There's a serious raw dump of negativity surrounding coaches and coaching style on this forum. It's part of the job dealing with difficult parents. Anyway, it got the old grey cells ticking over Out of interest, from a parent's perspective, what would be your preferred coaching style for your child? Firstly, a tough talking, no nonsense, technically astute motivator that gets the best out of your child, but who isn't afraid to crack skulls and take names. OR A warm-hearted, funny, compassionate individual who's main focus is for your child to have fun. If your child falls on his tushy, coach can wrap your child in cotton wool, pat his little fanny better, and chase the boo-boos away. Before we get howls of abuse from the happy clappers, I understand these two approaches aren't mutually exclusive. However, which style on management would appeal to you and your child more?
This completely depends upon the kid, though I'd prefer a nice combination of both. My older boy suffered with self doubt at the younger ages and a completely no nonsense coach would have made him hate the sport, mostly because I don't care how may positive things you say to him - it's the negative things that would stick in his mind. He's matured and is no longer like that and could handle a coach like that now, but he doesn't have one. His coach is doesn't really fit into either of those boxes. He's not a softy that's for sure; he's great with junior high aged boys - which can be a challenge because they will walk all over you given the chance, and he can come across as a fun loving guy - he loves and promotes the team aspect of the game and takes the focus off individual players except for how they help the team as a whole; they boys all feel valuable and want to play well for him. My younger boy (and virtually everyone on his team) is thriving under a no nonsense coach - there's no cracking skulls; they are young. This coach is quite blunt (maybe it's his Eastern European culture as opposed to my older son's coach who comes from a South American culture), and while he is positive and motivating, he is just as quick to correct them, and has big expectations for the boys. For example, if training is 90 minutes; those boys will be training and focused for 90 minutes. My son played recreational basketball in the winter and he was pulling his hair out with the kids who payed absolutely no attention and goofed off for 35 minutes of the hour long practice, saying ""***** (name of coach) would kill these kids if they were on our soccer team, we got nothing done at practice." In contrast to my other son at this age, these kids are all very confident, very competitive and seem internally motivated. They all want to be challenged and rise to the occasion every time. I think it makes a big difference.
I would think it would depend on the child, age, and level. Personally, I don't want a coach at U7 rec dropping f-bombs and yelling at kids when their passes don't go where he wants them to go. But, I have no problems with a "tough" coach who lays out his expectations (assuming they're reasonable) and holds kids to them. I know DS's coach will cuss at them after the game if they've played like crap. I don't have a problem with that. Of course, DS is now U16. You keep coming on here and trying to make things black and white and fit every possible scenario, but that's not how life works. It's not that the two approaches aren't mutually exclusive, but they're at different ends of the same scale.
For starters, I'd like a coach who walks the walk for all the good/positive stuff talked about in the parent meeting at the start of the season. Stuff about how it's all about the kids until you find out it's not all about the kids ... and it's more about the coach.
First, I think you are misreading the negativity toward coaches and coaching in general around here…there might be some negativity toward some of the things you have posted and your coaching style, but let’s not project that on all coaches… My son is currently on his sixth or seventh club coach…some he’s had for just a season, some for a couple of years at a time…most, lean toward the serious, nonsense side of the scale; none were complete jerks, although one came pretty close; none were particularly touchy-feely, bubble-wrap guys either….nobody’s perfect, but I really haven’t had a problem with any of them…for the most part, tough, but fair…the fair part being of key importance… My son as always been pretty “coachable” so tough, but fair works well with his personality…
Basically your question doesn't have a good answer. It's like trying to answer the question "so when did you stop beating your wife?" You say the two positions you posted aren't mutually exclusive. That's not the issue. Picture a number scale 1 - 10. On one end is the "a--hole" coach who isn't "afraid to crack skulls and take names". At the other end is "hippy dippy" coach who wants to "chase the boo boos away". In all honesty, NEITHER coach would be desired. What would be preferable is someone between the two. Hard nosed? Sure. Concerned for the kids' well being? Absolutely. Critical & high standards? Yes. Knowing how to present criticism (which could be different for each kid)? Hell yes. Be able to train kids to bring out the best? Yes.
For me, it also depends where the kids are at a given time. My youngest son was part of a team that endured beating after beating at u10 and into u11, often to teams that played kickball or had one big, fast player, while they improved in terms of individual skill and, to a lesser degree, their teamwide ability to play. They had fun playing together, but there was some fatigue setting in when. But at u11 the club assigned them a new coach who had been a good college player in the not-too-distant past, was upbeat and fun (my wife said the team was like a bunch of pirates when they played for this guy), but knew how to play the game and how to teach some of that to them, enough of it that they could hit the field and start seeing that improvement translate into on-field success (sometimes wins, but generally always being competitive). They had a great two years with that coach, and improved significantly. But toward the end of that time, most of them started to see him as more like a big brother than a coach -- like someone else here said, middle schoolers will walk all over you if you let them. So the next coach (the current one) has a much sharper edge. He's a great guy and a good teacher for both individual skill and tactics, but he made clear early that he had expectations for them and wasn't out there to be their buddy. His tone can be pretty sharp. Some parents (and at least one of the kids) aren't crazy about him. I think he's just what they need right now (my son responds to his style, so maybe that's easy for me to say), and in hindsight think that was true of the first guy at that time, too. We've been fortunate in that sense, I think.
I'll take the tough talker. But if your gonna crack heads, you better be a master motivator. My kid has had about 11 coaches, head and assistant, maybe two of them were moderately effective at motivation. We had Tony Kees for a preseason 4 day camp. This is a guy who can motivate kids! and create cohesive TEAMS. I have not seen him game coach. I'd like to clone his DNA into all coaches as a foundational behavior!