Soccer coaching forum
and-again soccer forum
Register  |   |   |  Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 4 of 8      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   Next   »
TomK

Registered:
Posts: 1,875
Reply with quote  #61 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scotsoc

Well Tom, I can't speak for the others but I'm just replying as Russ does, i.e. the reply bears no relation to the points raised....


I will admit though that Russ does contribute positively to the forum, in a roundabout way as there are many good reasoned replies to his drivel which I'm sure many coaches will find informative.

...



I agree with pretty much all you say, but I don't think his behavior justifies questionable behavior by others and some of these comments remind me of middle schoolers. I agree that he appears to enjoy the attention, as the "Ahh, I'm melting!" comment showed. He did not want that topic to die.

You probably don't have access to it, but there is a TV show here (National Geographic channel) called "The Dog Whisperer" which is based on Cesar Milan helping people deal with problem dogs. The problems range from being dangerously aggressive to being scared to walk on slick floors. I won't try describe all of his "principles" in detail (whether "invented" or "discovered"), but one thing he stresses is not playing attention to a badly behaving dog. Many owners will do that, which he believes reinforced the behavior. I have no doubt that there is a lot in the show that applies to children and I think that particular principle applies to Russ.

BTW, there is gravity everywhere, including space.

Coachkev,
I agree that the like the attention even if it is negative, but that does not justfiy any response no matter how childish.

I don't expect any great changes.
thoughtsoc

Registered:
Posts: 6,536
Reply with quote  #62 

Russ,

I don't watch Dr Phil very often, as I am usually working or doing something else more worthwhile, but I have the impression that he has a phrase that he uses with people who are indulging in self-destructive behavior: "How's that working for you?"    What would your answer be if I were to ask you that question about your participation here?   What would you advise if you were counseling someone and they brought in a transcript of one of these topics?    This is a serious question.

 

If I knew a client was visiting this forum, I would immediately render some kind of masochistic-related diagnoses.  But I participate at this forum for a few different reasons over which I have control:

 

1) An opportunity to formulate opinions, get reactions, and react to those reactions

 

2) An opportunity to provide advice from the context of the model I use--a model that I believe is very useful, particularly for new coaches

 

3) Confronting peer pressure in various forms forces me to deal with various integrity versus pressure/acceptance issues that I believe are very important.

 

I don't have control over the reactions and choices of other people.  If someone wants to ridicule what I believe are very useful soccer ideas, and ridicule me for sticking with those ideas, that's within the rules here.  If doing that brings them pleasure in some fashion, I'm glad to provide the opportunity and should perhaps send them a bill.  But the other aspect of these rather flexible rules is that I'm also allowed to continue expressing myself. 

 

The answer, as I see it, depends on what your objectives are.  If your objective is to get attention, your approach is working, though most of it is negative.    If your objective is to be accepted, then you are failing.  If you are convinced of the correctness of your ideas and want to persuade others to use them, then you are failing.   If you want to pat yourself on that back for maintaining your "intellectual integrity" in the face of insurmountable odds, then you may be succeeding, but what is that really worth?   I heard a radio caller comment positively on a state political figure, saying that at least he stood up for his principles.  What he did do actually hurt his cause.  In the long run, his actions were significantly less effective than mooning the Supreme Court building and certainly no more admirable.

 

Attention from people on a soccer forum whom I've never met is of no value to me.  Nor can I read their minds and determine what exactly they think and feel.  I have no control over whether someone here accepts me or my ideas.  I've convinced of the validity of some of my ideas, and convinced these will become part of the commonly accepted soccer wisdom at some point in the future.  Probably after I'm long gone.  At which point the ridicule here will itself seem somewhat foolish.  But hey, it was fun so go for it!

 

I believe in stating what I find to be true, being more self-critical than anyone here could ever be of me, admitting when I'm wrong, when I've made a mistake, or when I've found a weakness in my thinking, and letting the cards fall where they may.

 

BTW, I agree with AFB that diversity is not a worthwhile objective in and of itself, though it it often regarded as such by colleges and such.   It is wrong to presume based on group identity.    If the people who participate here dismissed your ideas because you never played professionally or have coached less than N years, that would be wrong.  Nothing to get to too upset over, but wrong.  If they dismiss your ideas because they believe you fail to explain them sufficiently and believe they are flawed, then your best bet is to try to explain them again.  If you have exhausted that approach and can't think of another way to try, just give up.  Accept that fact that you can't persuade most of us and let the topic drop.  It is totally ineffective and highly annoying to argue that you have answered the question, just "not to your satisfaction".  If you want to persuade people, you have to answer to their satisfaction.

