Functional Path Training

Great Advice & Food for Thought

Some wise words of wisdom and some real food for thought from Starbucks CEO Howard Shultz: “Grow with discipline.  Balance intuition with rigor.  Innovate around the core.  Don’t embrace status quo.  Find new ways to see.  Never expect a silver bullet.  Get your hands dirty.  Listen with empathy and overcommunicate with transparency.  Tell your story, refusing to let others define you.  Use authentic experiences to inspire.  Stick to your values, they are your foundation.  Hold people accountable but give them the tools to succeed.  Make the tough choices; it’s how you execute that counts.  Be decisive in times of crisis.  Be nimble.  Find truth in trials and lessons in mistakes.  Be responsible for what you see, hear, and do. Believe.”

 

USA Track & Field Coaching Education – An Overview (Part Three)

This is Part Three of the original article that appeared in the IAAF Technical Journal that was published under the title "Coaches Education - a perspective," New Studies In Athletics, Vol. 6 # 4,1991, pp. 7-11

Can you teach someone to coach?  Coaching is definitely an art.  It is a feel for saying and doing the right thing at the right time.  I question if this can be taught.  On the other hand the technical aspects can be taught and coaching skills can be improved in this manner. Communication skills, leadership skills, and psychological skills all can be enhanced through education. All of this is dependent on the desire of the coach to want to be better.  Just because a coach attends a course and passes a test is no guarantee of that individual’s ability to coach. This is another reason that the focus should be on education rather certification.

Is there a different approach? Yes there are as many approaches as there are countries that have programs.  The key is does that system meet the needs of the athletics coaching community in that country.  I feel that a slower more methodical approach would have beneficial to our program. I think it is necessary to have a paid professional staff to institute a national level program.  More time should have been taken to assess the needs of the coaches at all levels of the sport.  Also more time should have been spent on exploring methods to bring the information to those who need it the most.

As in many other countries the geographical size of the country posed many problems. The foremost problem was one of basic logistics of assigning instructors and scheduling schools in the correct areas. There were also regional differences that should have been considered when designing a program for a country the size of the United States.  In certain areas the club programs are stronger and have more influence than the interscholastic programs.  Curriculum adjustments to account for this would have been helpful.  The fact that the program had minimum funding did not make the process any easier.  Fortunately due to attendance fees the program was able to support itself at a very minimal level.  This continues to be problem.  Basically the size and level of the program should be determined by the funding.  This may not necessarily be the ideal but it will allow for a level of excellence rather than a watered down program.                     

Coaching education must be an integral part of the total national development program.  The career of the coach transcends the career of the elite international class athlete.  One good coach produces a ripple effect. That coach will produce many good athletes, but along the way there will be many athletes who will go into coaching.  It is trite to say, but coach’s begat coaches.  Coaches are the foundation of a system.  A small investment in coaching education is a true long-term investment in quality development of a national program.

Realities of the modern coaching dictate that the coach cannot keep up with the volume of information necessary to stay current in all areas due to the information and knowledge explosion.  In the US the coach must be a generalist out of necessity. This is especially true for those coaches working at the beginning stages of the development process.  As the athlete rises through the system the coach must become increasingly more specialized to meet the changing needs of the athlete.  At no stage of the total coaching process should the athlete be limited in his or her development by a deficiency on the part of the coach.  This requires that as the athlete achieves the elite level of performance that the coach becomes the leader of a team of experts with one goal in mind, to make the athlete better. This requires task identification - What does a coach have to do relative to the development level of the athletes he is working with.  What can be done to make the job easier and the coach more efficient in performance? 

