Five Things I've Learned About Coaching
3/27/2009

Five Things I've Learned About Coaching

By: Eric Leary  

We are products of our environment.  I didn't come up with that one, but I can definitely find it to ring true as I look back on my time spent on the ball fields, in the dugout, and on the sidelines the past eighteen years.  I have been lucky to work with exceptional athletes, but more often extraordinary people.  I have been influenced from some of the great minds of sport both locally and from a distance.  I have garnered suggestions from colleagues, mentors, family (... thanks honey), and even the peanut gallery.  Like many, I also have found the ability to relate a lot of what is not "sport" to imbed itself into what I do in working with student-athletes.  Not a lot of difference is found from the techniques, relationships and perseverance I have found useful in my classroom, on the field ... or even training my lab (who always thinks I'm smart, no matter the score).

With all of this in mind, I have tried to condense and convey an abridged list of the "best lessons" I've learned in my seemingly short career (though some may say I've done this far too long and need to hang it up ... that's straight from the peanut gallery).  So, with candor I'll share with you some lessons you may already know, or perhaps a few you've never considered.  If this list is helpful, go forth.  If the following seems ho-hum "got it" stuff, consider yourself ahead of the curve (or ahead of me anyway).

Planning is necessary.

As coaches must be planners in order to accommodate the ability to cover fundamental, schemes, physical preparedness and at least a gazillion other facets associated with the ever intricate game of baseball, the necessity to prioritize and set aside time to learn is most important.  Bottom line - baseball can be overwhelming in its tendency to "hi-jack" a practice plan.  How many times has a session within practice extended too long and run into, or replaced other objectives of the day?  With that said, it becomes paramount to dedicate the scheduling of coverage for the most imperative operations.  Spend less time on events and situations that rarely happen - carefully notice I did not say NO TIME.  All the while remember, in order to gain proficiency one must work on it.  The answer is to find balance in what to do, and how long it should take.  Factoring in the "how to's" and the "who's" is critical to achieving the right plan.  The time honored belief that we get out what we put in, warrants consideration in planning practice time.

Not only does the time of practice need to be set aside for bettering - say pitchers mechanics, hitting backside, or executing bunt coverages - the pace at which it is administered can be critical.  This can be a sticky predicament, as the learning styles and abilities of the players dealt with play a significant role in determining how fast to expect mastery.  Young inexperienced players expectantly may need a slower pace and more instruction, while veterans of high caliber only a brush up on goals like hit and run, cuts and relays, or pick-offs.  Best advice, be realistic and choose to cover items that are necessary for the club to be successful.  Furthermore, providing age and skill guided instruction enhances the success and may resolve some of the time/pace issues.  Generally, simple and repeatable concepts, schemes, and drills that can be expanded or evolved to serve a group that has moved forward will work best.

Consistency has its benefits.

A motto for this lesson may be, "the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow."  In working with young people, providing a consistent approach to teaching can be critical to supply necessary fundamentals and understanding of objectives.  In other words, "if we do it different everyday, we won't know how to do it."  This is not to say that changes are always wrong.  That can be very true in routine from time to time, or even in schemes and principles; whether it be slight adjustments or dramatic shifts.  Those changes really rely on finding what is best for the team and its ability to succeed in a given context.  The consistency of significance is that with which the coach fosters a learning environment.  It is determining "the way" to teach a skill, or run a play, and then selling it.  Some coaches use the same approaches to pitching, hitting and defensive schemes year after year and collect the benefits.  Yet, others employ alternative measures and re-route often, and still seem to be equally successful.  Which one is right?  Both can be correct, depending on the coach, the players or the environment.  It stands to reason that the consistency is dependent on the way the teaching, and coaching is implemented.

Consistency also rings true, perhaps even more so, for how the coach handles situations.  If fairness and reason are the modeling forces for dealing with events on the team, the coach has a stable force to create consistency.  This does not mean that every situation has to be handled exactly the same way.  Quite the contrary, as situations are uniquely different and demand all factors to be considered when leveling justice.  Discipline seems to be a universal feature to teams that are handled with consistency.  Understand that discipline is not synonymous with "no fun."  Discipline means everyone knows what to do and what to expect, and then act accordingly.  Teams with consistent coaching do not let the individual decisions on the team impact the overall goals of the season - distractions are non-existent, or eliminated.

Responding to failure is critical.

