Campbell: Stifling defensive systems tricky to address
Guy Boucher's 1-3-1 system has some fans – and team's – up in arms.
Ken Campbell, The Hockey News, 2011-11-10
Anyone who watched the Tampa Bay Lightning and Philadelphia Flyers try to bore each other into submission Wednesday night must have felt like they went to a staring contest and a hockey game broke out.
Most of us can agree it was a pathetic display by both teams, unless of course you like paying good money to watch two teams play table hockey. While convalescing from knee surgery at his home in Tillsonburg, Ont., former NHL hanging judge Colin Campbell watched the proceedings and had a unique take on the, ahem, action.
(A quick aside. The people who operate NHL.com decided to make the Lightning-Flyers stalemate a “must see” on their website Thursday. Do these guys even get it?)
“Playing like that will cure the concussion problems in a hurry,” said Campbell, whose job as senior vice-president of hockey operations is to monitor such things. “Pretty tough to get a concussion when nobody’s doing anything.”
Much was made of the tactics employed by Lightning coach Guy Boucher and Flyers coach Peter Laviolette, and good on Laviolette for exposing what he thought was a crime against excitement. Campbell said the league’s GMs will certainly talk about it when they meet next Tuesday in Toronto, but don’t expect a mid-season rule change a la Sean Avery.
“I’m not even sure what we would be able to do about it,” Campbell said.
Right now, all that exists in the rulebook is a provision to keep the flow of play continuous, but the onus on doing that rests with the team in possession of the puck, not the team that is doing absolutely nothing, and we mean nothing, to try to get it back. Under Rule 72.1, which deals with refusing or abstaining from playing the puck, the rulebook says, “The purpose of this section is to enforce continuous action and both referees and linesmen should interpret and apply the rule to produce this result.” More directly, Rule 63.1 governing delay of game reads, “A player or team may be penalized when, in the opinion of the referee, is delaying the game in any manner.”
What this all comes down to, really, is the age-old rule of unintended consequences. When the NHL radically changed the game and opened it up to provide more offense, one of the major tenets of its overhaul was to take out the red line for purposes of calling offside passes. And while it has generally been a positive move, leading to numerous long-bomb passes that result in breakaways and goals, it also encourages coaches like Boucher to sit back into the 1-3-1 defense to prevent his team from being burned by the big play.
It’s actually called good coaching, unfortunately. And while many of the (announced) 19,204 in attendance at the St. Pete Times Forum in Tampa would have loved to see a good old 1980s shootout, you can bet they were just as happy their team managed to win 2-1 in overtime. After all, it’s OK to be bad and it’s OK to be boring. You just can’t be both simultaneously.
And Boucher, unlike a lot of other NHL coaches, can play that kind of style because he knows his players have bought into his system. He also knows his goaltending has been brutal and for all the trapping his team has done, it stands in the lower third of the league in goals-against average. He’s also aware he has the kind of offensive talent in his lineup that allows him to flick the switch immediately and send his players into attack mode if they need a goal. Not all coaches have that luxury. Some of them have to play that way to keep their jobs.
Campbell said when he was coaching the New York Rangers, teaching a guy such as Alexei Kovalev to play the trap was about as productive as hitting himself in the head repeatedly with a ball-peen hammer. Convincing players such as Mark Messier and Wayne Gretzky to do the same was about as successful.
“They would tell me they didn’t win all those Cups by skating backward,” Campbell said.
So, what to do about the kind of display the Flyers and Lightning put on Wednesday night? You could try to ban zone defenses, but that seems unwieldy at best and unrealistic at worst. You could put the red line back in, but that also seems like a step backward. You could slap guys like Boucher up the head and tell them not to direct their teams to play that way, but that seems rather extreme.
It’s all well and good to admonish the Flyers and suggest they try to beat the trap with their speed, but had they done that and turned the puck over, Martin St-Louis was the man playing high, so it would have been his breakaway coming back the other way. And with the margin between victory and defeat so thin, nobody wants to be the guy who is stripped of the puck and causes a goal against.
But in the end, the responsibility for winning and playing the game at a high tempo belongs to the coaches and the players. After all, the Flyers, who came into the game as the league’s highest-scoring team, took just 15 shots and scored once. They were willing to play the chess match just as much as the Lightning when the better strategy might have been to kick the board over and send all the pieces flying.
The NHL has long been a copycat league, but the last thing anyone needs is for 28 other coaches to emulate Boucher and Laviolette’s strategies from Wednesday night.
-----
"The NHL has long been a copycat league..." because:
(a) they don't know HOW to think outside the box?
(b) they don't WANT TO think outside the box?
(c) they are too SCARED to think outside the box?
(d) they are too COMFORTABLE in the box they are in? (Even those teams outside of a playoff position).
(e) "We are in a box? Really? I had no idea..." (clueless...!)
Pick an answer... then think about Sir Ken Robinson's discussion on creativity on TED.com. Or read his book, "The Element."
The NHL doesn't get it. The game will dictate the game. The players and coaches will be along for the ride...
NHL notes: Bettman not a fan of stalling tactics
QMI Agency, Nov 11 2011
NHL commissioner Gary Bettman said Thursday the league's general managers will probably want to discuss the stalling tactics employed by the Philadelphia Flyers Wednesday night against the Tampa Bay Lightning when they meet next week .
With the Lightning playing a passive 1-3-1 system and clogging the neutral zone, the Flyers opted to hold the puck in their own zone for an extended period a few times during the game. At least twice play, which came to a virtual standstill, was whistled down by the officials.
Bettman denied the notion that the hyper-passive tactics by the two teams were an embarrassment to the league.
"While we had an interesting night in Tampa, I'm not exactly sure it was the grand moment of the season that everybody's speculating," Bettman said on his weekly radio show. "Did I like it? No. Is it the most horrible thing I've ever seen on the ice? No. But I do think it has now added another agenda item to the general managers (meetings) next week.
"I'm kind of enjoying the fact that there's some outrage when something that tries to take the game out of its normal flow gets this kind of reaction."
Bettman backed up the game officials, saying they "reacted appropriately" by whistling the play dead when the Flyers held the puck.
Flyers’ trap protest has hockey world buzzing
Flames players couldn’t believe what they were witnessing
By Scott Cruickshank, Calgary Herald, November 11 2011
Lee Stempniak had been watching highlights of the previous night’s games.
Or, at least, he thought he was watching highlights.
But that, right there — is that a still photograph?
No. Because, as it turns out, Stempniak was being treated to video of “action” between the Tampa Bay Lightning and Philadelphia Flyers.
By now, most everyone has had a peek at Wednesday’s standoff between the Bolts, practitioners of an infuriatingly passive 1-3-1 forecheck, and the Flyers, who, setting up shop in their own zone, stubbornly refused to advance the puck.
“The game was on national television in the U.S. — so probably not the best way to sell the game,” said Stempniak, winger of the Calgary Flames. “Especially a team like Philly, a high-flying team . . . I’m sure that’s not what the fans were expecting when they showed up. I’ve never seen anything like it, but it seems like an isolated incident right now.”
Added Matt Stajan: “You don’t want to see that in a game. Obviously, a waste of two minutes. Fans pay a lot of money to see that. It was funny, but not good for the game, for sure.”
A bizarre scene, to say the least.
Brent Sutter got a kick out of it.
“I thought it was kind of funny,” said the Flames coach, chuckling. “You can look at it two ways. Neither team is wrong in what they’re doing — I can understand where Philly is coming from, I can understand where Tampa is coming from. But you don’t want to see it in a game either.