This logically leads to the areas of evaluation and accountability.  Is the material that is being taught being understood and used?  Is the coaching education program actually changing coaching behavior and improving the standard of coaching?  What are they actually learning in the program? Is the theory being transferred into practice?  Are the teaching and learning models that are being used valid?  All of these questions demand answers to insure that coaching education is viable.  A program that produces coaches that are not effective is not of value to the national system.  A measure of the success of coaches going through the program is how many athletes they have involved in their programs.  What have they done to promote the sport in their respective area, such as hosting competitions, clinics, or workshops?  In summary the coach has to be the center or focus of the development process for that process to have any long-term success.

All nations, regardless of development level, could profit from the new IAAF program.  The international scope of the program lends a perspective unavailable to any individual nation.  The development of a standardized international curriculum leading to an IAAF Diploma is a positive step.  Nations can build upon it to suit their individual needs using the IAAF program as a standard.  The coach is an essential spoke in the wheel of development regardless of the development level of the country.  The role of the coach relative to underdeveloped, emerging, and developed countries differs but the knowledge base necessary for  success is the same in all situations.

The development of the TAC Coaching Education program has been a tremendous experience for all those involved.  We have all gained a better insight into the coaching process.  Hopefully this brief overview of the experience will prove beneficial to others beginning their own program.

USA Track & Field Coaching Education – An Overview (Part Two)

Part Two of the article that appeared in the IAAF Technical Journal it was published under the title "Coaches Education - a perspective," New Studies In Athletics, Vol. 6 # 4,1991, pp. 7-11

The curriculum is composed of two basic components:  sport science and event specific.  The goal in each area was to teach fundamental principles that the coaches could immediately apply. It was designed so that coach with little or no background in sport science or coaching could understand the material.  Evaluation at level I consisted of a multiple choice, open book, take home exam.

To meet the needs of the athletic community as it has been traditionally structured in the US the program was structured into levels.  The three levels are: 

Level I - Focus on coaches who are working with club, junior high school, and high school age athletes. Provides broad base of knowledge in all events with an emphases on teaching basic skills and fundamental understanding of sport science.  Level II - Focuses on coaches who are working with national caliber athletes - Specialization in an event group. Provides in depth coverage of sport science.  Level III - Focuses on coaches who are working with elite athletes at the national and international level with specialization in an individual event. Provides in depth understanding of the sports science aspects of that particular event.

The levels are intended to be hierarchical in that one would be built upon the other in a continually expanding knowledge base.  There was much discussion as to the distinction between the levels. It has not always been clear where one stops and the other begins.  I am sure this will be a continuing debate which will occur everywhere that there are levels.  They were designed to meet the needs of the coaches at all levels of the sport.

One controversial aspect of the levels was the "Grandfather" issue.  There were those people in the sport who had coached a number of years and by the nature of their knowledge and experience felt that they deserved certification beyond Level I. With our fundamental philosophy of including everyone in the program a policy was developed that was good for the program and those individuals.  They were asked to attend a Level I school to gain an understanding of the terminology and the process.  Then they applied to the level they felt their knowledge and experience dictated.  Very few people have elected to exercise this option once they realized the additional knowledge they could gain by going through the program in it's entirety. 

At this point, Level I and II are fully operational.  Level III is in the final planning and development stages.  In retrospect there was possibly too much of a hurry to proceed to Level II.  Therefore the committee is taking more time to develop Level III.  Without question the focus should be on Level I where there is the greatest need and the necessity for the greatest number of coaches.

One of the primary issues that has arisen is that of certification versus education. When the program was in its developmental stages the focus was on certification. It quickly became apparent that this had too many negative connotations.  Education shed a more positive light and this became the major thrust of the program. Hopefully the program is just the start of an educational experience for the coach, one that he or she will be motivated to continue for self improvement on their own outside the courses.

