesses, ego getting in the way, and several other ways. If we work on fixing these problems individually, we will be able to avoid the debate that cannot be won about coaching. Fixing these more specific issues, we'll be working towards one common goal. The manner in which I wrote this seems far too simple of a task. I don't think this debate will ever be solved, but little by little, the issues creating the debate can be eliminated.

Coaching is a difficult subject to determine a winner for because it is a very subjective matter. Morals aren't a large factor in this contraversy; therefore, people must turn to other means of which to base their argument, perhaps turning to their experiences and what they've learned from others' experiences. Why do we debate a topic that cannot be won? As human beings, we like to think that we're right, and in many situations, we do think that we're right. Debating may give us authority and a sense of power over other people. Ultimately, this leads to arrogance and a limited view of the outside world. I've come to find that I cannot truly feel someone's feelings or understand where they're coming from until I've experienced it. However, through observation, conversation with others, and honestly attempting to understand what other people have been through, I become closer and closer to understanding other people's perspective of life.

Final Thoughts...for now

After reviewing the coaching blogs and comments from other people, I have come to discover the importance of clarifying which sports I am referring to. I'll admit I am not very knowledgable in individual sports. The role of the coach seems to be very different in team vs individual based on the comments I have received. Those who have participated in team sports seem to side with me and those who've played indivudal sports seem to have a contrary perspective. I have also begun to wonder how much of coaching styles are simply a matter of tradition or if a coach has created their own new techniques. Both I'm sure have their pros and cons. Should coaches be allowed to coach however they want? Or should the training I referred to in the previous blog be required for all coaches to learn and follow? This goes back to one of the links I posted when someone posed the question, "Is coaching an art or a science?" Ultimately I don't think either way can be proven right or wrong. So many different techniques have worked for different people.


On Wikipedia, the many different types of coaching are listed. Businesses borrowed the term from sports related activities when they realized it was a good word to encompass psychological aspects of the business world. Here are some uses of the term: life coaching, personal coaching, systemic coaching, dissertation coaching, ontological coaching, executive coaching, and dating coaching. It wasn't until the 1980's that coaching became a real profession outside of sports. Doing some research I came across a book called The Inner Game of Tennis. It's written by Timothy Gallwey and is written for coaches and players. Although intended for tennis buffs, many others have used it - The USC football coaching staff, Heisman trophy winners, managers of companies. The book discusses the importance of the inner self and how psychology can influence one's potential. Gallwey created a formula: Performance = Potential - Interference. Although I have not read it myself, many well-respected people involved in athletics and business have considered it to be a large aid to their success. Perhaps coaches should be more aware of the psychological state of his or her athletes. Gallwey writes that many people have the physical skills but it is the interference of one's mind that gets in the way of peak performance.

Concluding the matter, I do believe that ineffective coaching is a major issue that society needs to give more attention to. Both the physical and mental aspect of coaching is crucial to the player's development. Too much instruction can lead to unlearned lessons, while too much criticism can lead to a decrease in self-confidence. There is definitely room for instruction and critcism, but the coach must develop a balance to create just the right amount for a player to reach his or her potential.

Qualifications for coaching...

Knute Rockne, a very successful football coach for the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, played football, was a master at marbles, played the flute, and ran track all before becoming a coach. Notre Dame offered him a job in the chemistry department as a lab assistant and he took the offer only if they allowed him to help coach the football team. He did, and when the other coach retired, Knute Rockne began his legacy. Don Shula is a another well-known coach in the football world. He currently holds the most wins for the NFL with 347 and also led the Miami Dolphins to a perfect season in which they won the Super Bowl. Before coaching, Shula played in college and for the NFL and thus gained a lot of experience with football. Do you think it's previous playing experience that wins people coaching positions? Does how good of an athlete they are determine how good of a coach they will be?

There is a program that recently developed called American Sport Education Program which provides proper training for coaches in the United States. It is involved in sports philosophy, sports psychology, sports medicine, and sport management. ASEP attempts to certify high school coaches to make them more qualified. However, this program is not involved as much in volunteer coaching. Volunteers mainly rely on books and such for coaching tips. Human Kinetics is a program that works with ASEP by selling coaching materials such as videos and books to promote more efficient coaching for all different sports.

http://www.asep.com/about.cfm check this website out for more information about ASEP!

Have you ever wondered what requirements a person must have to become a coach?
The link below is a website discussing the requirements to coach a high school athletic team in the state of New York. I suggest reading it for the special exceptions when coaches can coach without a teaching degree.
http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/ciai/pe/pub/coaching.pdf

Coaching Calculus?