“When I first saw it . . . it was pretty funny. But you know what? Same thing happened last year and no one talked about it. So let’s move on.”
Sutter was then asked if he plans to implement that strategy next month when his team visits Tampa.
“Let’s move on,” he replied with a smirk.
Alex Tanguay, however, applauded the Flyers’ stance.
Nothing wrong with a protest. Nothing wrong with making a point.
“People want to see hockey, people pay to see a show,” said Tanguay. “People pay to see skating and skills. I guess it’s working for (the Lightning). But as far as I’m concerned, if I was a fan paying, I would much rather see a team that’s aggressive and skating than a team that’s waiting for . . . I’m not sure what.
“Those people in the stands, they’re the ones making our livelihood, making us what we are. We have to respect them.”
Trust Olli Jokinen to stand apart.
He declared that he is OK with the tactics, that he cannot find fault in the strategy of either side. In fact, according to Jokinen, it serves a snapshot of picture-perfect adherence to a game plan.
“At the end of the day, it’s about winning, about believing in your system, doing what the coach told you to do,” he said. “I think it’s a good example of why those teams are top teams in the Eastern Conference. Especially Tampa. They have all these high-skilled players, but they do what their coach tells them to do. That makes them a good team. Very impressive on their part. Can you blame Philly for having a game plan? No. Just smart coaching on both sides.
“Obviously, it was a hot topic this morning — guys were talking about it.”
None of the players, however, seemed too anxious to weigh in on potential solutions.
Maybe, like in basketball, there’s a place in hockey for illegal-defence restrictions?
“That’s not for me to say,” said Stajan. “I’m sure the NHL is going to be answering questions about that. If stuff like that keeps happening, they’re going to have to put in a rule, for sure.”
Said Tanguay: “It’s interesting. We’ll see what comes out. I’m not going to speculate. We all have our own opinions. We’ll see what the league decides to do.”
Trapping the way it is in NHL
By Eric Francis, QMI Agency, Nov 13 2011
How to bury the boring Tampa trap? Beat it
One month into the season, no one was complaining about goal scoring in the NHL.
Nor was there any whining about the sort of age-old traps designed to stifle offence.
Up until Wednesday, that is.
Enter Philadelphia Flyers head coach Peter Laviolette, who instructed his players to do the hockey equivalent of taking their ball and going home.
In grade school, we called it “sucking out.”
The more polite term suggests it was a protest against a defence-first system that has been in place for decades.
In response to the Tampa Bay Lightning’s system that had no forwards in Philadelphia’s zone to pressure a breakout, the defencemen simply waited. And waited. And waited.
The game came to a comical standstill.
It happened several times thereafter, with officials unsure what to do.
It was bad for the game, and no one wanted to see it.
And because of it, endless number of critics suggest the league needs to do something to prevent it from happening again.
Enough already.
That’s one of the problems with society today – everybody throws up knee-jerk reactions, and now, there are endless critics who want rules changed.
It isn’t going to happen.
Nor should it.
Yes, the league has looked at it closely and had discussions that will continue on into Tuesday’s GM meetings. Waste of time.
Colin Campbell, who has looked into trying to limit the trap before, cautioned against the type of over-the-top reactions written across the continent and said he’s hesitant to try telling coaches how to coach.
“One thing I’ve learned over the years is that if you put one rule in, it affects seven others,” he said, pointing out implementing new rules is a big decision not taken lightly. (It also requires approval from the Competition Committee.)
Brian Burke said that when he was with the league, he and a screening committee comprised of Lou Lamoriello, Glen Sather, Harry Sinden, Craig Patrick and David Poile tried to do something about the trap in 1995, but after exhaustive efforts, determined it could not be done.
Sadly, he’s right.
Instituting a rule demanding teams send in a certain number of forecheckers or pressuring teams to clear the zone via a clock of some sort is ridiculous.
The game doesn’t need or want it.
As much as fans have every reason to despise any system that limits scoring, we need to stop trying to address every little issue with rash responses.
It’s worth noting Laviolette was not contacted by the league or asked to stop his stance, although obviously, everyone is hoping his notable protest won’t be repeated
It won’t.
After all, in more than two decades of trap-like tactics, this is the first such mockery made of it.
The worst thing about the whole story is that the Lightning won the game, proving once again the trap is an effective way for coaches to mask their teams’ lack of talent and preserve their jobs.
Lindy Ruff suggested probably half the teams in the league employ some sort of trap, so as one GM said, “just get the lead and then you don’t have to deal with it.”
Agreed.
Ironically, it was Ken Hitchcock’s St. Louis Blues who played Tampa Saturday night. When reached before the game he told me he had no plans to pull the same stunt Philly did against Tampa.
“Saw that movie once – it was a flop. Let’s move on.”
Yes, let’s.
-----
How to bury the boring Tampa trap? Beat it
Jason York, QMI Agency, Nov 13 2011
OTTAWA - The trap, the 1-3-1, the 1-4 — whatever you want to call it — they’re all about as exciting to watch as a four-hour game of Scrabble with your family.
And on Wednesday night, the Philadelphia Flyers had enough of the Scrabble game the Tampa Bay Lightning was trying to play. The Flyers tried to make a statement to the Lightning and the NHL by refusing to skate into the 1-3-1 trap the Lightning were trying to deploy.
I have to admit I have never seen anything like that in my entire life of watching NHL hockey. I played on teams that trapped and I played in a lot of games where our game plan was to break the trap that we knew we would be up against.
But I have to say the Flyers took trap-busting to a whole new level when their defencemen actually stopped skating and just stood there in open ice waiting for the Tampa players to forecheck. I think even the the referees were caught off-guard, but did the right thing eventually by blowing the play dead — much the same as they do when a player does not play a highsticked puck — forcing a faceoff in the Flyers’ zone.
The big question now around the NHL is, should the league discourage the trap by punishing its use with a minor penalty or faceoff in the team’s own zone in an effort to deter teams from playing boring rope-a-dope hockey? My answer is an emphatic NO.
The NHL is a results-oriented league, where wins and losses are the bottom line. Teams should be free to do whatever they want — traps and all — if they think it’s going to increase their chances of winning. The entertainment factor is important, but last time I checked, winning ranked a little higher on the depth chart. When you don’t win, coaches and GMs get fired, players get traded and fans go away.
Look at the Washington Capitals — one of the most entertaining teams in the league — and pose the question: Would you rather entertain the fans like the Caps do or have a few Stanley Cup banners like, say, the New Jersey Devils have, in large part thanks to the trap?
If teams want to trap and play boring hockey, that is their business. If their fans stop showing up, that’s their problem, but the NHL can’t tell teams how to play or change the rules again for the umpteenth time.
People just need to leave the game alone. It’s great the way it is. The Tampa Bay Lightning isn’t the first team to trap and won’t be the last. Philadelphia did the wrong thing Wednesday night by stopping the flow of the game.
From a young age, I was always taught that if you don’t like what the other team is doing, don’t quit — quitting is the worst thing you can do. If you want to stop the trap, figure out a way to beat it.
Unfortunately for the Flyers, their tactics didn’t work. They lost Wednesday night anyway.
What are the observable characteristics of the intelligent player?
Paulie
Quote by: PaulieWhat are the observable characteristics of the intelligent player?
Good question Paulie!
Taking RookieCoach's idea from last week, let's make this our new question of the month... or at least till the end of November!
Please submit your ideas under this GIT thread.
Let's hear from you guys...!