 

I can't control the whole persuasion thing, particularly in the realm of soccer where so many people consider themselves at the top of the food chain.  How do such people usually respond to a new idea, a new theory, even a new term, or an activity that they haven't been using?  "I'm not thinking that way or doing it.  There must be something inferior about it.  No need to even try it." 

 

To reiterate my main point (to Russ):

What is your objective?  Are you achieving it acting they way you have been?   What could you do differently to have more success?  (As a counselor, I'm sure you realize that wishing everyone here was open-minded and intelligent enough to appreciate your wisdom is off limits.)

 

I've been acting as an intelligent, rational, compassionate human being who has different beliefs about what the soccer world currently needs.  You won't find too many personal attacks, demeaning jokes, dirty words, or angry tirades in any of my written responses.  Where I've slipped, I've attempted to either apologize or revise.  That's how I see my way of acting.  Perhaps, though, you can give some feedback about the ways I've been acting.

 

To reiterate my main point to everyone else:

When Russ "goes off the deep end" in a topic that he didn't start, do not reply or comment on his post, or comment on him.   You have the ooptionof spinning off a new topic.   If he starts a topic and he annoys you, don't read it and don't comment.  Obviously, this would be voluntary, but I think it would be beneficial.

 

I'm not sure what this "going off the deep end" means.  Also, any topic posted here runs the risk of digressing in different directions.  It's the nature of the beast.

TomK

Registered:
Posts: 1,875
Reply with quote  #63 
Russ,
How's that working for you?   Are you accomplishing your objectives?   Are there any changes you could make that would make you more effective?
thoughtsoc

Registered:
Posts: 6,536
Reply with quote  #64 

I agree with pretty much all you say, but I don't think his behavior justifies questionable behavior by others and some of these comments remind me of middle schoolers. I agree that he appears to enjoy the attention, as the "Ahh, I'm melting!" comment showed. He did not want that topic to die.

 

Actually, that was a play on the image others evidentally have of me--that I just want attention, and hence couldn't tolerate being ignored.  I fully respect the right of anyone to ignore anything here, and it's indeed a legitimate way to shut me up.


You probably don't have access to it, but there is a TV show here (National Geographic channel) called "
The Dog Whisperer" which is based on Cesar Milan helping people deal with problem dogs. The problems range from being dangerously aggressive to being scared to walk on slick floors. I won't try describe all of his "principles" in detail (whether "invented" or "discovered"), but one thing he stresses is not playing attention to a badly behaving dog. Many owners will do that, which he believes reinforced the behavior. I have no doubt that there is a lot in the show that applies to children and I think that particular principle applies to Russ.

 

I welcome your feedback into what constitutes bad behavior on my part.  Believing in a particular idea?  Not respecting the opinions of others?  Not truthfully expressing what I believe, and the reasons why I believe it?  Providing the reasons why I believe as I do using my own framework rather than the framework of others?  Making demeaning jokes and personal attacks?


Coachkev,
I agree that the like the attention even if it is negative, but that does not justfiy any response no matter how childish.

I value human contact with other soccer people, the meeting and the clashing of different opinions.  I don't value being praised or esteemed by others, nor do I like to be controlled by the apparent disdain of others.  And I believe as you do in the responsibility of each person to control his own behavior.  The "he brings it on himself" line is akin to the "she brings it on herself" line that spouse abusers use.  I'm not saying anyone here is a spouse abuser, so don't even go there.  But the lack of personal responsibility is similar.

TomK

Registered:
Posts: 1,875
Reply with quote  #65 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thoughtsoc
...

But I participate at this forum for a few different reasons over which I have control:



3) Confronting peer pressure in various forms forces me to deal with various integrity versus pressure/acceptance issues that I believe are very important.

...

 If you want to pat yourself on that back for maintaining your "intellectual integrity" in the face of insurmountable odds, then you may be succeeding, but what is that really worth? ...


Attention from people on a soccer forum whom I've never met is of no value to me. Color me dubious.


I believe in stating what I find to be true, being more self-critical than anyone here could ever be of me, Color me dubious^2  admitting when I'm wrong, when I've made a mistake, or when I've found a weakness in my thinking, and letting the cards fall where they may.

...