You are sitting in Calculus while the teacher explains how to solve integrals. As your eyes slowly shut, you know that you should be paying attention because you're going to have to apply the integral method to the test on Friday. Math is one of those subjects where you learn the material by working out the problems yourself, which is why math homework involves practicing what you learned in class. Your math teacher will be there for tutoring to help you with problems you didn't understand, and he or she will be there to teach you a new lesson the next day. However, on the test (in most cases), the teacher's aid will not be offered. It is solely up to the student to perform well. If the teacher helped the students with the exam, the students will most likely do very well, but the teacher wouldn't be able to tell if they learned anything.

Relating this to sports, specifically soccer, the coach is like the teacher. In practice, like in class, the coach is supposed to teach lessons to the players. Different coaches run practices in various ways. Some like to play practice games, others do drills for technique, others do fitness activites. The coach corrects what the players do wrong. He or she can go through different scenarios and suggest to the players what to do in those situations. Players can stay after practice for additional help if needed. On game day, the coach's role changes, like the teacher's role. It is now time for the coach to witness what his players have learned. The coach will not truly know their growth and development if he or she, dare I say, "cheats" and tells them what to do during a game. The coach should sit back while the players take their test.

New Look

Why, one might ask, am I writing a blog on coaching, when I, as an eighteen year old college student, have never experienced what it’s like to coach? While I have never had the role of a coach, I have definitely had to cope with the MANY different coaching styles since I have played soccer for fourteen years of my life. So yes, I am writing this from a first hand account of playing soccer at a competitive level. In that sense, one may say that my view of coaching is limited due to that single sport’s impact on my life. If that’s you, then just take this from a soccer perspective for now and later we will conclude whether or not it can be applied to other sports. Having to adapt to numerous coaching techniques throughout my many years of playing, it made me wonder which methods are more effective. I’ve seen coaches win games through constant instruction; I’ve seen them make players cry; I’ve seen them sit in angered silence. As a person who sought and still seeks approval from others, I yearned to meet the coach’s standards. I was afraid to be yelled at. I would often think - what if the coach takes me out of the game or what if he embarrasses me in front of the entire team? Playing with fear did not produce the best results for me personally. Experiencing so many extreme emotions and getting a taste of different coaching styles, the way someone coaches a team really interests me.

Is any coaching method necessarily right or wrong? Perhaps a better word choice would be - are certain coaching methods more effective than others? What do these different styles look like? For now let’s just address coaching during games, and specifically soccer games. Some coaches take the approach of instructing their players what to do on the field. The player could have the ball and have to make a decision; a player could be on the other side of the field, just in the wrong position; a player could have just passed the ball instead of shot it. The coach could interject and tell the player what to do in these situations. Would this be beneficial to the player or hinder the player? The player could learn from the coach’s instruction and next time shoot the ball if they’re in that situation, or they could get in a better position next time. The next time that situation arises, the player may do the right thing only because the coach navigates their movements while the play is developing. Is the athlete actually learning the right choices to make or robotically following the coach’s requests? One may say, well what does it matter if it’s bettering the team’s performance? In the long run, a player’s personal development will be aided by actually learning how to play the game. Consider this quote about education… http://en.thinkexist.com/quotes/Bill_Beattie/

Also, I have witnessed many emotional problems with soccer players. Sure people are bound to get upset after losing a big match or getting a bad call from the referee. Some emotions are difficult to control. However, when a player gets angry because of a coach’s decision, comment, or action, something should be done about it because those things can be prevented. Especially in youth soccer, shouldn’t soccer be made to entertain kids? So many times coaches get too into the game and start yelling at five year-olds. YMCA soccer is not meant to be extremely competitive, especially at that age. Yelling at children could be discouraging and steer them away from liking soccer. As kids get older, they may be able to handle more criticism. But even then, it still can affect a person’s self-confidence, thus changing their performance. Coaches need to be more aware of how each individual player responds to them in order to strengthen the team’s performance.

Other resources on the issue...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coach_(sport)
This Wikipedia website provides a basic definition for a coach in the sports world. It gives a few different responsiblities of the coach as well.

http://www.coachfederation.org/ICF/
A website about coaching from a professional perspective. It gives a few roles of coach in the business world, but can definitely be related to sports by comparing the relationship between the coach and the client to the coach and the athlete.

http://www.golf-mental-game-coach.com/mental-game-golf-coach.html
Looks at a different sport - golf, and the role that a "mental game coach" plays in the life of a golfer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_psychology
Discusses the aspects of sports psychology among athletes involving concepts such as motivation from external and internal factors.

http://www.guidetocoachingbasketball.com/coaching_methods.htm
Talks about coaching techniques from basketball's point of view. It has additional links relating to developing a philosophy for coaching.

http://www.psychologymatters.org/smith.html
Gives an example of a program that teaches coaches good techniques to use. Specifically talks about coaching youth sports.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov99/in2.html
Discusses the importance of good psychological training amongst athletes. What do athletes do when the fans don't cheer or when they need to get prepared for a competition?