 

USA Track & Field Coaching Education – An Overview (Part One)

A couple of weeks ago when going through some old computer files I came across an article I wrote on the USA Track & Field (Then known as TAC) Coaching Education program. This weekend I will be going to the USOTC in Chula Vista for some planning meetings on the coaching education program. As I have gotten back involved over the last eighteen months I have become increasingly aware of how few people know the history and origins of the program. The programs started with a meeting at the 1981 TAC Convention in Reno. A group of us felt that we needed to start a coaching education program. An ad hoc sub-committee of the men’s and women’s development committees was formed. I was chair of the committee; the other members were Joe Vigil, Gary Winckler and Al Baeta. We were charged with coming back with a specific proposal to be presented at the next convention. I presented the proposal and it was accepted after much vocal opposition from a group of coaches who viewed it as a threat to their power within the organization. I became the first Chairman of the program and the other members and organizers’ were Gary Winckler and Joe Vigil. The budget we were allocated was $3,000! Somehow we were able to pull it off. We trained out first group of instructors in December of 1983. At that time we also defined and refined the Level I curriculum. The first schools were offered in January of 1984. The first Level II School was offered in December 1986. Today it represents one of the most successful programs within USA Track & Field. It certainly has its faults and it’s strengths. I have chosen to get back involved in an advisory capacity to help move the program forward in a positive direction and to hold to the ideals of the founders of the program. To give a complete overview here is the article that appeared in the IAAF Technical Journal it was published under the title "Coaches Education - a perspective," New Studies In Athletics, Vol. 6 # 4,1991, pp. 7-11:

I am writing this from the perspective of my experience with the development of the TAC coaching education program in the United States.  The US was one of the last major athletics nations to adopt a coaching education program in 1984. I will draw comparisons and conclusions for the development of coaching education in athletics throughout the world.  This should not be interpreted as an attempt to portray the TAC program as a model for others to follow.  Instead it is an attempt to share on our experience to help others to develop their own programs. There are common problems and solutions that transcend language, political ideology, religious beliefs and the athletic developmental level of the country.  We must focus on these commonalities in order to improve the quality of coaching worldwide.

Historical Perspective

The TAC program evolved out of a perceived need of a small group of coaches and the encouragement of national coaching coordinator, Berny Wagner, in Dec 1980. For many years the US had a relatively unchallenged position of leadership in the international arena.  This domination was the result of several factors: The educational system in the US provided coaches and facilities for the development of athletes. There was and continues to be a large, healthy talent pool. The country was not devastated by war and famine. There were educated coaches from the beginning of an athlete's career. There was excellent competition at all development levels.  There were excellent facilities that were accessible to all. 

It is my opinion that the role coaching played in this success has never received due credit. This is especially true for the coaches at the beginning levels. The system was and continues to be a transport system where the athletes were passed from coach to coach as they progressed through their athletic career. This never allowed the club coaches, junior high and high school coaches to receive the recognition they deserved for identifying and nurturing these youngsters. Ultimately the coach who was associated with them at the apex of their career received the credit. Nonetheless the beginning coaches usually were teachers or recreation leaders who had paid positions and continued with their jobs of getting the youth off to a good start by providing direction and competitive experience.

By the early 1970's this supremacy was being challenged by many nations of the world. Events that the US had previously dominated were now closely contested. This all began to change as educational funding was reduced.  Mandatory daily physical education was gradually eliminated until today only one state has mandatory daily physical education at all levels. Physical education that had formerly provided a core of youngsters who had a basic fitness level and sound fundamental movement skill was taken away.

In addition there was a trend to specialization and early tracking in sports other than track and field, which cut down on participation. This also had the effect of reducing the number of coaches involved.  Formerly the football or basketball coaches who had assisted and coached several events in track now did not help because they were busy running their off season programs. The net result was to shift greater responsibility onto fewer coaches. This also coincided with a period when a number of experienced coaches became eligible to retire which further reduced the pool of available coaches.

The growth of girls and women's programs added another dimension.  Their inclusion in the scholastic and collegiate program was a positive step, but the net effect was to put more pressure on an already declining number of qualified coaches. Conflict arose between club and school coaches in sharing athletes.  All this served to weaken the talent pool of qualified coached available especially at the beginning levels.

