Coaching Coaches

One of the main things that I did was to have a conversation with the coaches individually. Usually in post season evaluations (but it could also happen in random conversation). I wanted to find out what they wanted to improve on.  Give them ownership of their own improvement.  Very similar to how we might operate with a player.  After I was able to obtain that information, I would find resources to help them achieve that particular goal.  I would always have my own input, but usually there was a mutual understanding from both parties.  

If it was on the field (scheme, technique, etc.) or off the field (rapport building, positive communication, whatever), I made it my purpose to support that cause as long as it worked toward the improvement of the program.  I always searched for articles, clinic notes, videos, books, or whatever I could find to assist.    

With younger assistants, I would establish a few clear and measurable objectives and hold them accountable for it.  This can be the difficult part and, in my opinion, a trait that separates a good HC from the pack.  Communication of this aspect is very important. We all know that coaches have a certain level of ego.  However, any good coach will accept the challenge and allow the HC to "help him" reach the goals that he indicated he would like to achieve.  EVERY coach needs goals, or they and their coaching will get stale.

It is especially difficult when you have coaches that are older or have been coaching a lot longer.  Younger HC's have to be very clear with their communication, "okay coach, these are the three things you want to work on? Anything else? Ok cool. Just so we're clear, if I see something, you trust my judgment and it's okay to mention something to you? Ok, cool."  From a psychological standpoint, it puts a thought in the mind of the assistant that he's not above being approached about something.  In some cases, it might even be advised to reveal a few things you (the HC) would like to work on to show your own willingness to improve.  The "reciprocal relationship" for younger coaches can sometimes ease the tension. But it is vital for the younger HC to never loose his position of authority among the staff.  On that basis, I speak from experience.

In short, it's difficult to coach guys (grown men) on things they don't want to be coached on. In some cases, you have to make some concessions or compromises without forfeiting the things you feel are vital. I would use the same format for younger guys. Have them reflect and search out the areas they want to improve in, give your own input, establish some measurable objectives, provide resources, implement some strategies, and help them get there.  

Younger guys will need room to grow.  Mistakes will happen.  Just remember, regular communication on the objectives is the key.

I totally agree with same scheme at all three levels. It takes hiring the right people that are loyal to the goals of the program. I've seen some football programs in our area that run totally different schemes at each level, and those are the programs that historically struggle every year.

Similar to what fantom said about programs that treat teams as autonomous entities, I've seen too many HC's treat each level's staff as an autonomous entity. If a HC has a problem with anything he sees, both he and his assistants need to be comfortable addressing it. On this board, we like using the phrase "You see it, you coach it." That's true for all your levels. So, if you're the varsity HC and your freshmen aren't tackling properly, it is your responsibility to approach your freshmen coaches and figure out what the heck is going on. You have to actually coach your coaches.

I guess what I'm saying is, the best thing a varsity HC can do to help his lower level staff is to clearly express his vested interest in the team and have a clear line of communication with them. I've seen too many varsity guys talk crap about the JV guys they're supposed to be helping and then getting mad when their junior LBs can't read, drop, run, or tackle.

Are varsity position coaches taking ownership of that position on the lower level?

Attachment DeletedI give this to all coaches every year, and review it with my new coaches when I agree to bring them on. Its a good starting point.

the biggest point you made was VERTICAL CONTINUITY

seems the majority of our lower levels 
A. know more than us at the varsity level
B. don't care about vertical continuity
C. they are all chasing that elusive freshman/JV championship ring

dcohio
Nice post you ever need a job look me up. I could sure use coaches like with that attitude.

Thanks for posting that info. coach.  As usual, very helpful stuff.

And there is nothing wrong with those guys, probably functions better with a few "cogs" as long as they work.

I erased it but when I'm HC at Sister Catherine's Girls of the Poor I'm going to remember the "More on field responsibility, less off the field responsibility" philosophy.  I think that would be huge, may create resentment from some of the other guys but if they aren't in to splitting up coaching responsibilities than that should be the trade off.

It's like the old saying goes, "everyone wants to harvest, but no one wants to plow."

I really like the phrase "vertical continuity."  In education we call it vertical teaming.  Same concept.

I also appreciate that you brought up an uncomfortable part of coaching, which is knowing when it's time to cut someone loose. Without straying too much from the OP, I experienced a lack of continuity in my first couple years as HC.  I was in a smaller community with very few quality coaches.  In short, I had a program with little to no vertical continuity.  

When I took a new job, I promised myself that I would never allow that to happen again.  It wasn't fair to the kids for me to bring them less than the best.  I would tell the kids that often.  When my staff looked like a skeleton crew, kids would ask if anyone else is coming in to help.  I would assure them that when I found a person I felt was worthy of being around them, I would hire that person. I likened it to a divorced parent being very careful about bringing people they dated around their children.  

I have unfortunately fired numerous coaches over the years.  Most of them were mutual agreements.  They left knowing that they didn't fulfill the requirements that we discussed upon being hired.  As I look back, it was rarely ever the younger coaches I let go (only one I can remember), but the older ones who simply couldn't adjust or conform to the expectations required.

Just a city boy trying to learn the way man!

Coaches coaching their coaches,

I'm the young guy on staff currently attempting to be coached up. The guy being coached up I like to think.

This weekend's assignment is studying our past seasons run game and breaking it down. What worked well, why did it, what didn't work well, why didn't it? Being assigned things like this to do defensively really helped me a lot, and now I'm being asked to do similar things with the offense. Really get the sense that the point of this run game assignment is to coach me up. Which I take on with excitement.

If the head coach of a program doesn't coach his coaches, it's doomed for failure.

I'd rather have loyal assistants willing to stick to the program and the process it takes to be successful than some hotshot who thinks he knows it all.

The number one thing we look for when hiring new coaches (besides a pulse) is how good they are at teaching. I'd rather take a solid teacher who knows nothing about football than a former good player who doesn't want to or isn't willing to learn how to teach.