You had to do it Paulie, didn't you? I thought I might get a Sunday off from thinking.....
Right off the bat:
- Head & eyes up: constantly sizing up the situation, not just driving through everyone (though I like these players too!)
- Deceptive: shows an understanding of what most players will over-commit for, and uses to his / her advantage.
- Use of space: recognizes what's given and uses it, or creates own space through qualities listed above. Passes to areas, and makes other players more eager to move without the puck. (This is most important in my opinion)
- Communicates: sometimes verbal, sometimes non-verbal, but is always a quarterback with the puck.
- Multiple speeds: understands how changes of speed are as important as all out speed.
Good question....thanks for getting the ball rolling.
Dave
Great topic Paulie, I agree with Dave and these are my thoughts on what separates the smart from the not so smart player.
- easy to play with i.e. gets in a good position to receive the puck and gives a target.
- creates space for themselves skating away from pressure.
- makes the easy play and then becomes the pass receiver for a give and go.
- carries the puck in the triple threat position; not overhandling it and is ready to shoot or pass at the ideal time.
- when they get the puck they make the best choice of whether they can
a. make a play.
b. regroup
c. gain a zone
- recognize when a team mate needs help and tell him he has time, man on, where you are.
Hockey is a game of constant choices and switching between the playing roles on offense, defense and loose puck situations. Game understanding and good habits make smart decisions possible.
It is the most difficult thing to coach.
Great question and replies. Last fall I went to watch a game with intentions to watch a particular player and try to learn something to help the kids I coach. I had heard great things about this player as far as game intelligence goes. His physical skills were not too far above everyone else, but what he did with those skills was on another level
a few things I saw
-great puck skills. He used this to give himself more time to survey the play and decide on next move/pass/shot. There were other players between these two teams with high level puck skills but they did not use these skills to do anything other than try to dangle and force themselves to difficult areas
-Deception. Skated with and without the puck always seeking empy areas of the ice. Never seeked a defender just to make a move on them. Without the puck, he was constantly changing slightly the direction he was moving with simple/slight changes of angle and speed.
-Deception. Was not in triple threat position as much as he should have been but he was constantly trying to appear he was passing or shooting towards a direction he was not planning on going to.
-He used angles against the boards very well. He used the boards like a 6th teammate a few times.
I enjoy watching some past games of Mario and Wayne to figure out what made them so far above their peers. One of the things that stood out to me was that they were more productive than players who were stronger, faster, better puckhandlers, shooters, etc. I remember watching the Pens play live a couple times and being amazed at how Kovalev looked like he was from another world with his smooth, quick hands that made NHL players look like poor puckhandlers. But then during the game seeing Mario make simple moves with just a drop of the shoulder or head and not even move the puck to create time and space.
RedWingFan
Well guys , I'm NOT getting drawn into this one. Great points made by all coaches so far.
An intelligent player player has a great understanding of the game , with good sight , and vision.
- deceptive speed and changes directions and the flow in a game
- Makes a hockey play never forces a pass to put his team at a disadvantage.
- Reads the opposition , studies their weaknesses, then exploits those weaknesses and reacts accordingly.
- buys time with the puck with skating speed , waiting for support.
- Knows when to drive skate to open ice or find open ice , before the opposition can react.
- will skate for open ice with speed and confidence as a deceptive move to draw pressure away from his teammate if he has the puck.
- deceptive passing skills - sees the pass but won't telegraph a pass. uses fakes ,moves before he passes. uses all directions on the ice (N,W,S,E)
- knows how to keep his emotions in check. Never gets rattled , and knows when to keep it simple.
- a player who listens feeds off his line mates and team.
_ good body positioning and stick checking skills to help conserve energy.
- also has good anticipation "SIGHT"
- can adapt to different levels of competition.
Just a few , my head hurts already from this.
RK
RookieCoach
I forgot one.......A really intelligent player never panics, and always seems to find time to make difficult plays under pressure. It's as if time and pressure are moving more slowly for them than everyone else. Watch Joe Thornton or Pavel Datsyuk with the puck, for example.
RK,
I would hate to see what happens when you actually DO get drawn into another one of these discussions...!!
Great replies everybody! Lots of good stuff!
My 2 cents: "Execute skills - head up - at speed - under pressure - consistently" is my mantra.
A player who can do this demonstrates Game Intelligence.
I am amazed (saddened, disappointed) at how many athletes are 'heads down'...
If you want to add to the description of observable Game Intelligence, please do so. Otherwise, lets move on to the next question... it may take some time to formulate the answer (for those who don't have it done already...) See the next post!
In another thread, Tom mentioned he didn't like to do punishments for the losers of activities.
Quote by: TomMI like the intrinsic motivation of wanting to succeed or win instead of extrinsic motivation. Not a big believer in punishing the losers (sorry Dean). We sometimes have them do things like a few push ups, pick up the pucks or skate the circles; but it is more for fun. Winning is a reward in itself and losing is the pits. If I have a team that is low in self motivation I may have more external consequences but I prefer to appeal to the need to get better so they and the team can succeed.
I respect Tom's philosophy and appreciate that he knows what his philosophy is. I also like how he ties things into the Team Covenant that Bob Murdoch has presented to Tom's coaching class. This got me to thinking...
WHAT IS YOUR COACHING PHILOSOPHY?
Let's make this the new question of the week / bimonthly / whatever it is we are calling it!
I challenge all of the coaches to put pen to paper (old school!) or fingers to keyboard and do the same. What do you stand for? , (And for bonus marks - WHY? You don't have to share the justification if you don't want to. The important thing is you can tell people what your stand for; and not just copy somebody else's because "it sounds good.")
"A man who stands for nothing, will fall for anything." - Macolm X - What does this mean to you?
I will go first this time; providing some justifications of what I do under Game Intelligence Training, based on my experience as a player, coach and researcher.
I have been subjected to the full gamut of coaching styles - no / some / lots of competition and accountability (rewards and punishments) as well as consistent / inconsistent application of them. As a player, I preferred a defined structure (competition and accountability) delivered in a consistent fashion as I felt I performed better in one like this; rather than a 'do you best' scenario. The feedback I get as a coach, is that both the players and parents (and administrators) prefer and appreciate this approach too - even more so in the last ten years (perhaps as society changes to one that allows entitlement? I don't know why...)
I would LOVE it if every kid / pro demonstrated their intrinsic motivation to succeed or win consistently. If they did, I wouldn't need to apply the accountability factor! But 90-95%(?) of the people I coach don't demonstrate this in their actions consistently - kids or pros (for whatever reason). So, by fine-tuning my philosophy to bring competition and accountability (rewards and punishments) to the forefront, this does several things:
1) It increases the attention to instructions given and the execution of the activity / decreases screwing around and 'wrong' performance (it helps keep performance within accepted bandwidth levels sooner and narrower (more desired performance and outcomes));
2) It allows for revolving leadership opportunities (I select different captains and let them keep score, make decisions for the team, etc.);
3) For those in the minority 5-10%(?) who possess and demonstrate this intrinsic motivation, they immediately excel in this environment and they learn to to deliver this more consistently. Everyone talks about how they are striving for consistency (hockey, football, basketball... wait, basketball is locked out these days!) - by holding people accountable all the time in practice, this breeds better habits during game situations.