I can't control the whole persuasion thing, particularly in the realm of soccer where so many people consider themselves at the top of the food chain. There is no food chain.  Each reader makes their own evaluation of each poster on a individual basis.  How do such people usually respond to a new idea, a new theory, even a new term, or an activity that they haven't been using? "I'm not thinking that way or doing it. There must be something inferior about it. No need to even try it." 
People are often resistantant  to new ideas but they accpet them if they are persuaded the idea has value.


To reiterate my main point (to Russ):

What is your objective? Are you achieving it acting they way you have been? What could you do differently to have more success? (As a counselor, I'm sure you realize that wishing everyone here was open-minded and intelligent enough to appreciate your wisdom is off limits.)

I've been acting as an intelligent, rational, compassionate human being who has different beliefs about what the soccer world currently needs. You won't find too many personal attacks, demeaning jokes, dirty words, or angry tirades in any of my written responses. Where I've slipped, I've attempted to either apologize or revise. That's how I see my way of acting. Perhaps, though, you can give some feedback about the ways I've been acting.

I will leave that up to you.  Are you OK with the reactions to your posts? Is there anything you could do differently that would result in more palatable reactions?  I am not suggesting that you need to compromise your beliefs.

To reiterate my main point to everyone else:

When Russ "goes off the deep end" in a topic that he didn't start, do not reply or comment on his post, or comment on him. You have the ooptionof spinning off a new topic. If he starts a topic and he annoys you, don't read it and don't comment. Obviously, this would be voluntary, but I think it would be beneficial.

I'm not sure what this "going off the deep end" means. Also, any topic posted here runs the risk of digressing in different directions. It's the nature of the beast.



"going on the deep end". :
Speculating that AFB or anyone else is coordinating attacks on you via email.
Speculating or asserting that there is some conspiracy against you.



TomK

Registered:
Posts: 1,875
Reply with quote  #66 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thoughtsoc

...

I welcome your feedback into what constitutes bad behavior on my part. Believing in a particular idea? Not respecting the opinions of others? Not truthfully expressing what I believe, and the reasons why I believe it? Providing the reasons why I believe as I do using my own framework rather than the framework of others? Making demeaning jokes and personal attacks?




I don't think you really do respect the opinions of others to the degree it is warranted.  Someone with 20-30 years of coaching experience does generally know more than someone with 1-2 years of experience.     And I don't believe you provide complete reasons in many cases.  Someone will ask a question and you do not respond directly and clearly, often spinning off into other topics.  When accused of not answering, you tend to say, "I answered, just not to your satisfaction."  If you want to "get along" and get anywhere in terms of persuading others of the validity of your ideas, you have to answer to the satisfaction of the reader. 
AFB

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 6,406
Reply with quote  #67 

Tom,

 

Your arguments on every subject are well thought out and quite rational.  They are persuasive in the limited context of one or two posts with whom ever your are vying with.

 

In the course of months or years they are lost.  Memory of them fades.  If the poster you are contending with would concede and not raise the subject over and over, the loss of memory would not be a problem.  When, however, the poster raises it again and again another approach is necessary.  One that burns the poster and indelibly burns into the reader's mind that the other poster is a fraud.

 

This is doubly necessary when the person you argue against plays games.  Many think that by winning a semantic game they win an argument.  This is what Bill Clinton thought when he quipped, "That depends on what "is" is."  That is rarely true.  The listener does not see the argument as a game, but as an attempt to find the truth and in this search the truthful, not the game player, will be persuasive.  To win an argument you must be believed and belief hinges on how credible the argument you make is.  When someone argues with circular reasoning and plain evasion, logic often becomes lost and loses its power.  The reader may know that something is wrong, but is not reading the detail often enough to glean what was missing and what was responsive.  Too often in arguing against illogical arguments based on false premises, the one presenting the logical argument is forced to remake the opponent's gibberish into something sensible.

 

In these cases a more effective technique of persuasion is ridicule.  When  such an attack is mixed with humor there is very little one can use to defend one's false ideas.  You are very right the draw back is the taint that stains all involved. 

 

This stain has to be weighed against the argument that Russ will simply go away if only ignored.  If Russ were after just attention this might be the case.  He is not.  He wants attention and acceptance, both at high levels.  If you go to Paul's forum you will find Russ over there posting his views, over and over, even though none would argue with him.  You will find him touting his book and trying to inflate his position with the simple fact that he has been published.  He left that forum because the traffic had come here.  If he will post his tripe when ignored, why do you believe ignoring him will solve the issue?

