Coaching Philosophies

[Chief00]

I ran into a friend who told me early in the season George Blaney would go to most PC practices and games and then after games would write up two pages of notes. He would typically have some brilliant insights sprinkled throughout his notes by most accounts but apparently Cooley joked they were brilliant but always negative - what they did wrong. Of course, George's son Brian is an assistant coach there.

That got me thinking - that was the Calhoun/Blaney approach - identify and fix problems immediately. True, Calhoun would do it in a nano second on the fly while Blaney might wait until practice. But, they felt if they fix all the bad stuff there would be less reason to lose. They would talk about games for hours and craft solutions using their basketball genius.

While Cooley and Ollie have some of that philosophy they also try positive reinforcement perhaps more. Calhoun would actually do that in a subtly way but more often he would push buttons - i.e. telling Daniels before the FL semi game - nobody is talking about him.

I think maybe today's coaches like a little positive reinforcement too. Quite frankly, there is no right or wrong answer but the different philosophies are fascinating to the Chief.

 

[upstater]

So you're saying some use negative reinforcement while others use positive reinforcement and others use a mixture of both.

 

[pj]

Some try to accentuate strengths, some to mitigate weaknesses.

 

[Chief00]

So you're saying some use negative reinforcement while others use positive reinforcement and others use a mixture of both.

I was really thinking how clinical George and Jim were - every detail of the game was addressed - I don't think they viewed it as positive or negative - but just going through the problems and fixing them. However, I agree others might view it as "negative" rather than "positive". Although, Calhoun would do a "positive" approach in the post season. They could take a halftime stat sheet and devise a second half game plan. At the time I thought of Calhoun above all as being tough and determined but he really had such a cerebral approach to the game.

 

[Kitaman]

A lot of times we can forget that there is also a coaching team (i.e. staff). Sure the HC sets the direction, but all of the assistants must adopt and executive the plan.

Blakey/Calhoun was great chemistry along with Hobbs and the others.

Ollie has a lot of new coaches so it will take some years to establish comparable chemistry. But his staff know Calhoun philosophy very well. The bonus is that Ollie has other great coaching philosophies in his repertoire.

Again give him time, he's made for this coaching stuff.

 

[dogpause]

Isn't that basically what coaches do -- fin it and fix it?

 

[Rico444]

As much as this year has sucked with all the injuries, it's forced Ollie to become a better coach. Not that he was bad before, but this season has been a huge challenge for him to make this team compete with the best, and a challenge is really just an opportunity to get better. Really like what I'm seeing from KO; this team is hitting their stride in late February, which is turning into a staple of Ollie's program (much like it was when Coach Calhoun was here).

 

[dennismenace]

I see less and less of the negative body language on a number of players and more hustle. Also, KO willing to substitute freshman into more minutes when he doesn't like what he sees. Playing for today and building for tomorrow at the same time.
Making the best of every situation; next man up.

 

[imno1]

So you're saying some use negative reinforcement while others use positive reinforcement and others use a mixture of both.

Fascinating