4) For those in the majority 90-95%(?) (who aren't so lucky with their level of intrinsic motivation) - well, there is no more coasting and hiding in my activities and games; especially in the 1 vs 1's that I use almost 50% of the time... they figure out they must start to apply themselves on a regular basis or else they are on the receiving end of the accountability, more often than not. I don't control that as a coach; their performance (or lack thereof) in the activity dictates that. I am merely the person helping them conform to the standards of the game. Fortunately, humans are competitive by nature, so this is a natural evolution for them. These people usually elevate their level of play - some take longer to figure it out than the others - but in the end, they will figure it out. This starts out extrinsically for them; over time, good work ethic and habits BECOME intrinsic and this becomes their 'normal' way in practice and games!
I will post more on my coaching philosophy later... my kids are calling me!
Article from Soccernation.com
The Awareness Philosophy of Training and Development in Youth Soccer
Youth Soccer News: Wayne Harrison is a former pro and coach with Blackpool FC in England, Al Ain in UAE, and Eden Prairie SC. Focused on player development, Awareness Training helps train soccer players to be like Barcelona's Xavi Hernandez and English soccer great, Paul Scholes.
SOCCER AWARENESS: DEVELOPING THE THINKING PLAYER. Accessing options before you receive the ball.
Wayne Harrison is a former professional player and has been a highly qualified professional coach for many years. He has held the position of Academy Director at Blackpool Professional Football club in England and at Al Ain Professional Football Club in the UAE.
Wayne Harrison spent 9 years in Minnesota developing Eden Prairie Soccer Club with his specialized training. Harrison has held the UEFA “A” License since 1996 and holds the NSCAA Premier Diploma. He has also earned a degree in Sports Psychology and Applied Physiology. Coupled with this, he has published eleven books on Soccer Coaching and Player Development.
Harrison has designed his own means of developmental coaching and training, which he calls Awareness Training, over many years of experimentation. In just two years with Al Ain, his training methods helped the club’s youth academy win seven National Youth championships at various age levels.
"The ultimate goal in coaching is helping each player develop his or her talents and abilities to the fullest. With this in mind, I created my Awareness Training philosophy of developmental coaching and training over many years of experimentation. It simply means training the mind before the body." Wayne Harrison
Wayne Harrison's newest book on soccer coming out in two weeks.
This is the first book on this system of play; the 4-2-3-1 which is the most popular system now.
Coaching focus - an Interview with Wayne Harrison
SNN: Where have you coached youth soccer?
Wayne Harrison: I have coached in England, the U.S and United Arab Emirates. All parents are focused on winning. Americans are not worse but the only place there youth players get paid is in Dubai. U9 players actually get paid to play and get bonuses for winning.
SNN: You are pleased you moved to San Diego. What are you looking for?
Wayne Harrison: A competitive youth soccer club that will embrace my developmental coaching and training. My training philosophy is designed for the player to think and not to be constantly instructed by the coach while on the field during a match. I believe that it is important to improve thinking and decision-making as the game is getting quicker.
SNN: How does a coach make soccer players think under pressure on the field?
Wayne Harrison: Getting someone to think for himself or herself can become habit forming and that is the goal. Teaching players to form good habits that last a lifetime.
But you have to teach players when they are young, in the golden years when they are U7 to U11. If you can teach a U10 player to think and realize his options, then you have a learned behavior that can last a lifetime.
It is critical to know what your options are and to know what to do with the soccer ball
The more you solve soccer problems on the field, the better a player you will become. It is like developing muscle memory. My book explains this all. This approach also allows for mistakes on the field to be corrected.
What does this all mean in one simple sentence? It is all about accessing options before you receive the ball.
SNN: It sounds so logical.
Wayne Harrison: It is, but no one has written a book on this before. I have checked.
SNN: Why is One Touch the best training for developing players?
Wayne Harrison: This training approach takes the player to the next level. It transforms them into a thinking player.
Winning requires mental preparation. Developing mental readiness is not a 5 minute job, it requires years of training.
American players are very physical and the game of soccer is very physical now, I think
SNN: How can we improve soccer in America?
Wayne Harrison: American players could be more cerebral. Some players have the ability to assess what to do with the ball naturally, but others do not. We can teach it.
Players should use their peripheral vision to be able to know where they are passing the ball. The one-touch approach allows the speed of play to stay quick enough not to lose the ball to a defender.
SNN: Who are great examples of famous players who use the one-touch approach?
Wayne Harrison: Barcelona's Xavi Hernandez is a great example. One of the greatest English soccer player of his generation, Paul Scholes, is another player who uses the one-touch style.
SNN: What about Cristiano Ronaldo?
Wayne Harrison: The spectacular players like Messi and Ronaldo, who beat players 1 v 1 and score goals, usually win the title of World Player of the Year, and they are deserving of it of course. But I hope one day the less spectacular but equally effective players like Xavi will win this honor. Xavi creates the chances for others; the passing player should be recognzied, not just the dribbler.
EFFECTIVENESS is the key to the great player.
Ronaldo has awareness with lots of touches. I am referring to awareness with one touch. The one-touch training is designed to train the mind when to take one touch and when to take two touches or run and dribble the ball.
SNN: Why do you coach?
Wayne Harrison: I am a teacher, I like to teach, I like to help develop players and I enjoy working with kids. I have a real love for it. I am always challenged to find different ways to communicate to my players and different ways the training can suit them.
SNN: How involved do you think parents should be in the development of their player(s)?
Wayne Harrison: Parents should know what coaches are doing to teach their kids. Parents are paying the money and are entitled to know what coaches are doing. I have really comprehensive player evaluation forms that I hand out to the parents. The evaluations do not always make the parents happy, but…
SNN: What do you look for in a player?
Wayne Harrison: Game intelligence. Regardless of the age of the player, you can see game intelligence in an 8 year old.
Game intelligence is the when and where and how and why – the skill factor, understanding where to be and when to pass and where to dribble
The continuum of training… When you see a player dribbling past numerous defenders and then lose the ball, often you hear people say "bad luck." The player looks spectacular, but he is not effective. He does not know when to pass the ball before he loses it. This is lack of game intelligence. A lack of the skill factor. But we, as youth coaches, need to teach the when and where. The when and where are more important than the actual technical skill, which is easier to teach.
In the continuum, a player might not have great technique but might know when to pass and have great game intelligence.
Many players are very good technically, but the when and where needs work.
SNN: How will this impact the game?
Wayne Harrison: The players will think quickly. Take for example, Barcelona.
Barcelona has proven great soccer is all about the mind. Barcelona has small players who think quickly and have great game intelligence.
When I played at Blackpool F.C. in England, Alan Ball was a great player on the team. Ball was named the best player in the World Cup when England won in 1966 and he was just 21 years old. Alan Ball was the epitome of one touch play, and to be honest I couldn’t do it like he could. Alan said to me, and I quote, “I don’t need one touch, I need half a touch.” This was in 1979.
I realized then that I wasn’t good enough at this and that it was a bit too late for me. I lacked this capacity to identify my options early enough, and this held me back. I might need 3 touches, Alan might only need half a touch, and this is when I realized I needed to teach. Alan inspired me to be the best coach I could be.
Then, years later, I saw this style of soccer being played when I watched Barcelona. It was magnificent.
RECAP of Harrison's One Touch Training and the Importance of Awareness
The awareness concept is teaching players to recognize their options “before” they receive the ball, thus speeding up decision making and improving field vision and general speed of play. The designed objective of this training is to make the players think for themselves and problem solve, not have coaches think and solve the problems for them; otherwise the players learn nothing for themselves.
The concepts of coaching and training come together with this philosophy. It uses a methodology that guides – not commands – the players to solutions. The coach has to encourage self thinking in the players. He has to ask questions to get them to think about the problem and how they need to solve it themselves. The coach must encourage and offer positive reinforcement.