 

Over the years I have represented some very unpopular causes.  I have never really found anyone who could separate the lawyer from the client, even though in some cases I personally opposed the cause I represented.  I took such cases, sometimes pro bono, because I believe even the most repugnant, and sometimes especially those, deserve to have their position argued and rejected in a fair tribunal.  John Adams, a staunch and original patriot defended the British Soldiers accused of murder in the Boston Massacre for this reason, and won their acquittal.

 

Here I firmly believe many of Russ' ideas are detrimental to a coach and player.  I saw Russ expose his ideas on the original forum and lead some novice coaches to try them.  Then CoachMarino was the major thorn in Russ' hide.  I have since met those who stumbled upon Russ' book and tried his "system".  They met with disaster.  The ones vulnerable to his theories are the novice coaches looking for a quick fix, which is what Russ claims to offer.  They do not have the grounding in the game to understand even the basic flaws in what he offers.

 

For the novice coach Russ is akin to a patent medicine man hawking bottles of cocaine and opiate laced heavy metal syrup to trusting rubes.  Though poison, it might make them feel better for a time.  Like the patent medicine peddler, Russ offers the illusion - one the illusion of health and Russ the illusion of soccer.

 

Unlike CB and others, I think Russ believes his own press.  I think, he thinks he is on to the magic elixir of soccer.  Like many I confront on the witness stand he avoids and ignores any facts that challenge his view of the truth.  In this is very human. 

 

Knowing that Russ will continue, how do we handle him?  With logic?  Yes - but only at the beginning of every post he starts.  We give him time to again evade and play semantic games.  Then we heap ridicule on him.  At that time pure contempt will be more persuasive then anything else.

 

This topic was one Russ started as an outgrowth of being pilloried on another thread.  He came to that topic, one where a young coach asked for help in meeting the expectations of his coaching course instructors, with his typical mechanical drop pass drill.  Keith pointed out how Russ' ideas would get the young man flunked.  Russ took exception and came here with his plea, not that he was right, but that we should tolerate "diverse", in others words stupid ideas solely because they were diverse.

 

In that case ignoring Russ did no good.  He came as he always does.  Look at what he wrote:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by thoughtsoc

When I took my D course in Maryland many years ago, Graham Ramsey was the instructor.  My topic was support also.  I used a condition scrimmage I now call Three-and-a-Drop.  Players are limited to three touches (i.e., a player can use one, two, or three touches), and a team must complete at least one drop pass (a pass in the direction of it's own goal line) before it can score.  Small goals of some kind work fine. 

 

The exercise went well, because so many coachable moments arise very quickly.  A player will have the ball, force it forward, and lose it.  Part of the problem was his choice of direction, and part of the problem was that no teammates moved behind him for support.  So, I'd freeze the action and revisit this scenario.  I'd have a player move in behind the ball, at the correct distance and angle, and yell "Drop!"  The player with the ball would turn and make the pass, and then we'd play on.

 

Soon, someone would move into a great support position on their own, call for the ball, a drop pass would be made, and the team keeps possession as a result.  I'd blow my whistle, freeze the action, and walk through the moment of brilliance for all to see.

 

Keith responded without a personal attack, but directly addressed why Russ' ideas were inappropriate:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KeiththeKoach

One thing to bear in mind to get the exercise moving.  Start with the player releasing the pass.  Focus on his movement as soon as he has passed the ball.  Do this for each player. 

 

Don't worry too much about conditions.  4 v 4 is enough of a condition.  The player who passes the ball is most often the one the defense then ignores.  His subsequent movement has an effect on the repositioning of the other two players off the ball.  If he moves in close support what should the others do?  If he runs ahead of the ball what should the others do? etc. etc.

 

You may want to progress by introducing some choreographed support. e.g the wall pass and the set up pass.  This will require the players to recognize when this support movement is on and even when it can be a decoy.

 

I hope this helps but think it is difficult to give advice not knowing what the instructors are really looking for.  4 v 4 in general is about close support.

 

I would advise not to use conditioned drop passes.  You miss out on the opportunity to coach when drop passes should be used and when not.  You need to show players why and when to move for drop passes to create shooting opportunities.  You need to show players why and when to play drop passes away from pressure when there are no forward or sideways options. 

 

 

 

The above is found on the first page.  By the second page of the thread the topic had become a typical Russ whine of self pity, conspiracy against him, high authority trying to stamp out the truth because it threaten them (how it threatens is of course never explained). 

 

If ignoring him is not an option;  if he will follow wherever this community goes; if the only way to stop him is to heap ridicule on him, what is the option?

