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.