Finding success on the diamond can be as elusive as a pearl for some, but almost effortless for others.  This is true not only for individuals, but also for teams, and yes, even coaches.  Thus, it becomes difficult to accurately pinpoint failure as only those events when a batter makes and out, the fielder makes an error, or the team loses.  Failure can be more appropriately determined as when performance does not meet an expected, achievable standard.  Even then, careful consideration should be taken to analyze all the factors as to why the result was insufficient.  Making sure the goals are achievable should definitely be considered.  Honest assessments are needed to first recognize failure.  Understand that the results do not always equate the execution - players and teams can do everything right and still fail to some extent.  Conversely, failing attempts or approaches will occasionally provide success.  Do not argue with those successes, but moving on without recognition and attempt to fix will surely thwart future endeavors.  When failure is more easily determined avoid ignoring it, making excuses or the deflections of responsibility so popular within the culture ("my bad").  Rest assured, failure will happen when competition and difficult skill meet.

The real issue with failure is how to respond.  Comprehending how the failure happened is a first step in supplying an adequate response.  One of the first places to look for in the "why it happened," is to make sure the understanding of the skill, or scheme, was available.  When people fail in something that they are capable of doing (an important aspect to consider), it is may be due to  a lack of understanding.  This is widely visible when working with players at a new level, or dealing with a new coach.  Simply grasping the concept through explanation, or even demonstration may not be enough.  Sometimes the failure is necessary.  It is a harsh teacher, but often an effective one.  In this scenario, providing a "safe" environment for failure (at practice or in a decided game) may be an effective learning tool.  Failure can be the catalyst to bring about the correct responses to avoid future disappointments.  Responding to failure then involves the recognition of the shortcomings and a move to correct.  It is a key element in player's, a team's, and a coach's journey towards goal fulfillment.

Pressure is a tool for performance.

Providing student-athletes with the appropriate inspiration to improve performance is sometimes a challenge that brings debatable answers.  Different coaches have and will embark upon diverging paths to aid their players in "seeing the light."  Often openly displaying their personality in getting a point across, yellers yell and the soothers soothe.  Pressure can be those verbal interjections of a game or practice that calls attention to the task, or details of the event.  But, pressure can also be physical punishments, expanded benefits, or undesired consequences.  It can be the providing for, or the taking away.  Not attempting to cast a preference for the right or wrong way to bring a change in behavior, only understand that a wide variety of techniques and tactics have and will be used by coaches, teachers, and mentors.  Simply, pressure is a psychological tool that becomes the trigger for performance.

The issue with pressure is the appropriateness with the athlete.  This is determined often by a maturity level - the players must be able to handle the pressure in order to respond to it.  Every team is not the same, and even more importantly, every player is not the same.  Finding out what pressure works best can bring the highest satisfaction to both the player and the coach.  With that said, pressure is not always readily accepted and tough choices are often made when it is implemented.  But remembering that the player understands the expectations before the pressure is applied becomes critical to it being a benefit.  While the days of coaches going about their routines with the notion that only "their way" is the remedy for improving performance may be long gone, it bears to mention that mass pressure to the entire team is necessary to bring a point of emphasis to the collective attention of the group.  Used effectively, and again appropriately, pressure generates the right responses from the members of the team.

Relationships matter.

If all the before mentioned lessons are building blocks to a coaching career, then this one is the mortar that binds them together.  The ability to relate to the people that are involved in the process is of understated importance.  This holds true across the spectrum of individuals that may have impact on a team's success - players, families, other coaches, administrators, the media, and yes ... even officials.  Cubing this concept down to imply that coaches should be all about "hugs and flowers" would be missing the point.  Relationships involve the effective interaction with other human beings.  That means communication is meaningful and clear.  That means consideration of others' needs are taken into account and valued as worthy.  Best coaches have the ability to relate to people in ways beyond giving signs and directing runners from the third base box.

All of the components of coaching, or aiding someone's attempt to improve their standing, are made with more clarity when the one directing the team looks beyond the wins and losses to build a caring relationship with the players.  When coaches look beyond themselves and recognize their opportunity to positively impact people's lives, the end results are win-win ... regardless of the record.  Simply inquiring with a "how's it going?" ... or a "what's going on in English class?" ... may be the catalyst to prove to players that this coach looks at them as a person and not just a shortstop, a 5-hole hitter, or a starting pitcher.  Relationships that are built on truth and trust have a better chance of survival when times are adverse.  Thus, knowing that this game doles out adversity in healthy portions should lead coaches to use truth and trust as the foundations for team relationships. 

In closing, these lessons have been my own.  I cannot say that I have perfected any of them.  Yet upon identifying their worthiness, I am striving towards the goal of executing each of them.  Also, in writing these lessons in such a way, I have come to realize their connectivity to one another.  Through my planning, consistency becomes central to the processes of coaching, and thus allows me to deal with players' and my own failure more appropriately.  The pressure I use to respond to failure on the team is more effective when I have planned with realistic expectations, and offer consistent approaches to learning.  Again, all of these goals are enhanced when truth and trust are at the core of my relationships with those involved.  As my reflections are often therapeutic, I thank you for allowing me the opportunity to share with you.  Hope your spring is going well and good luck!