 

Russ is very predicable.  He has not figured out how to deal with scorn.  He was tried various approaches, but none have been successful.  He will study this and attempt to find some way he can copy it or apply it.  It has been interesting watching Russ' ability to argue evolve.  However, Russ will not figure this out.  Even if told the answer he would find it almost impossible to use.  His mind is too rigid; his view of himself is too inextricably tied to his theories (on other forums totally unrelated to soccer he goes by the name "thoughtsoc").  I am afraid if you want to end Russ' presence on a topic and have it die, after attempting logic and reason, you must go to ridicule and scorn to persuade and convince a reader that adopting a particular Russism is foolish and something no same person would contemplate.


__________________
Some wisdom from Winston Churchill:

"Once in a while you will stumble upon the truth but most of us manage to pick ourselves up and hurry along as if nothing had happened."

"You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life."

"You can always count on Americans to do the right thing—after they’ve tried everything else."
thoughtsoc

Registered:
Posts: 6,536
Reply with quote  #68 

I don't think you really do respect the opinions of others to the degree it is warranted.  Someone with 20-30 years of coaching experience does generally know more than someone with 1-2 years of experience.     And I don't believe you provide complete reasons in many cases.  Someone will ask a question and you do not respond directly and clearly, often spinning off into other topics.  When accused of not answering, you tend to say, "I answered, just not to your satisfaction."  If you want to "get along" and get anywhere in terms of persuading others of the validity of your ideas, you have to answer to the satisfaction of the reader.

 

Tom, just some quick responses and then I've got to try to do some different things and stay away from here for a bit.  First, I might have more years of coaching experience than you realize.  I began coaching my son's teams in approximately 1998.  The model I use would be unacceptable to some, regardless of whether it grew out of 20 years of experience or 1 year.

 

I feel I do my best to provide complete reasons.  I never consciously hide anything or dodge anything.  If I was going to dodge anything, don't you think it might be the reasons why I didn't get my C license? But I also believe you're honestly reporting your perception of me, and I respect that.  I think you'll find that, when I seem like I'm dodging a question, it might have more to do with the question itself.  Anyone, when answering any question, certainly should evaluate that question, it's motives, and it's hidden assumptions.  This would be readily understandable if I were to ask you, "Tom, what deep seated issues are leading you to align yourself with bullies?"  You'd probably get a bit upset, because the question assumes you have deep seated issues and that you're not thinking on your own.  And I very much respect that you are thinking on your own.

 

You suggest that, if I want to "get along" here, I must answer questions to the satisfaction of the reader.  Here's the problem.  My answers aren't going to be satisfying to many readers.  They're even going to be threatening to some readers.  Ultimately, I can't control the satisfaction of the readers.  And the ones who are most dissatisfied with my answers are going to be the ones who are most outspoken.

brian41

Registered:
Posts: 1,285
Reply with quote  #69 

Anyone see Miami CSI last night? 

 

I think this post needs a bit of Santaria?  Anyone that posts after mine will suffer three days of "athlete's foot", followed by "Montezuma's Revenge". 

 

The cure is three touch pass and drop (dump).    

thoughtsoc

Registered:
Posts: 6,536
Reply with quote  #70 

I don't think you really do respect the opinions of others to the degree it is warranted. 

 

Tom, I just realized that you were answering my question about what constitutes my bad behavior.  I think you're saying that I'm behaving poorly by not fully respecting the opinions of others who presumably have more coaching experience, more playing experience, more knowledge of the game, or whatever, than I do.  I can see why that would seem like bad behavior, and why people might get upset about it, and I'll consider any suggestions you have for this reason.

 

Here are what I perceive to be the circumstances.  I'll set up a hypothetical situation so that I can look at it more objectively.

 

1.  Coaches A, B, and C have played a great deal of soccer at high levels, recieved their B licenses or higher, and coached youth teams and/or adult teams at very high levels. 

 

2. Coach D didn't become serious about playing until he was an adult, took the C license course and the National Diploma course but didn't pass the former, and coached only as high as the high school/youth travel team level.

 

3.  Coaches A, B, and C, while each very independent and creative thinkers, have been trained in a similar model.  They use similar terminologies, and believe in similar principles, theories, and practice methods.

 

4.  Coach D develops in completely different circumstances, isolated from the influences that were so impactful for Coaches A, B, and C.  Like a coach developing in a different culture, or on a deserted island, Coach D develops different terminologies, principles, theories, and practice methods.  In many ways, these are similar to those of Coaches A, B, and C.  But in some ways they are significantly different.