The ultimate solution, especially for the schools desperate for coaches, was the so-called "walk on" coach or "rent-a-coach", a non-faculty member who was interested and willing They were usually given a small stipend. There was no assurance that they had any qualifications to coach aside from their interest in doing so.

It was this background that lead to the formation of the TAC Coaching Education program. The goal was to provide beginning coaches with a basic body of knowledge in the sport sciences and the actual events. This would provide the background for them to effectively coach beginning athletes at the junior high school and high school level. 

From the formation of an ad hoc committee to explore the concept to the first Level I school it took three years. This was done entirely by volunteers with limited funding. The committee examined certification programs from many different nations. The final program borrowed the best aspects of many programs and synthesized them into one applicable to the situation in the US.

Developing a cadre of trained instructors is the key to any program. Qualified, motivated, and committed instructors are essential to the success of the program. This proved especially difficult because the people originally chosen were already extensively involved in many aspects of coaching and administration and they would be volunteering their time for this program. Instructors were chosen for their proven excellence in teaching the fundamentals of track and field, organizational ability, and geographic distribution.  The latter was necessary in order to insure that the program was truly national in scope. The second generation of instructors has come from coaches who have been through the Level I course. This has proven to be very helpful, especially in consistency of presentation. More emphasis must be placed on the training of instructors in order to maintain a high standard.

Championship Season - Swimming

My favorite time of the training years is the so-called championship season. I say so-called because champions shine all year by winning workouts and preparing for this special time. This is the time leading into and including all the big championship meets. This is the time where all the hard work pays off and the time to shine and compete. I am privileged to work with three swim clubs as a consultant on their dryland training - Carmel Swim Club, Carmel Indiana, Dynamo Swim Club, Atlanta and Sarasota YMCA Sharks. Because I live in Sarasota I have been able to spend more time with the Sharks. It has been really neat to see the kids grow in their ability to train and race. All the clubs are age group clubs so literally week-to-week you see the results of growth and development, a factor that must be continually taken into consideration. This is the time of the year when it is tempting to do more or change something. I learned along time ago that this is the time of the year when you do less and you dance the last dance with who brought you to the dance. You can’t make up for something you have not done in your preparation at this time. This is a time to get the head right and sharpen the focus. In dryland this is what I call the Hybrid phase that consists of two to three sessions a week of short sharp workouts that are selected from what makes the swimmer feel good. There must be enough of a stimulus to stabilize the strength gains, but not too much. It varies by individual, gender and stroke. This is where the art of coaching is paramount. Now we all get to paint on a bigger canvas.

 

Cut to the Chase

Focus clearly only on what needs to be done to get training results that translate in competition performance. This demands focus on the training tasks that are meaningful. Eliminate the nice to do activities that make you tired but don’t make you better. It is so trite to say but less is more. Find out what works and keep fine-tuning and tweaking that to achieve continual adaptation. Variety and variation for the sake of variety will lead to mixed results. Have a very specific objective for each workout. Everything in the workout should be in pursuit of that objective. At the end of the workout evaluate – was the objective achieved? if so why? If not why not? Adjust subsequent training accordingly. Always put the workout in context of the whole training plan, never lose sight of the cumulative effect of training. As I have said many times in this blog one workout cannot make an athlete, but one workout can break an athlete.

 

Oblique & Intercostals Injuries

Oblique strains and pulls and intercostals strains are injuries that you seldom saw or heard of fifteen to twenty years ago. The two injuries are different injuries; I think one mistake is to group them together. Now they are both a very common occurrence in baseball both in pitchers and hitters. If you look closely at the mechanism of the injuries based on the demands placed on the body in the activities that cause these injuries it is clear that both are force reduction injuries. They occur in deceleration of the trunk after a violent ballistic action of swinging a bat or throwing a pitch. As with any injury it is important to thoroughly assess what is being done in the training/prevention area and what is not being done. My observation is that the ratio of actually preparing to pitch and hit is out of balance. There is too much swinging of the bat with out the requisite lead up activities that prepare for the deceleration forces exerted in a diagonal rotational pattern. With pitchers they pitch more but throw less, by that I mean a structured long toss program where they have to extent themselves through ranges of motion outside of their normal pitching motion is not emphasized enough. The same would be true with striking and swinging activities to prepare for hitting. In addition there is more emphasis on weight training that is not specific enough to the demands of hitting and pitching. There are still too many traditional weight exercises with emphasis on load and force production mostly in sagittal plane. In addition the too much of the “core work” is still done in prone & supine postures and too isolated. Not enough emphasis on catching and activities that force the trunk to decelerate.

The ultimate reason for these injuries goes far back to what the current generation of players did and did not do when they were kids growing up. Most began playing baseball at an early age when they were identified as being talented and probably specialized early and prepared by pitching more and swinging the bat more. In essence accumulating stress without any preparation for the imposed stresses. Most did not have regular physical education as that has gone the way of dinosaur. The surest way to strengthen the intercostals and the oblique’s is to climb, hang, swing from overhead ladders and crawl all activities inherent in play and work in past generations. The current generation of players did not get this either in free play or in physical education. This should force us to reconsider how we train and prepare these athletes from younger ages on up to the professional level. I know this sounds old school but take a step back and think about how it can be done. It can be done, but it must be done in systematic manner beginning at the youngest ages with comprehensive preparation to play activities that are structured into the start of practices at every level. These activities should be as movement rich as possible including climbing, hanging, suspended swings and crawls. Mind you this is not to be done in a boot camp environment but in a structured playful teaching environment regardless of the level of development. It is not real complicated; it is very basic but necessary. That is both the long term and short-term solution.

Communication – Getting the Message Across

Effective coaching is about sending and receiving messages. Notice I said sending and receiving. It is a two way process. Effective messages are clear, on point and brief. The message should be conveyed with appropriate emotion and content that elicits the desired action or response. Words create images and images create action so select the words carefully to communicate the message you desire. Don’t forget body language and tone of voice, they often speak louder than any words. If the message is in writing select the words even more carefully, make it more brief and exact than a verbal message. Ultimately the effect of the message is based on what the receiver of the message hears and sees not what you say or do. Sometimes it is not what you say as much as how you say it that counts.

 

Pay The Piper

There are no shortcuts, crash programs or quick fixes that will get you there faster. You will always have to pay the piper whether it is sooner or later. It is better to pay up front by being very thorough in the development process with a balanced program that builds a solid foundation. All components of fitness must be trained at all times of the training year and the career, just the proportion and emphasis changes with advancing training age and proficiency. At younger training ages, especially during periods of rapid growth and development it is tempting to try to accelerate the process, because they can but they will pay for it later on. My concern today is that young athletes over compete and under prepare in terms of sound fundamental training. They can continue to advance on talent and competitiveness and then the roof caves in either with serous injuries, performance stagnation or performance decrement. Pay the piper, take care of fundamentals heed the wisdom of the body and train appropriate for the athlete’s level of development. Rome was not built in a day; training accumulates day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month and year-to-year. Take time and do it right.

 

Coaching Art and Science

Good effective coaching demands a careful blend of art AND science. It is not an either or proposition. Modern coaching necessitates that the coach have a sound foundation in sports science which means the coach is educated in sports science, but is not a sport scientist. You can learn the science in school or by reading, you can’t learn to coach in a classroom, online or in a book. You must get out and practice coaching.  Coaching is something you are not something you do. Day to day coaching demands artistry to achieve results. In today’s world, with the stress on science and technology it is too easy to forget the art and focus on the science. The words of Bill Sweetenham from the Global Coaching House last summer in London sum it all up quite nicely: “ Science is only useful if it makes the coach a better artist.”