Thanks, Raymond for your well-explained content. Theory of knowledge before experience. Experience is the application of our theory or our knowledge. Knowledge is the WHAT and experience is our HOW.
Really powerful to finally starting to connect the dots. Thanks again.
Absolutely see all of the theory book, the periodization books, and these videos coming together. CDEF is an easy system to remember along with breaking it down into both references and sub-references. What came up for me, especially as you explained the sub-reference of thinking, is how closely connected thinking is with a player’s fitness. If a player struggles with maintaining both quality and more actions near the end of the game physically, they are also undoubtedly struggling mentally as well. Both have to be strengthened and one question is which one is important to set straight first? Do you need to strengthen a player’s mind so they can get through the fitness or do they need to be fit in order to mentally be tougher? Perhaps it doesn’t matter, but from my perspective they correlate closely.
Thanks for the introduction. The difference between experience and knowledge became very clear. The question is often discussed whether a good coach must have been a good player? I understood for myself that the experiences as a player are only helpful if the coach has reflected on these experiences.
Raymond is teaching us how to think (critical evaluation), for us to become better coaches.
Explanatory theory, objective reference as a starting point to apply the hypothesis in order to improve the player’s thinking (next) action.
Bravo regarding coaches being defensive on their knowledge and experience. Anybody who says they have never felt this way is not being truthful with themselves. It is difficult yet necessary to hear feedback and honestly evaluate/test that feedback in order to improve. Further, though, the person giving the feedback might do well to ask the coach “why is it you were doing xxxx during practice” instead of saying “when you did xyz that was the wrong thing to do.”
Perhaps there was a deductive reasoning behind it. I enjoy going to local fields during the season and simply listening to how coaches communicate with their players. This framework will help me in evaluating what I hear.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. AcceptReject
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
6 Comments
The level of detail towards “thinking” for players is key, as well as staff.
Training players to think “next task” is vital to keep communication levels high and improve the chance of a positive team playing style.
Thanks, Raymond for your well-explained content. Theory of knowledge before experience. Experience is the application of our theory or our knowledge. Knowledge is the WHAT and experience is our HOW.
Really powerful to finally starting to connect the dots. Thanks again.
Absolutely see all of the theory book, the periodization books, and these videos coming together. CDEF is an easy system to remember along with breaking it down into both references and sub-references. What came up for me, especially as you explained the sub-reference of thinking, is how closely connected thinking is with a player’s fitness. If a player struggles with maintaining both quality and more actions near the end of the game physically, they are also undoubtedly struggling mentally as well. Both have to be strengthened and one question is which one is important to set straight first? Do you need to strengthen a player’s mind so they can get through the fitness or do they need to be fit in order to mentally be tougher? Perhaps it doesn’t matter, but from my perspective they correlate closely.
Thanks for the introduction. The difference between experience and knowledge became very clear. The question is often discussed whether a good coach must have been a good player? I understood for myself that the experiences as a player are only helpful if the coach has reflected on these experiences.
Raymond is teaching us how to think (critical evaluation), for us to become better coaches.
Explanatory theory, objective reference as a starting point to apply the hypothesis in order to improve the player’s thinking (next) action.
Bravo regarding coaches being defensive on their knowledge and experience. Anybody who says they have never felt this way is not being truthful with themselves. It is difficult yet necessary to hear feedback and honestly evaluate/test that feedback in order to improve. Further, though, the person giving the feedback might do well to ask the coach “why is it you were doing xxxx during practice” instead of saying “when you did xyz that was the wrong thing to do.”
Perhaps there was a deductive reasoning behind it. I enjoy going to local fields during the season and simply listening to how coaches communicate with their players. This framework will help me in evaluating what I hear.
Love the course