http://www.1to1coachingschool.com/Evidence_Based_Approach.htm
Another website with a business approach to coaching. Mentions that coaches do not have to have a sufficient knowledge of psychology to be a decent coach.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/6257/the_problem_with_overcoaching.html
An opinionated article that describes the issue of over-coaching. It discusses things such as decision-making and athletes receiving too much instruction from the sidelines. References the NBA.

http://www.footy4kids.co.uk/newsletter6.htm
An editorial on over-coaching, as well as questions and answers on the subject. Talks about the problems with it, the effects, and what can be done about it.

http://www.brianmac.co.uk/coaching.htm

Source from the United Kingdom Coaching Strategy. Very good information on the different roles a coach can play; provides basic coaching tips. Is coaching an art or science?

http://www.wpys.org/overcoaching.pdf

Source from the US Soccer League that addresses over-coaching from soccer's point of view. Gives an example of an over-coaching situation and the effects it can have on athletes.

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:o6DaxaHmPmgJ:www.amessoccer.org/documents/Coaching/OverCoachingSimeone.pdf+over-coaching&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=us

An article that separates soccer from other sports when it comes to over-coaching. Admits that other sports require a higher degree of coaching in competitive situations.

http://www.baseballtips.com/basecoach.html

A look at the base coach's responsibility during a baseball game. Assigns a pretty big role to this coach, giving him a lot of responsibiliy to better the team's performance.

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/tipsandtricks/a/qualitycoach.htm

An article about effective coaching methods. Such characteristics of a good coach include listening, motivating, and leading by example.

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/sports-coaching.html

Brings up the idea of internal obstacles affecting performance more than a person's skills. Should a coach focus more on developing skills or on how to cope with internal struggles?

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_24_229/ai_n13812569

An article about NFL quarterbacks using the wristband technique to look up plays. The coach calls the play and tells the quarterback through their headset technology. The wristband could be considered a back up if the communication between player and coach fails.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Knight

Basic background information on Bobby Knight, a famous and successful basketball coach. His ways of coaching were very contraversial, but brought him victories.

http://www.focusedtraining.com/a3.html

A rowing coach gives advice on how to train his athletes. Admits that you can't train an athlete to win but rather to have a good performance.

http://www.competitivedge.com/ppg/ppg07.html

Provides a psychological perspective on how to coach a team or individual. Generally talks about boosting the confidence of the athlete, giving them a high self-esteem.

Coaching

Questions I'd like to pose:

What, if any, is the causal relationship between coaching during games and an athlete’s individual improvement in his or her sport?

What is the relationship between over-coaching and a team’s success in a sporting event?

Some quick thoughts on the issue:

In the sports environment, there are many people that keep a sport alive and entertaining – the players, the coaches, spectators, and referees. Let’s analyze just two of these roles – the players and the coaches. What is the relationship between these two people? We first must examine the role of the coach. The coach’s role in an athlete’s life is debatable. It could be perhaps to teach, encourage, or lead. A player could take on information from the coach and use it to better or worsen an individual or team’s performance. It is up to the athlete to decide what to do with the coach’s advice. However, it is the coach who determines what advice should be given. There are also different places a coach fulfills his duty - at practice, during a game, or outside of anything related to the sport. Practices usually help athletes prepare for their games. Practices are a time for questions, to make mistakes, and receive instruction from a coach. Games are a time for athletes to demonstrate what they have learned in practice. This is not the time for coaches to instruct the athletes what to do. Rather, coaches should sit back and observe the fruit of their efforts in practice in order to further overall team and individual performance. If athletes are being instructed how to play throughout the game, it is more of a robotic movement of the coach’s desires rather than a test of what the players have learned. In addition, coaches do not see the game from the same physical perspective as athletes. A player may see a better option for a play than the coach sees. Hearing instruction from a coach would make it harder for the player to make his or her own decision and may cause panic. Thus a player’s self confidence decreases and he or she becomes dependent on the coach’s instruction. When athletes switch coaches, they will not know how to play the sport for themselves. Coaches’ instruction during games may lead to immediate success for a few games, but in the long run, an athlete’s ability to play a sport is hindered by this instruction. The sports that apply here are usually fast paced sports such as football, soccer, basketball, or hockey. Half times and time-outs are a time for coaches to give advice for style of play. During these breaks, players can focus solely on this instruction, and they can decide to use this information or disregard it. Ultimately, it is the player’s decision because the athletes are the people playing the game. In professional and college basketball, it is common to see the coach pacing by the bench shouting at the players on the court, telling them what play to run. Imagine the difference in a game where coaches were not allowed to speak to their players. A spectator would really be able to tell which players know how to play the game and which players are dependent on their coach's instruction. The game would probably be more entertaining to watch as well, because the players could be more creative and think for themselves. What if NFL coaches didn't have headsets during a game? During each play, the athletes would be forced to make the call. Is this the way it should be or should coaches be just as much a part of the game as players are?