COACHING IS THE ONLY JOB… in which we hand over our 18-year-olds and expect them to be turned into not just winners, but better people.

     "Try taking charge of 12 or 14 kids of varying dispositions and backgrounds, each with his own hang-ups, crises, love interests, and abilities – and some of them with cars."

     "Every knock on your door will produce a problem. You think every coach is a Father Flanagan? You think there are no bad boys? Oh yes there are! And some very bad ones. And it’s that realization that makes us so deeply ambivalent… (Jenkins, 2001)."

     The interaction between psychology and sport can be a very viable thing. Through the application of fundamentals and scientific theory, psychologists and coaches can motivate athletes into achieving the peak potential not only in their sport, but in other facets of their competitive lives, such as self-confidence, a strong work ethic, perseverance, and the subordination of egos and individual agendas to team goals.

     At the same time, coaches have to know when they reach the point of diminishing returns in their effort to maximize performance through the traditional exercise physiology. Most coaches subscribe to the same kind of strength and conditioning regimens, nutrition, skill development, game preparation and competitive strategy.

     Though we may not have as yet learned how to maximize our athlete’s physical development, we are fast approaching it. The next step in the growth potential will probably be achieved through the maximal application of psychological theory.

     Coaches who are bold enough to accept this premise and work at it may very well wind up with a huge competitive advantage.

     A pilot study with the St. Joseph’s University (PA) basketball team produced a feedback loop in the form of a statistical ranking of each player after every league game (Barker, 2001). The ambiguity of the roles, team hierarchy, and playing time were eliminated through this objective, quantifiable reporting system, and it was no accident that the team’s league record improved from 7-9 to 14-2.

Case 1:
A rookie pro player led his team in scoring, out-performing all of his teammates throughout the season. Extremely introverted, he never accepted the team leadership role. He declined to address the team on the court, the bench, or in the locker room.

No one else attempted to fill the void in leadership and the team underachieved.

Case 2:
Lamont intimidated everyone with his size, strength, play and clever but acerbic demeanor. He always held court in the back of the team bus on road trips, offering each teammate a criticism either in terms of his poor play or his inability to get the ball to Lamont enough.

Despite leading the team in scoring and rebounding, Lamont forced the head coach to drop him from the team. The team had gone 1-11 with him and then 4-6 with his charismatic replacement.

     As a rule, a team will suffer whenever its alpha leader is replaced by a lesser light. The burden can place a tremendous strain on the replacement, and the coach will have to provide a lot of support for him.

     The coach must always control over the selection of the team leader. He may encourage input from the players and assistant coaches, but he must remain the "majority shareholder," holding 51% of the vote for team leader.

     If the leadership pool appears limited, the problem of weak leadership can be managed by rotating the role among the superior candidates.

     Coaches have the opportunity to bond with their insecure athletes by responding with empathy to player problems on and off the court-making sure to be generous in bestowing pats on the back and high fives for positive efforts. It may appear simple minded, but it works. The coach should always be looking for ways to strengthen the psyches of his athletes and to identify himself as a "source of strength, care and calmness to the players (McAdam, 2001)." These are key ingredients in the ideal coach-player relationship. Coaches who invest time in cultivating trust and a secure bond with their players will be in a position to help every athlete achieve his full potential. The psychological challenge has been to identify the components needed for a positive player-coach relationship and to understand how to develop and maintain them for the mutual benefit of all team members.

Behavioral Learning

     A player makes a bad play and his coach screams at him. He tightens up and commits another miscue. If this pattern is continued over several games, bad things will happen.

     Initially, the coach may react only to a particular kind of miscue, such as a missed shot. The player may respond to the coach’s remark by missing his next shot.

     As this continues, the player can work up a psychosis about making a mistake and incurring the coach’s wrath. Result: Whenever the coach yells for any reason, the player will follow up with an error.

     As the downward spiral accelerates, the player will loose confidence, perform poorly and force the coach to reduce his role on the team. A highly capable player can become completely incompetent due to a conditioned and negative response by his coach.

     On the positive side, some athletes will play well on a particular field or court against a certain opponent. When he does this again and maybe even a third time, he may begin to feel that he will always have a great game against Team X of Player Y or whenever he plays on a particular court.

     How can coaches ensure positive outcomes on a more frequent basis? By providing a reward after each performance of the desired behavior.

     Where does punishment fit into this method of learning? According to Skinner, "punishing a response merely alters the person to what should not be done while providing an example of a constructive alternative. Punishment is generally a rather weak form of behavioral control (McAdam, 2001)."

     The coaching staff must assume responsibility for deciding what behaviors will be reinforced, what behaviors will be punished, and what behaviors will be ignored.

     Coaches have the opportunity to redefine the reward structure by eliminating all entitlements. Coaches who promise players a place on the team, or a certain amount of playing time, or a starting position should begin drafting their letter of resignation. They will have no rewards left for positive reinforcement.

     Only punishment will be left as a means of shaping behavior. Since the athlete has been given everything, the only way to change the environment and get his attention is by taking something away.

     Coaches must clearly define their expectations with regard to such basics behaviors as arriving on time for practice, working hard every day, and showing respect for others.

     Athletes who do these things will be given opportunity to make the team, practice every day, play in the next game and participate with the team throughout the season.

     Negative or undesirable behavior will be penalized by seating the offender on the end of the bench and having him watch rather than play the game. ("When you are ready to play, let us know.")

     Coaches have to understand, however, that anytime a player feels that he is never going to complimented for anything, he isn’t going to expect any positive reinforcement from the coach or value any of the feed back he gets from him.

     Truism: The simplest and perhaps most effective motivational tool (praise) won’t work unless it is consistently applied and there is a positive relationship between coach and player.