The training philosophy is designed to help this with specific conditions inherent in it to guide players to the right decisions. Training is at a high tempo, which creates stress; the stress creates mistakes in training, which forces players to learn from those mistakes. Mistakes are accepted; negative criticism is not allowed where decisions are made that did not work in a particular situation. Players are told that they learn how to get it right through making mistakes. Therefore, players should be more relaxed in training and in games, knowing mistakes will not be negatively challenged.
The Awareness Training model of development was devised to assess the strengths and weaknesses of players. There is a link among the aspects of player makeup – psychological, technical, skill, tactical and physical – and the associated positive words of the continuum. In order of sequence, the coach has to asses these word associations:
1. Look/Observe (before receiving the ball)
2. Communicate (can be a two way positive of the players themselves on the ball or their teammates off the ball)
3. Position (feet and body preparation)
4. Control (unless a one touch-technique is needed)
5. Technique
6. Skill (when and where)
7. Mobility (movement off the ball)
8. Transition (possession changes)
The first step is relating word association with actions to identify the strengths and weaknesses of players and how to correct them. Second comes individual building blocks (awareness with many touches at the younger ages and awareness with few touches as they get older).
Next the coach adds unit and team building blocks (awareness with few touches). Finally, awareness training needs to be structured to apply to all age groups beginning with simple individual developmental concepts at approximately 8 years old and moving through to advanced team training concepts from 12 year old and onwards.
How many times have you looked at a player and felt he or she was a good player, but just lacked something, and you couldn’t put your finger on what it was?
This continuum can help in this identification. The solution is to value the different parts of the player's makeup separately, and then to add the values of the different parts of the whole together to make the final player.
So, while the whole (the player) is very good, improving “one part” (it could be the “skill” part or maybe the “look” part, which most of them often do not possess initially) will make the whole (the player) better. For this to work, the coaches of awareness training must be quality demonstrators.
So what exactly does “awareness” mean?
Awareness in soccer means stages of thought (psychological) processes combining with technical, skill, tactical and physical aspects and their ensuing movements in play.
Though also relating to identifying “when and where,” awareness applies in “specific moments” to maintaining possession with one touch or many touches of the ball. This training is primarily designed to help the players to learn to think for themselves more quickly with one-touch play, and to improve their decision making. It also helps them to think/decide more quickly and effectively than they did before they were shown and taught this form of training.
One-touch training helps this develop more quickly than any other training. So what does one touch play help to teach? It is psychological – training the mind – as well as training the body. For the individual receiving player it teaches a variety of important lessons.
Quicker Thinking: The game is getting much faster, so players need to think much more quickly to be able to cope with this increase in pace.
This means they have less time to make decisions. So, one-touch creates "quicker thinking players."
Quicker Play: Because the game is getting faster, players have less time on the ball, so a natural progression to cope with this is to use fewer touches of it. This means using one touch more and acting more quickly particularly in tight situations, hence observation before receiving the ball is a necessity. One-touch play forces the player to do this if they want to be successful.
This means looking before receiving the ball and assessing options early. It requires a look over the shoulder, to the sides and behind the player before receiving the ball
Body and Foot Preparation: One-touch means getting the body/feet into appropriate position to receive the ball. One-touch develops body positional awareness in a player (e.g. a player may need to let the ball "run across the body" to "save" the touch).
Improved Technique: One-touch demands and promotes technical excellence when distributing passes received in the air (foot, thigh, chest, head). It also improves the first touch by lots of practice relying just on that skill.
Improves and Speeds up the Skill Factor: This is “decision making” awareness – “when and where” situational play. Skill is the end product of technique: the how, why, when and where of the technique.
Faster Ball Movement: The ball is moving faster, too, as well as the players moving faster. This suggests quicker passing sequences. Faster ball movement, faster running of the players and quicker closing down by opponents means everything is quicker.
Thinking and decision making have to match this. Hence being very good and successful at one touch play is an essential part of a modern day player’s makeup.
Limited Space Possession and Tight Situational Play: One touch teaches players how to maintain possession in tight spaces or when closely marked.
Ball Mastery: One touch requires players to demonstrate ball mastery when receiving (for example, cushioning a pass to a teammate in close support vs. hard pass to a teammate supporting at a distance). One-touch teaches players how to correctly "weight" their passes.
Fitness: More frequent and quicker movement off the ball means players have to work harder to support the player on the ball, as they have little time with it and need instant help. If the ball is being passed consistently by one-touch, then the ball is travelling faster and more frequently. The players have to work just as quickly and frequently off the ball to cope with this and maintain possession of the ball; thus it improves specific soccer fitness.
Time Management: One-touch play means thinking quickly and identifying options early. This in many instances can give the player more time on the ball because they have already seen where the space is to play before they have received the ball. So, it creates time on the ball to allow for more touches, if needed, by identifying options earlier
Identification of Players and Space: It offers the means to a faster identification of players’ positions, both teammates and opponents. It helps a player identify more rapidly when and where to pass, whether to feet or to space, and where the space or player to pass to will be.
On-the-Ground Patterns of Play: One-touch encourages passing on the ground to maintain possession so it is easier for the next player to control the ball.
For the attacking team, one-touch training has significant benefits.
Movements OFF the Ball: Training with one-touch means the player receiving the ball has to move it on quickly, therefore players have to move OFF the ball more quickly to help support the player receiving it. This is a very important aspect of one touch training, as it involves all the other players off the ball and their positioning to help the player on the ball, preferably before they receive it so it can happen more quickly.
Style of Play: One-touch training encourages a fluid, attractive style of play and develops a good tempo and speed of play
Combination Play: One-touch training encourages combination play, such as wall-passes, set-up passes or third-man runs. There is no better play than a give-and-go one-touch pass combination to beat defenders. It is difficult to defend against, especially in and around the attacking third or the penalty area when quick play is applied.
Aesthetic Effect: One-touch training is "pleasing to the eye" (think of Arsenal, Barcelona or Manchester United).
Counter Attacking Play: One-touch training is useful when teaching the counter-attack, as fewer touches means the ball travels faster
Ultimately, one-touch play is designed to improve the player’s first touch in the redirection of the ball, to help players identify their options before they receive the ball and thus know which option next is best. This next option may not be a one-touch pass in the actual game situation but may be a dribble with many touches, a turn, a run with the ball, a cross, a pass or a shot.
By learning one-touch passing – which to be successful needs the player to be able to identify options before receiving the ball – players develop an awareness of many things including teammate positions, opponent positions and where the space to play to is. One-touch is challenging mentally, physically, technically and tactically, and better players will thrive on "one-touch sessions" and rise to the challenge of them.
Kai,
+1 and thanks for this post. His philosophy sounds eerily similar to myself and the Colombian! I alerted John and he is going to check out the Soccer Nation site too. I think it is so neat that someone has such a similar philosophy as myself and John... we had been wondering, "Is there anybody else out there with a similar methodology, or are we truly in 'left field' by ourselves?" Maybe we aren't the crazy coaches everybody thinks we are... now we are a group of ... 3!
(I just checked my book shelf... coincidentally, I have a copy of one of his books, "Game Situation Training for Soccer" but I haven't had time to review it yet... it will now get moved up towards the top of my pile of 'to read'!)
I have had house guests the last two weeks so computer time is restricted.
Consequences: There should always be consequences in an effective practice but I believe the puck in your net or in the opposition net is the consequence. That tells you if what you are doing is right or wrong.