 

5.  Coach D decides that his terminologies, principles, theories, and practice methods are different enough, and useful enough, that the soccer world should be told about them.  He therefore writes a book about them.

 

6.  Coaches A, B, and C notice that some aspects of Coach D's thinking are similar to theirs, and therefore either redundant or plagiarized.  They notice that other aspects of Coach D's thinking are contrary to theirs, and assume that these must be wrong. 

 

7.  Coaches A, B, and C tell Coach D their opinion about his thinking and their reasons why.  However, Coach D continues to believe that aspects of his thinking and his activities are both novel and useful.  He continues to explain why.

 

Is that a pretty accurate summary?  I can see why Coaches A, B, and C might feel disrespected and get bent out of shape.  But their mission has become getting Coach D to say, like Rosannadannadanna, "Never mind."  I don't see that Coach D has any option but to continue explaining his thinking and why it's effective.  Were he to do otherwise, he would have very little self-respect.

 

It's my opinion that the bad behavior, and hence the true ability to initiate change, rests with the other side.  A few other options to this pattern would be:

 

1.  Acknowledge the strengths in Coach D's approach.  Which activities seem unique as well as useful? 

 

2.  Acknowledge the clarity with which Coach D explains his ideas to new coaches.  Even if the ideas are faulty, perhaps this ability to explain things simply could be used to teach the correct ideas.

 

3.  State opinions without pretending to know the facts about Coach D's experiences, or deducing his personality characteristics from his soccer opinions.

 

4.  Apologize for past misconduct (behavior that was insulting, demeaning, profane, etc.).

 

If other options are available to me, please feel free to suggest them.

CB

Registered:
Posts: 5,056
Reply with quote  #71 

Tom-  Like yourself, I avoided Russ's posts for quite a long time.  At one point I thought that certainly Russ could budge a little off his stubborn perch if only somebody rational could get through to him.  I tried several different approaches, including a speed posting approach so he would not have to create his answers but rather just answer quickly based upon his understandings.  That failed as did all my other attempts to even have a rational discussion with him.  Here is where I think Russ is at:

 

After I coached for about 5 years, I decided to write a coaching manual for beginner coaches.  I did a great deal of research, found all the best drills, and it was pretty comprehensive.  I thought I knew pretty much everything to know about teaching modern day soccer. At least for kids.  Well I pulled it off the shelf this morning...  Although there is some good stuff in there, I realized that I use almost nothing that I wrote about in the book in the way I coach today.  I have learned a great deal since I wrote the book.  There is sort of a coaching evolution that takes place.  Much is learned from the game itself, especially as one coaches at the higher levels and against higher level coaches.  Much is learned from being exposed to coaches with different views and approaches to soccer from your own.  I have been fortunate to have been aquainted with numerous high level national and international coaches that I have learned from.  And there are other sources of learning along the way as well, such as from your players, dvds, coaching forums, etc... 

 

The problem with Russ is that about the same time I wrote a coaching manual he wrote a book.  And his book was published.  So while I was out seeking more coaching ideas and knowledge on soccer, Russ was already defending his book.  And to this day Russ is still defending his early ideas because they are in print for all to see.  The point is that Russ is in a tough position of essentially having to denounce his book in order to move ahead in the soccer world.  He would have to give up ideas like the T3, 3 drops and a pass, and out-dated games in order to open up his mind to what really works in coaching soccer.  But he just can't.  And he never will be.

BobC

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,688
Reply with quote  #72 

CB - Yes, yes, and yes. By the way, though, it's "3 and a Drop". He's probably going to jump all over you getting the name wrong.

 

Russ - (and I can't believe I'm doing this) you don't seem like such a bad person, you just won't stop this stupid, annoying, immature trip you're on; and because of that I really don't see much hope for you continuing to improve and grow as a coach. That's too bad...

 

The rest of y'all - like CB just said, I keep telling you your never going to get through to him. I appreciate all your efforts (and it seems like every couple of months somebody new tries), but it just isn't going to happen.

 

 

The score still stands:

Jello 7, Hammer & Nails United 0


__________________

When a flower doesn't bloom, fix the environment in which it grows, not the flower

TomK

Registered:
Posts: 1,875
Reply with quote  #73 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thoughtsoc

I don't think you really do respect the opinions of others to the degree it is warranted. 

 

Tom, I just realized that you were answering my question about what constitutes my bad behavior.  I think you're saying that I'm behaving poorly by not fully respecting the opinions of others who presumably have more coaching experience, more playing experience, more knowledge of the game, or whatever, than I do. ...Here are what I perceive to be the circumstances.  I'll set up a hypothetical situation so that I can look at it more objectively.

