Reply To: Game Intelligence / Decision Training

OK this is a continuation from Dave's comments on the forum "Clearing the Defensive Zone"…

Dave, I want to comment on your middle paragraph and provide my insights:

"A coach I worked with this summer had a great method of stopping play, questioning what went wrong, waking them through it the correct way slowly, then sending the players back to line (if it was a drill) or back to the original position (scrimmage) and starting play back up with a successful pass/play. I liked this method because it went beyond pointing out what players did wrong, walked them through doing it right, then started back up at a pace closer to competition. The one drawback to this is the players not involved in the play need to be paying attention or they will recreate the same errors. Also the players tend to get frustrated with all the stoppages of play, but it sends a strong message that you need to do it right or we'll stand around all day/night until we do and everyone is accountable. If they really can't perform the skills needed to do what you are asking, then then it is time to back up and do more simple skill drills. Then come back and try again. (Tom's books have great ideas for teaching the skills through progressions and games to apply them in, by the way.)"

1) Love the questioning nature of the coach – instead of 'telling'.

2) How often does the coach need to stop the play; and when? (The art of coaching.) Or can the coach accomplish what he wants by talking to the kids between reps while they are waiting to go again – rather than stop the play? Sounds like he is stopping the play too much for my liking, but I wasn't there to see it.

3) RE: the drawback you mention (players not involved / frustration with "all the stoppages of play") – I go back to, Why does one need to stop the play so much?

BELOW IS WHAT I BELIEVE IS THE SECRET TO SUCCESSFUL COACHING (and the endemic problem with traditional coaching – patterned drills that don't reflect games therefore detraining our mind and stunting our Game Sense; no objective measures and no accountability):

If you want to increase attention with those waiting (and limit frustration), play games that involve scoring (of some sort – not just goals… but successful shots on net, decisions, good passes tape to tape, whatever it is – but 'it' / 'they' need to be measurable.)

Examine your work:rest ratio… keep more kids more active! Kids LOVE to PLAY!

Hold the individuals / team accountable for their scores / outcomes. If you play Smart Transitional Games or some of Tom's games, everyone is involved with less 'down time'. If the 'losers' have to do a punishment at the end, this sharpens intensity, focus and execution (not to mention readiness because the kids are competing; not doing mindless repetitions of traditional drills where nobody keeps score and nobody cares if you miss the net, make a bad pass, etc!

By removing the 'drill in isolation' and placing it into a realistic game-like situation (under pressure), you kill multiple birds with one stone: skills practice, pressure, heads up, decision-making, outcomes, accountability… THE GAME IS THE BEST TEACHER and IMPLICIT TEACHING IS THE BEST OF ALL. The players receive feedback when they make a good or bad decision and it results in a goal against, a turnover, etc. It's a tangible result.

If you put two groups of equal players into an explicit learning scenario and an implicit learning scenario, the implicit scenario players are more resilient under stress… they will be less likely to 'choke' under pressure… IE in a game, when it counts!

Real-life experience, under competitive conditions, inoculates us against stresses of the real thing (a game). This way, we are training for game conditions. The Spartans had it right – train incredibly hard so when they went into battle, it was (relatively to them), a picnic!

99.99% of ALL coaches / teams, do it WRONG! They use patterned drills… then wonder why they struggle to compete during games! So-called pro players and coaches included! I have coached pros before several years ago and again last year; it was evident first-hand. It is my opinion (and John's) that they were scared to compete! They didn't want to look bad in front of their peer group… who does? But to be the ultimate competitor, you need to park your ego and embrace failure. Fall down, try new things, compete and if you lose, ask why and try again. Persevere. Failure should steel one's resolve to get back in the saddle and try a new way… cause the old way isn't working! (Definition of insanity: do the same thing and expect different results.) The pros aren't used to competing or training competitively. They 'compete' 82 times per year in the NHL (league games); practices are de-training their competitive spirit (drills, more boring drills!) and then the coaches ask the players to 'turn it on' and compete in games. Counter-intuitive to me!

Not trying to pick on Dave as he is merely relating what he saw. But I am trying to sharpen our collective coaching awareness to become better coaches! I challenge each one of you to think about 'how' and 'why' you coach. Can you identify weaknesses and possible solutions? At the end of the day, my rant is to inspire you to become a better coach for your players…

Comments / Rebuttals / Discussion? Looking forward to it.

(Dave, thanks for firing me up and inspiring me to write something 'original' rather than posting articles!)
—————————————-
Dean, Dave, MMB (I don't know why your posts don't appear unless I log in) it is great to see some discussion here. I have been posting for weeks in isolation and no response; even though I have posted some pretty controversial concepts.
Great.
That is why this site is here. I would love to read other coaches opinions.
Horst Wein sets up tournaments and games in modified space and number of players and they play. When they are having trouble he has them do corrective exercises (drills) to deal with it and then back to the game.