Before or after a drill or game I tell the players why they are doing a skill and why it will help them to be better individually and as a team. If players are not practicing the skill properly in either a game or a drill I will talk with them to find what they are thinking and if it is consistently wrong I will stop everyone and bring them in to explaning the point of the activity and how it will make them better.
The team makes a covenant that states what the players and team goals are and this is my template to how much input I give.
Last night I talked about individual goals and team goals and what college scouts look for. We talked about good habits and good technique. I told them that winning or losing is NOT an accident and went over the goals we gave up on the weekend and how good habits and techinque would prevent them. I used the games as examples of how shooting instead of making poor percentage passes would help us score more. We then did drills and games to practice good habits and techniques.
The consequences are:
- you lose instead of win close games.
- losing teams don't get recruited very much.
- scouts watch and see how you play in all four game playing roles. You need to be competent on both offense and defense.
Losing team last night did 5 push ups; more a way to point out the other team won.
If you want to get better to create more opportunities for yourself and for the team to succeed, then you compete hard in practice.
As Joan Vickers says in her Decision Making book; the players need to become independent thinkers and not rely on coach input all of the time.
So I say 'The Game is the Great Coach' and the consequence is losing the or winning the game. If you do the right things only to 'Avoid Punishment; how independent are you when the 'Coach' isn't around.
So that is my opinion and why I always appeal to stated individual and team goals.
During a game players constantly make reads and use acquired skills and habits that will help them to be successful. The coach has to make sure that these are covered in practice and the players have to make sure they become part of their toolbox.
First off , I have been off the bench for about 7 years or so, but still running different team practice's.
I always used a couple of Sport Quotations with my teams:
"Success is NOT a sometimes thing , In other words, you don't do what's right once and a while , but all the time. Success is a habit. Winning is a habit ". - Vince Lombardi
" Winning isn't everything, but making the all-out effort to win is the most important thing." - Vince Lombardi
Coaches must be prepared for every practice. I prepare like it's a job.( that I would get paid for)
-Respect players and they will respect you as a coach. If you show them you are prepared and committed to teaching them , they will strive to please you , their coach.
- Put yourself in a young players position when you coach. They want to have fun , and they will want to practice.
- I am NOT a fan of "bag" skating players. But my teams don't stop skating from the time they hit the ice. I will give a few warning of the lack of intensity , and they usually know what will come if the don't focus and pick it up.
- Every practice has a different look. I constantly change drills and games. If you keep using the same practice , they will just go through the motions. It takes the thinking out of the practice.
- I have always used different types of 1on1's. I feel they have natural battles , creates competition , and players can't HIDE from 1on1's.
- Team must practice with the intensity that you want in a game situation.
- Players feed off of each other and also their coach. If they all buy into your Philosophy , you can be successful.
- Set forth a team structure of how you want to play as a team and coaching staff.
- All players must come to a game with a goal in mind. Something that they need to work on or show weakness in a game and practice. If they think about , focus, visualize and strive to improve in these areas. ( ex- keep my feet moving. don't stand still)
- They must understand that's ok to lose , if they work their hardest I would be proud of them as a coach.
- All practice situation have a puck involved , drill or games.
- I would say ' that I'm a hybrid type of coach now with drills and games. Games are making more sense , every play has a new outcome and you touch on more player roles.
- I use accountability in my practices. Players love to compete with each other.
- I am the silent type of coach that lets the players dictate the flow. After a while a player can tell by a coaches body language , and they can sense when a coach isn't happy how things are playing out.
More later. Gotta run to watch a game.
RK
RookieCoach
Rookie Coach, I agree with what you say, especially about giving physical and mental effort. If they give everything they have but still lose a coach can't ask for anything more.
My philosophy is 3 things
1. Pond hockey type play as much as possible. (open days, off weekends, selected times during the practices) Goal is to create what most past legends had on a daily basis that created a passion for the game.
2. Rep, Reps, Reps Keep them moving. When possible have everyone moving working on things like the Russian Warm up, particular puck moves, passing, keep away, skating moves like tight turns, mohawks, pivots
3. Learn from each other and from others. Watch your teammates and learn. Watch the opposition and learn. Copy them. What do they do best? now copy it!
I do need to use more rewards.
I am mixed on punishments for losing games during practice. Agree with both sides so I'm torn . I remember hearing that the great players do not have a love of winning but more of a hatred for losing
RedWingFan
Tough question Dean....I guess I never have taken the time to articulate this.
Some background: I had three distinctly different styles of coaches as I progressed through competitive hockey. 1)The "dump it in & go hit 'em" one, who got us in better shape than anyone else and stressed body contact. This team relied on emotion more than skill, and had lots of 3rd period wins by wearing down the other teams. 2) The technical expert, who probably developed a hundred or more Division 1 college players in his career, but who absolutely berated players when they made mistakes. Players were motivated by fear more than anything. 3) The tactician - this coach changed the way I looked at the game - made it creative & fun, even with 3 hour practices and missed vacations I always looked forward to playing. He had terrible people skills, but the way we played the game made up for it...it was wide open, creative, and all about speed. Only twice in four years did we have a bag skate, and we deserved it both times, but we were in shape from the constant flow of our practices. We won a lot of games, too.
I'd say I am a hybrid of these 3 distinctly different approaches. I would love to play the wide open game (experience #3), but without the raw skill of experience #1 and the refinement of experience #2, it's tough to play at that level....but the goal is to get there! The biggest things I've learned and I now focus on are:
1) Coach at the players level: You have to be wiling to adjust and go backwards if needed. A glaring lack of fundamental skills cannot be overlooked. Hockey is a continuum of acquired skills, and you can't move forward very far without the fundamentals. There are no shortcuts!
2) Build players up, don't tear them down: I never enjoyed playing in fear, and I catch myself often barking like the old drill sergeant I had in experience #2 above. I'm working hard at remembering these are kids, not small adults, and they are often way more fragile than they act. Encourage them when they do things right, convince them that they can and that it will make a big difference.
3) Details Matter!: Small details can make the difference between an average team/player and a good one, and they're things that everyone is capable of...stick on the puck, blocking shots, backchecking & short shifts are examples of things that everyone can do that make a difference. Do your job with attention to detail and trust that your team mates will do theirs. Do not try to do someone else's job. Reward excellence in this area but do not tolerate mediocrity. We are all capable of doing these little things that make the difference.
4) Discipline in the defensive zone, creativity everywhere else.
I still catch myself falling back to old drill sergeant skill and drill coaching from time to time, but the input of coaches here on this sight.....Tom's books & videos, Dean's relentless rants, and Kai's wealth of knowledge.....have convinced me that games are the best teacher. This has made coaching more fun too.
Dave
I have a patch on one eye with antibiotics in it; so the typing may not be so great with my eyes closed. This is how I want my players to be able to play the game; except the eyes closed part. I learned to touch type in high schhool and the skill stayed with me even though I didn't type for twenty five years until I got a computer.
The teacher insisted that we have good posture and we were tested regularly and earned the right to advance to the next letters. It was a drill and practice methodwith a planned progression and the consequence that we were gradedd on how fast we could type.
Coaches have to have a progression in mind that has a scope and sequence but in hockey it is not just the technical skill but also the ability to use these skills at the proper place and time during a game. That is like moving across the hall to englih class and writing stories with the typewriter.
So it seems to me the question is 'how do we get players to involve themselves in 'deep practice' where they identify mistakes and work through them until they can do it? Daniel Coyle has a video on his site where he learns to dribble the golf bacll like Tiger by using deep practice. He is self motivated and has no instructor but a video of Tiger. The Turkish coach Deniz wanted to learn how to play hockey so he got a vhs of Mario Lemieux and watched it, then practice on his own, then watched it again until the tape wore our-t and he couldn't watch it anymore. He is pretty good.
When I worked with a team from the orient they would get good athletes and bring them here for a month with ninety six hours on the ice. Some of the coaches of the younger teams would punish the players by making them stand with their hands on the bboards and the coach would beat them on the behind with his hockey stick, and if he was really mad the last whack would be to the back of the knees. Another coach would simply call the player over and he would slug him on the jaw two ot=r three times. S I had to make sure I kept my voice calm because if the coach thought I was upset then some player was going to get hammered. Later teams stopped doing this but used other punishments like hands behind the back, forehead oand toes on the ground then hold yourself for designated amounts of time.
So I have seen a lot. I have also seen our western culture change from where a clild crying in the mall. Then eveyone looked at the parents and condemed them if they didn't spank the kid to now if a parent touches the kid cell phones would be calling the poice .
So hw do we achieve deep practice and hold players accountable for how they practice.
I would like to read what punishments or rewards are given for players doing Deep Practice.
My eyes are still closed so I hope this is readable.
I can look at the computer screen now without my eyes killing me. I couldn't read your posting Dave.
I have had the same kind of coaches that you mention along with my jr A coach who put out a puck at the start of practice and then went and drank a bottle of whiskey with the owner while we played shinny games up to 5. He would come out the last 20-30 minutes of practice and bag skate us. When we were losing he would rant about us not using our power play or forecheck and we would look at each other thinking 'what power play'; what forecheck?' Anyway you eet a lot of different kinds of people in this game.
I started as the first kind of drill sargent coach who believed the fitest tea would win, then as I studied what the international coaches George kingston brought here every summer had to say I became a very tactical coach. When Juhani came he foreced me to look at how I was running practice and I started coaching like I taught PE and using drills, games and tournament. When I did this my teams winning percentage went up a lot.
So it is a process to develop a effective coaching style that is effective in teaching the skills and game understanding players need to be successful.
As I am thinking about our weekend games I am doing a mental review of what we have covered because another thing I have learned is that you can't expect players to be able to do things you haven't practiced and then reviewed. So everything is cummulative.
It's Sunday, and you know what that means....get your thinking caps on! Attached is a post from Swen Nater's blog describing how John Wooden understood and inspired motivation. (Thanks to Eric for sharing the blog here: http://blog.coachswen.com/.) My question to you is: How do you categorize your players' motivation, or lack of it?
Please share any anecdotes, theories, or strategies you might have.
Thanks,
Dave
DaveM, Great blog (thanks to Eric!) I bookmarked it and started reading it. Looks good!
Here are the 6 categories in the .pdf from DaveM's post.
1. The Motivation of Wanting to be As Good as Someone Else
2. The Motivation Wanting to be Better Than Someone Else
3. The Motivation of Wanting to be Recognized as Valuable and Needed
4. The Motivation of Wanting to Please My Teacher
5. The Motivation of Wanting to Prove Someone Wrong
6. The Motivation of Improvement
These categories are a pretty comprehensive summary... are there any more categories you can think of? (DaveM: not sure what you are looking for in your question... please elaborate. Thanks!)
How about 7. The Motivation of Wanting to Earn Ridiculous $$$ and Setting Oneself Up On Easy Street For Life While Playing a Sport?
I was gone this weekend to watch one of The Colombian's U16 (1997's) female soccer teams play in an indoor provincial tournament. They achieved the silver medal; winning 7 games in a row leading up to and including the tournament games. They lost the gold medal game 3-1. John's team was down to 10 players and a goalie (they started with 14 players - blasted injuries!) The team that beat them was one year older (1996's) and their increased strength, speed, skill and tactical play showed. That team has played together for four years while John's team (core of 8 players) has been together for 16 months. Still, they competed very hard. They need to refine their skills and play more confident. (The opponents scored to make it 1-0 34 seconds into the game!)
I made lots of notes and stats and will share some thoughts on these as well as the play in the games I saw. I kept track of possession time in one game and then consecutive passes in two games. I didn't make any judgements about the decisions - like Stewart B. did with the Dinos when Tom was working with them... I want to determine Stewart's system to see if I can quantify games with that system. Tom, do you have a form or guidance for me in that regard? I will share my findings later this week when I get more time.
Indoor soccer is very close to hockey - played in a rink of similar dimensions, change on the fly, 5 players and a goalie, three lines marking the ice, etc. There were some different rules though... In fact, it would be cool to try playing a game of ice hockey with some of these rules!
John was very impressive with his calm demeanor on the bench. I couldn't believe some of the other coaches - absolutely losing it at their own players and the refs! You could see from the players' body language that they weren't too happy about their coaches' performance!
John asked me into the dressing room and team meetings so I got to watch how he conducts himself. Not too many people have enough confidence in themselves to do this - but we have worked with each other for almost ten years and we share a very similar philosophy. It is always nice to be able to see other coaches in action; especially behind the scenes. Lots of good stuff. It was a great weekend of PD!
Quote by: hockeygodHow about 7. The Motivation of Wanting to Earn Ridiculous $$$ and Setting Oneself Up On Easy Street For Life While Playing a Sport?
With Mario asking Bob Perno if he could get him 1,000,000 if he broke Guy Lafleur's junior scoring record, I would say that #7 played a good sized role in #66's motivation.
RedWingFan
Sorry, I wasn't very clear with my question.
In a nut shell, how do you (experienced coaches) motivate players? Do you categorize players based on their motivation/personalities? What strategies do you use to motivate different players/personalities? Have they worked, and what are some success stories?
Thanks,
Dave
Dave,
Here is an article I received today from Bruce Brown. He is a mentor coach from the Seattle WA area. I have bought many of his booklets, CD's and DVD's and highly recommend them. This article concerns "Positive Conditioning". It ties into this topic of player 'motivation'.
Enjoy!
DaveM (and whomever), here is some more of my personal philosophy... not just the 'what' I deliver, but the 'how' the message is delivered (some background to help explain the 'why'!) ...
Having lots of conversations with John the Colombian lately; mainly about philosophy. We have been looking back over our respective playing and coaching paths, focusing on what impacted us the most, and plotting what is in our respective futures... "How do we get better?"
One of the biggest things both John and I have come to realize is the old cliche is so true... I first heard it in a coach clinic in the mid 1980's... "The players don't care how much you know, till they know how much you care."
I thought it was good advice at the time. As a young coach, I really took this to heart and tried to honour this. I had some of my most memorable years and best, enduring relationships with my players and their parents (and coincidentally, great results / outcomes!) when I deeply cared about all of my players. I let them know it, too. You know, when a kid screwed up on or off the ice, I really took it personally and it was tough. But I think this made me a better coach and I know the kids appreciated my concern.
In hindsight, about ten years in, I can see how I started to slip farther from this advice. I became a "transactional coach" with winning (an uncontrollable outcome) becoming one of my most important measuring sticks. Not 'win at all costs' as I still wanted to honour the spirit of the game, but I thought and talked about winning more than the process. I started to distance myself from my players. I didn't communicate with them as much - at least, not about their life away from the rink.
I wasn't so focused on performance (within our control; therefore where my / our focus should have been.) Performance and outcomes varied; but generally weren't where I wanted them to be. We 'under-achieved'. I felt this was influenced by the other coaches I was working with and around at the time. It seemed that this was the accepted hockey culture / coaching environment and the higher you got, the more it became like this. We were all concerned about getting to the next level - using each position to leverage the next position higher up the ladder. After awhile, my internal moral compass really started to conflict with 'what' I was doing and 'how' I was doing it.
My dad got diagnosed with terminal cancer in early October and I ended up resigning my WHL coaching position in mid-December as my gift to him. I wanted to spend the rest of his days by his side. He said that was the greatest gift he had ever received. We always had tickets to attend the Flames / Montreal game on New Year's Eve. I made special arrangements to get him in (wheelchair) with the Flames, but he was too weak to go. He entered a hospice overnight and passed Jan 13th. I still have the unused tickets in my folio. Obviously, this had a huge impact on me personally. I took a year away from coaching. It was a good break for me and I started to re-establish my moral compass. Dad's passing really made me appreciate life and see things in a new light. It changed me.
I got lured back as an assistant coach at Midget AAA a full year later, after the New Year's break (the head coach quit and his AC took over but needed another AC. We had worked together previously for a few years...) It was nice to work with some kids who wanted to get better, without the same intense pressure of the WHL (winning / outcomes).
After that season, I was asked to coach girls at university, I 're-found' some of the connection with my athletes, but hindsight being truthful, didn't recover quite back to my early levels. I still felt my job was on the line if we didn't win, so this outcome was still on my radar.
When I left the girls and went back to coach the guys at MRC, it was all I could do to get through the year. I recognized within two weeks that I had inherited a lot of issues (14+ 'projects') that no coach should have to go through all in one season (excessive chewing tobacco, drugs, heavy alcohol abuse, run in's with the police, lying, violence on and off the ice, a lack of demonstrable respect, etc.) There wasn't enough time in the day to change this group - particularly because they didn't want to change. They were young adults and were set in their ways. Sad that their previous coaches (parents?) allowed them to get to this. Many of the players lived a life that I felt was counter-intuitive to an athlete; the lack of maturity and leadership really made me happy to end it after one year. (We had our first child at the end of the year and our family agreement had been that when our first miracle appeared, it would be time to step away from coaching a team and focus on family. I was so grateful to be free of that situation!)
During my time coaching the girls and boys at university, I started teaching at several skill academies (Jr. and Sr. High). I have continued this and it has been an excellent avenue to stay involved. I have been able to stay on the ice, continue to fine-tune my Game Intelligence Training curriculum (on and off-ice) and more importantly, return to the roots of my initial philosophy, "They don't care how much you know, until they know you care!" This has become especially important to me now as a parent of two young children... I see their wonder and love in their eyes... and I see that reflected in the other kids I coach. "Daddy-ism" has changed me - again - for the better and I continue to evolve!
After all of life's experiences and all of the experimenting and reading I have done along the way, I feel Daniel Coyle (and other researchers) are really onto something when they talk about the factors behind what makes an athlete successful. In the realm of Talent ID, expertise, etc., one of the major influences is THE COACH. The coach can act as an IGNITOR - a spark - to encourage someone's passion and help propel them to the next level. (They can also easily suffocate or extinguish someone's love for the game... DON'T be that coach! "Hey Gretzky, Pass! Shoot! Hit him! Don't take such long shifts... get off the ice, you puck hog!" ... SHUT UP and let the game be the best teacher! Do you think Wayne's Pee Wee coaches told him any of these things? I doubt it... more like, "Wayne, your up next... stay out there Wayne.... nice goal again Wayne!" He scored 378 goals in that Pee Wee year!)
I feel that since my kids have been born, I have whole-heartedly returned to this initial philosophy and I have seen great results with the kids in the skill academies. Granted, it is a different relationship than a 'coach / team' one, but I do see a positive difference. It's not just the 'what' (Game Intelligence Training curriculum); it's the 'how' (a TRANSFORMATIONAL COACH - not a transactional coach) that is most important.
I think all kids deserve a transformational coach (I wish I would have had a coach like this!); so that is what I am in the process of becoming.
Can anyone else reflect upon the type of coach they are now? Or on their coaching journey in general? Hopefully we can have a few more people share a playing / coaching story that illustrates their past or current or future style of coaching / leadership. It is great to use this forum to learn from each other - even if it means opening up and sharing personal thoughts and influences!
NHL TACTICS: Hockey’s death trap
Robert Macleod, Globe and Mail, Nov. 10, 2011
Somewhere, Roger Neilson must be smiling.
The ludicrous spectacle of the Philadelphia Flyers refusing to advance the puck as a way of opposing the neutral-zone trapping tactics of the Tampa Bay Lightning Wednesday night was something the late NHL coach would have dreamed up.
And now the NHL might have to step in and do something about it.
“The question becomes, is there some additional penalty [than a stoppage in play] that you employ,” NHL spokesman Gary Meagher said on Thursday. “And I’m not suggesting there is.
“I’m saying, that’s the type of discussion point that the league’s general managers would have.”
The GMs will meet in Toronto next Tuesday and Meagher suggested the topic would be one of those discussion points.
Less than a minute into the first period of their game on Wednesday, the Flyers gained possession of the puck in their own end and the Lightning lined up in their 1-3-1 trap defence implemented last season when Guy Boucher took over as head coach.
http ://video. nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=35&id=133956
The system calls for one player to be near each blueline and three along the red line, a suffocating tactic that makes it very difficult for the opposition to cleanly move the puck from out of its own end.
When the lead Tampa Bay skater, Martin St. Louis, refused to cross over the Philadelphia blueline to pressure the puck handlers, Flyers defenceman Kimmo Timonen made one leisurely pass cross ice to Braydon Coburn.
For at least 30 seconds, Coburn just stood on the ice with the puck at his skates as the Tampa Bay players refused to be drawn in to attack.
Compelling hockey this wasn’t for both the spectators at the game and a U.S. national television audience.
“I could take three bites out of my dinner and then look up and they were still in the same spot,” said Toronto Maple Leafs coach Ron Wilson, who caught the game on TV. “I don’t know if I want to watch that, either.”
The stalemate finally ended when referee Rob Martell blew the whistle and ordered a defensive zone draw, which was the only option he has in accordance with the NHL rule book.
According to the rules, the onus is on the Flyers to try advancing the puck, even if the opposition refuses to aggressively fore-check.
When the teams finally got down to actually moving the puck, it was the Lightning who emerged with a 2-1 win in overtime, but the overall product didn’t rest well with some players.
“This games on National TV. … Way to sell it boys,” Leafs forward Joffrey Lupul tweeted.
“Tampa Bay Lightning are chipping away at our escrow 1-3-1 at a time,” Phoenix Coyotes forward Paul Bissonnette tweeted.
There have been several suggestions on how the NHL can rectify the problem, including a shot clock that would force the team in control of the puck to move it out of their own zone in a specified time or face a penalty.
Others have suggested the NHL should try to devise a way to make the neutral zone trap an illegal defence.
Wilson, for one, is not sure where the fix lies.
“Illegal defence?” he asked reporters in St. Louis before the Leafs’ game against the Blues Thursday. “Now you have to fore-check? How do you mandate that?”
Wilson said he is not a proponent of the trapping style favoured by the Lightning.
“That’s a little boring for me,” he said. “I can’t foresee us playing like that.”
Dean
M.Ed (Coaching)
Ch.P.C. (Chartered Professional Coach)
Game Intelligence Training
"Great education depends on great teaching."