 

1.  Coaches A, B, and C have played a great deal of soccer at high levels, ...

 

....

6.  Coaches A, B, and C notice that some aspects of Coach D's thinking are similar to theirs, and therefore either redundant or plagiarized.  They notice that other aspects of Coach D's thinking are contrary to theirs, and assume that these must be wrong. 

 

7.  Coaches A, B, and C tell Coach D their opinion about his thinking and their reasons why.  However, Coach D continues to believe that aspects of his thinking and his activities are both novel and useful.  He continues to explain why.

 

Is that a pretty accurate summary?  I can see why Coaches A, B, and C might feel disrespected and get bent out of shape.  But their mission has become getting Coach D to say, like Rosannadannadanna, "Never mind."  I don't see that Coach D has any option but to continue explaining his thinking and why it's effective.  Were he to do otherwise, he would have very little self-respect.

 

It's my opinion that the bad behavior, and hence the true ability to initiate change, rests with the other side.  A few other options to this pattern would be:

 

1.  Acknowledge the strengths in Coach D's approach.  Which activities seem unique as well as useful? 

 

2.  Acknowledge the clarity with which Coach D explains his ideas to new coaches.  Even if the ideas are faulty, perhaps this ability to explain things simply could be used to teach the correct ideas.

 

3.  State opinions without pretending to know the facts about Coach D's experiences, or deducing his personality characteristics from his soccer opinions.

 

4.  Apologize for past misconduct (behavior that was insulting, demeaning, profane, etc.).

 

If other options are available to me, please feel free to suggest them.

 

This is bad behavior.  You have returned to your favorite theme, i.e. that the experienced coaches refuse to admit the wisdom of the novice coach because their world view is somehow threatened and the novice coach is a heroic figure standing up to the authority figures.  You completely overlook the very likely truth that the novice coach is just wrong.  Even more tellingly, you think this kind of hypothetical fable somehow supports your initial coaching point.  It does not.   You must defend you ideas on their own merits and not bring up your persecution "defense".  Even if you are 100% right about everyone banding together to "get" you, this does not prove that your coaching ideas are valid.  Yet you seems to think being attacked for being an idiot somehow proves that you are not. 

 

AFB makes a rather long argument that ignoring you will not work and that ridicule is the most effective remedy.  I am not convinced but then I have not been active on Paul's forum.  I hope he's wrong.

 

Before I read this latest post, I decided that my point-by-point reply was a mistake and I wanted to return to my central question.   Are you happy with the way things have gone on this forum and would you change anything?

 

....

 

I just read the final part of your last message, starting with "It's my opinion that the bad behavior, and hence the true ability to initiate change, rests with the other side."   I am amazed.  (I only glanced at the Coach A,B,C story but correctly guessed the rest of it.)   As a counselor, does that sound like a good plan?  A client comes in and tells you that the whole world is against them, so you suggest they wait for the whole world to come to its collective senses and change so that the client can get along with the world? 

 

The only person you can control is yourself so don't rely on others to make things better.

 

BTW, Emily Litella was the one that said "Nevermind".

 

 I do think this sentence is important: "I don't see that Coach D has any option but to continue explaining his thinking and why it's effective.  Were he to do otherwise, he would have very little self-respect."  It is possible to accept that fact that others do not agree with you without reraising the same issues over and over again.  Silence does not imply that you agree with your critics and have succumbed to their "attacks".

 

I sincerely hope you can step back and consider if there are changes you coudl make, or if you're happy being regarded as an arrogant fool.

TomK

Registered:
Posts: 1,875
Reply with quote  #74 

CB, BobC, and others,

 

So what is the solution, if there is one? 

BobC

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,688
Reply with quote  #75 

Tom - I don't know if there is one, aside from the ignoring thing. I used to think it was so amusing to read all of the banter, but it's so stupid now I usually don't bother (coaching two teams takes care of most of my free time).

 

It's obvious that as long as people keep responding with all of the attacks and emotional stuff, it's just like throwing gas on a fire and he's just going to keep posting with the same old stuff. Ignore his posts (the stupid ones anyway), and you've most likely removed the fuel source. That's my best guess.


__________________

When a flower doesn't bloom, fix the environment in which it grows, not the flower

coachkev

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 14,607
Reply with quote  #76 

Short and sweet Russ,

WHAT principles/ethics/doctrine/credo/tenet you have for yourself and you express for YOURSELF is what is commonly known as Freedom of Speech.

 

HOWEVER, the ONE single thing that you HAVE and are CONTINUING to do that is SO dangerous is to espouse these ideals to new coaches as ABSOLUTE truth.

 

With ALL due respect, you are tinkering around with people who genuinly want to become better coaches and they see your 'INEXPERIENCED OFFERING' and judge it to be good because the Messiah Russ has said so.

 

If ALL those who have looked at your work, had been witness to your lack of experience as a soccer coach, then maybe we wouldnt be concerned about your single minded attitude towards your brief 'inventions' etc.

 

 

And as for bringing the analogy of spousal abuse into this thread, I think thats about the lowest you have scraped the barrel so far Russ. You are fast becoming a desperate person in need of recognition by your peers and its not forthcoming is it??.

 

Whats next Russ??

Were all acting like secret Child Abusers??

Were persecuting you like Pontious Pilot??

Were treating you like the 9/11 terrorists??

 

Come on man, grow up and realise that the majority of us expereinced coaches MAY NOT BE WRONG ABOUT YOU.

 

Entertainment is one thing - espousing half truths is another. You really are in need of your own counselling - you've been working too hard. Go listen to some Whale Music Russ.

thoughtsoc

Registered:
Posts: 6,536
Reply with quote  #77 

 And to this day Russ is still defending his early ideas because they are in print for all to see.  The point is that Russ is in a tough position of essentially having to denounce his book in order to move ahead in the soccer world.  He would have to give up ideas like the T3, 3 drops and a pass, and out-dated games in order to open up his mind to what really works in coaching soccer.  But he just can't.  And he never will be

 

You're half correct here.  I was hesitant to take the C course long ago because I knew it might all seem better than what I was doing, and the stuff I was putting in my book.  I left preferring much of the stuff I do, and sighed a sigh of relief, and continued with the plans to finish my book.  So, in my own mind, I've been through that.  My stuff has passed my own internal test, until something else comes along that I consider better.

 

The T3 isn't an essential part of everything else.  Were there to be a rewrite, I'd seriously revise the passage on the T3 and the Flat Back 4 so that they would stir less resentment.  The conditioned scrimmages are vital parts of the whole thing that I'm in no need to give up or denounce.  They work.  As for the out-dated games, you'll have to be specific.

thoughtsoc

Registered:
Posts: 6,536
Reply with quote  #78 

I suggest that your real gripe is with Reedswain publishing, which now owns the rights to my book, and with the editor of the NSCAA Soccer Journal, who found that two of my articles were sufficiently of interest to merit publication.  Perhaps the coaches here should form some kind of an advisory committee for Reedswain and the Soccer Journal so that such errors aren't made in the future.

 

I'll stick with the cards I've been dealt.  Challenge my hand at your own risk.

BobC

Avatar / Picture

Registered:
Posts: 2,688
Reply with quote  #79 

Russ - you're a freak! STOP!!!


__________________

When a flower doesn't bloom, fix the environment in which it grows, not the flower

thoughtsoc

Registered:
Posts: 6,536
Reply with quote  #80 

And as for bringing the analogy of spousal abuse into this thread, I think thats about the lowest you have scraped the barrel so far Russ. You are fast becoming a desperate person in need of recognition by your peers and its not forthcoming is it??.

 

Kev, you've behaved poorly on occasion.  You've on several occasions implied that my behavior somehow caused you to behave as you do.  That's called not taking responsibility for your own behavior.  As for scraping the barrel, what do you feel is your lowest point?

 

Whether or not we believe in God, most of us believe there is some external standard by which our behavior can be judged.  That standard sometimes bends and sways in the face of what other people are telling us.  But hopefully it's still there.

 

As I've said, where I think a particular idea is wrong, or an activity is harmful or outmoded, I'll be glad to state this here.  If I don't, I won't.

 

I'll also be glad to take a bit of a timeout from the forum if some hastily organized committe wants me to.  Say, a month or so.  How about this.  Form a committee of AFB, Kev, Scotsoc, Bob, Tom, and Jim. If I'm forgetting anyone who should have a vote, feel free to join in.  The They can each caste their votes.  If a majority votes for the timeout, I'll abide by that and not post here for a one-month period.  Then, either I'll realize "I'm better off now, no way I'm going back there", or I'll come back after cooler heads prevail and give it another try.

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

COPYRIGHT @ 2004 - 2016 AND-AGAIN, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED