Effective_Collegiate_Baseball_Strength_Coaching.10 by MLB Pitching

Effective Collegiate Baseball Strength Coaching Brian Gearity, MS, ATC, USAW, USATF Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee

SUMMARY THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE IS TO BEGIN TO DEFINE WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AN EFFECTIVE STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING COACH. A CONTINUUM APPROACH TO DEFINING EFFECTIVENESS IS INTRODUCED, ALONG WITH 3 EXAMPLES OF MORE OR LESS EFFECTIVE COACHING. LAST, RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PROVIDED FOR RESOURCES TO IMPROVE COACHING EFFECTIVENESS.

here are numerous articles written about traditional strength and conditioning topics such as the physiology and biomechanics of pitching and hitting and various ways to design resistance training programs. Effective strength coaching is a topic that deserves equal attention. In fact, what good is knowledge of the biomechanics of the power clean if a coach is unable to teach an athlete the power clean? Although many experienced strength coaches dread attending yet another presentation on the power clean’s mechanics at a conference, they ask other coaches how they teach this lift. In other words, they are seeking to become more effective. This article addresses that question by examining the meaning of effective strength coaching, 3 dichotomies of more and less effective coaches, and recommendations for becoming an effective strength coach.

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2009

EFFECTIVE COACHING

Strength coaches may obtain certifications that identify their ability to pass a written exam or honors that identify reaching certain milestones or achievements, but does this mean they are effective coaches? Strength coaches will often tell each other, ‘‘He is a good coach,’’ but there is no research and very little discussion on the topic specifically for strength coaches. What then does it mean to be an effective strength coach? There is research that describes what strength coaches do and their educational background (3,16,17). However, to date, no research or literature specifically addresses what is involved in being an effective strength coach. Instead, researchers have studied elements of strength and conditioning such as physiology, biomechanics, and leadership and practitioners go to work assuming what they do is the best course of action. However, both researchers and practitioners are perhaps partly to blame for not clearly and critically proposing what it means to be an effective coach. A possible criterion of effective strength and conditioning coaches may be the ability to provide detailed and quick instruction to an athlete performing a lift, for example. Based on research from motor learning, Baker has recently offered practical suggestions and guidelines for teaching motor skills to novice and intermediate-level athletes (1). A wealth of research exists on motor skill learning, and a recent

study is directly related to strength and conditioning professionals (11). Researchers worked with a collegiate strength and conditioning coach to improve his instructional and motivational behaviors. The coach reported greater awareness of his behaviors, and the researchers, through observational analysis, found that the coach increased his instructional and motivational behaviors (11). From my own experience, when an athlete was performing a squat, I have seen a graduate assistant and a volunteer strength coach hesitate to give instruction as if the coach were still processing what they just saw and were deciding what to say that would get the athlete to improve their squat technique. I am arguing that a more effective strength coach not only provides better instruction but also they are able to more quickly correct an athlete’s technique. DICHOTOMIES

In general, it is challenging for strength coaches to be outstanding at every facet of their job. A coach could be more effective at one task than at another. For example, they may be well versed on providing instruction on the back squat but not on providing nutritional information. Although this may be where a coach currently is in terms of overall knowledge and skill, they can improve these attributes and KEY WORDS:

effective coaching; baseball; instruction; strength coach

become more effective at any of their respective tasks. With that said, to understand what being an effective coach requires let us first examine 3 dichotomies in terms of a continuum from less to more effective coaching. As strength coaches, we have all witnessed a coach, heard a story of a coach, or been guilty ourselves of spending more time in the office or in meetings than we spend working with athletes. One of the qualities of an effective strength coach is the amount of time spent with athletes (Figure 1). Obviously, the more time spent with athletes, the better able the coach is to develop their strength, speed, or any other performance-related skill and to reinforce how to avoid common errors. Additionally, the more time spent together could potentially strengthen the relationship between the 2 individuals. Although NCAA limits how many hours we can spend with athletes, coaches at the University of Tennessee incorporate structured exercises and conditioning into baseball practices. As a result, instead of having a dozen pitchers stand around catching pop-ups during batting practice, our pitchers rotate between 3 stations: 1. Shagging fly balls while position players are hitting. 2. Practicing flat grounds and bullpens with pitching coach. 3. Doing extra strength and conditioning activities (such as throwing routines with medicine balls, hip and pilates exercises, or abdominal and low-back routines). Furthermore, by spending time with athletes, a coach is implicitly communicating to the athlete you are important and I care about you. In contrast, when a coach is not working hands-on with athletes, the athlete may feel abandoned, potentially resulting in

negative consequences (13). Such unavailability can result in loss of athletic effort and confidence. Furthermore, in the coachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s absence, athletes may be either incorrectly performing recommended exercises (such as for the rotator cuff ) or not following those recommendations. Instead players may be doing extra sets of bench presses, behind the neck pull-downs, and military presses. If athletes come to your office and ask what extra work they can do, do not just tell them to go do this or that exercise. Instead, go with them into the weight room and provide a learning opportunity for that athlete. Research has found that the mere presence of a strength and conditioning professional increases exercise adherence and muscle strength (7). An important characteristic of an effective strength and conditioning coach is to increase an athleteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s physical ability for sport. Although strength and conditioning coaches will usually decide the exercises athletesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perform, they should methodically plan programs guided by experience and research. A less effective strength coach does not use sport-specific exercises and/or does not emphasize proper technique (Figure 2). In other words, they randomly design programs, instead of looking at the bigger picture of field performance. For example, weightlifting (snatch, clean, and jerk) and their corresponding variations (clean pull and military press) can be difficult to perform. Effective strength coaches know not only the mechanics of the power clean but also the proper methods of teaching this lift. Although USA Weightlifting and the NSCA offer instructional progression models to teach the power clean (such as top to bottom or hang clean to floor clean), I recommend a Collegiate

Figure 1. Availability to the athlete. More effective coaches spend time with their athletes, whereas less effective coaches are unavailable.

Specific Progression (CSP) for college athletes, which involves the following 3 components: Use exercises that maximize athletic performance, injury prevention, and mental performance. Because collegiate athletes typically experienced previous success in their high school sport (such as baseball), they are likely to become frustrated and/or injured while performing exercises (such as weightlifting) in which they are not proficient. Therefore, this first component addresses the development of a program that emphasizes mastery of basic skills (clean pull) before more complex exercises (power clean) are included. Use exercises that the player can consistently perform properly. Athletes should use proper technique to avoid injury and maximize the usefulness of the exercise. If you cannot teach a particular exercise or cannot teach several athletes simultaneously, seriously consider adjusting your exercise selection until players can progress to more technically advanced exercises. Use exercises that are specific to the athleteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sport. Remember the movements of baseball require players to throw or hit the ball and run for both offensive and defensive purposes, not to perform well in the weight room. Strength and conditioning is performed to improve baseball performance. The point of this component is to illustrate that multiple exercises are baseball specific; no single exercise is necessary to play baseball successfully. CSP can be used as a way of properly selecting and progressing exercises in practice with baseball players by having them perform the front squat for several weeks before introducing the hang clean. At the same time, athletes progress from the high hang pull, to the knee level pull, to the below the knee pull, to the box pull, and finally to the floor pull. If an athlete is progressing quickly or already has proper technique, then she/he can move to the next progression sooner. Also

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org

Collegiate Baseball Strength Coaching

Figure 2. Program design. Effective strength coaches use exercise progressions that maximize results, whereas less effective strength coaches design programs haphazardly.

affecting the program design are situational factors, such as the coach to athlete ratio, weight room space, and time available for workouts. Regardless of such factors, basic skills should be mastered before progressing to more difficult exercises. The goal of CSP is for athletes to achieve consistently good technique and confidence in performing lifts while avoiding injury and unnecessary frustration. Although this is only 1 example of a CSP for weightlifting, strength coaches are encouraged to use progressions for other exercises that support their goals and demonstrate concern for each athlete. Three studies have demonstrated that coaches’ most frequent behavior is instructive (2,14,19). Research also reveals that athletes prefer instruction related to their sport and that they report satisfaction with coaches who offer frequent instruction (5,18). Furthermore, athletes perceive poor coaches as unknowledgeable and ineffective instructors (Figure 3). In contrast, effective strength and conditioning coaches provide at least 2 methods of instruction. The most common involves working one-on-one with athletes on properly performing a motor skill, such as the power clean or sprinting.

The other is through the curriculum of human performance. INSTRUCTION RELATED TO MOTOR SKILL DEVELOPMENT

One concept of motor skill development is verbal cues, which has been defined as ‘‘short, concise phrases that direct a performer’s attention to important environmental regulatory characteristics, or that prompt the person to perform key movement pattern elements, while performing a skill’’ (15). For example, when coaches are teaching the power clean to an athlete, they might say, ‘‘keep your butt down.’’ In giving such instruction, coaches are aware that the butt indeed rises when the athlete is performing the power clean; however, they really mean, ‘‘During the power clean, the shoulders and butt should be raised at the same rate until knee level, but your problem is your butt is raising at a faster rate than your shoulders which is causing undesirable stress on your lower back.’’ Coaches make the first statement to athletes when, in a futile attempt to keep their butt down, they continue to perform the movement improperly (because the athlete has just been told to keep their butt down, which is not really desired). Therefore, if what you

Figure 3. Quality of instruction. More effective strength coaches provide high-quality instruction, whereas less effective strength coaches provide little or no instruction.

are saying to athletes does not quickly change their technique, modify your instructions. In other words, consider individual responses and adjust your communication accordingly. When instruction goes beyond a basic motor command and delves deeper into what is really going on with the lift, the athlete understands what she/he is doing wrong and attempts to fix it. Research that studied the behavior of former UCLA basketball coach John Wooden found that his instruction was detailed, informative, and repetitive (10,19). In teaching motor skills, strength coaches should be aware of what verbal cues work and do not work, which is an awareness complicated by individual differences (4). However, this is part of the art of being a strength coach. CURRICULUM OF HUMAN PERFORMANCE

The second form of instruction (which many coaches do, but which receives little attention in the literature) involves the ability to communicate about a wide range of topics from a curriculum of human performance. This includes knowledge pertaining to exercise technique, sprinting, nutrition, physiology, biomechanics, and ‘‘life lessons’’ with topics such as ethics, desirable traits or qualities (discipline and hard work), and even parenting. A curriculum of human performance consists of the typical ‘‘ologies’’ seen in many academic departments, such as physiology, kinesiology, and psychology. Anytime coaches teach athletes why they perform an exercise, they are teaching from the curriculum of human performance. However, consider the difference in the following 2 statements: (1) ‘‘keep your back flat when you squat’’ (2) and ‘‘keep your back flat when you squat because doing so reduces harmful compression on your vertebrae and intervertebral discs that could eventually result in an injury . and take you out of the game.’’ Both statements are clear, concise, and direct. However, the quality of information is different. When coaches go beyond instructing

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2009

how to do a motor skill and provide a rationale for the primary command, they are teaching not only motor skill development but also a deeper understanding of biomechanics, injury prevention, and relationship to baseball. It is often useful to link training activities to performance on the field which is, after all, the objective. This may keep the athlete motivated and build credibility for your program. Many strength and conditioning coaches teach the ‘‘ologies’’ very well, using the banking model of education that views athletes as receptacles to deposit information (9). Under this model of education, upon being asked, ‘‘Why do you perform the lift this way?’’ athletes may be able to regurgitate the coach’s exact words ‘‘Keep your butt down.’’ Although it is important not only to tell athletes what to do but also to tell them why a particular motor movement is important to their baseball performance. Teaching the rationale behind the instruction is useful for 2 reasons: (a) to alleviate problems of their decoding your initial message and (b) to foster an appreciation and respect for your teaching them more, in turn building credibility for your program. Although this type of instruction enhances motor skills and athlete–coach respect, it is an area that needs more research and discussion to determine its value, need, and effect. The human performance curriculum should also extend to what many in sports label as life lessons or character building (6). The effective strength and conditioning coach teaches desirable traits for not only athletic performance but also everyday life including teaching discipline, work ethic, and teamwork (8). Effective coaches provide athletes with the rationale behind what they are doing, ranging from why shin angle is greatest during a sprint’s acceleration phase to why cleaning the equipment just used is responsible behavior. Research suggests that athletes not only perceive great coaches to be more than just teachers of technique but also mentors, friends, role models, and

parental figures (2). Therefore, effective coaches inherently recognize their responsibility to develop good people—as well as good athletes—and coach from the human performance curriculum. BECOMING A MORE EFFECTIVE COACH

Kaizen is a Japanese term (although an American, W. Edwards Deming, introduced the term to the Japanese) that means continuous improvement in small increments (12). Just as coaches implore athletes to ‘‘keep getting better,’’ coaches also must continuously learn and apply knowledge. In fact, strength coaches at conferences often hear, ‘‘If you can take home just one thing, one exercise, then this was a successful conference.’’ Although the formal training and education of strength coaches can and needs to grow, several other avenues are available to become an effective strength coach. Strength and conditioning professionals have an obligation to be excellent, which requires being as knowledgeable as possible about strength and conditioning. The only way strength coaches can do this is by education and experience. To learn more about weightlifting, check out the USA Weightlifting Association (http://weightlifting.teamusa. org/content/index/1429). To learn about speed training, check out the USA Track and Field (USATF) Web site (http://www.usatf.org/groups/ Coaches/education/). To be a strength coach, you can have a degree in about any academic area. Instead, strength coaches should be required to have a formal education and training in the coaching sciences from an accredited program. Courses from the following areas of study are recommended: pedagogy, physiology, biomechanics, injury prevention and care, nutrition, speed, resistance training, sports psychology, sociology, and management. If you do not have a degree in exercise science, obtain certifications, attend conferences, and study more about the coaching sciences listed above. In contrast, if you have

a degree in exercise science or physical education, study general education, physical education, counseling, psychology, and sociology. In other words, know your strengths and weakness and educate yourself in the weaker areas. To be effective, a coach must be well rounded and capable of relating to and teaching a culturally and personally diverse group of athletes. Other educational and training options include course conferences held by the NSCA, American College of Sports Medicine, National Athletic Trainers’ Association, and Collegiate Strength and Conditioning Coaches’ Association. Reach out to other strength coaches or personal trainers and ask if you can stop by to see them in action. Reach out to professors and scientists to evaluate your program and ask them about current research. Do not, however, let the size of the school, the athletes who train there, or the coach’s name recognition serve to validate everything that coach does. For example, being at a major university and having a few certifications alone do not automatically validate my coaching or my program. Respect is warranted for more experienced coaches and their knowledge; yet, for the purpose of critical evaluation, question what they do, keeping in mind the irreplaceable strategy of ‘‘learning by doing.’’ In summary, immerse yourself in coaching and continue becoming a more effective strength coach.

Brian Gearity is an assistant strength and conditioning coach at the University of Tennessee.

REFERENCES 1. Baker D. Science and practice of coaching a strength training program for novice and

Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org

Collegiate Baseball Strength Coaching

intermediate-level athletes. Strength Cond J 23(2): 61–68, 2001.

Wooden’s teaching practices. Sport Psychologist 18: 119–137, 2004.

2. Becker AJ and Wrisberg CA. Effective coaching in action: Observations of legendary collegiate basketball coach Pat Summitt. Sport Psychologist 22: 197–211, 2008.

11. Gallo G and De Marco GM Jr. Selfassessment and modification of a Division I strength and conditioning coach’s instructional behavior. J Strength Cond Res 22: 1228–1235, 2008.

3. Brooks D, Ziatz D, Johnson B, and Hollander D. Leadership behavior and job responsibilities of NCAA Division 1A strength and conditioning coaches. J Strength Cond Res 14: 483–492, 2000.

12. Imai M. Kaizen: The Key to Japan’s Competitive Success. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, 1986. pp. xix–xxix.

4. Burgener M. One-word coaching. Strength Cond J 16(5): 71–72, 1994.

13. Johnson MS. The Athlete’s Experience of Being Coached: An ExistentialPhenomenological Investigation [unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Knoxville: University of Tennessee; 1998.

5. Chelladurai P. A Contingency Model of Leadership in Athletics [unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Canada: University of Waterloo; 1978.

14. Lacy AC and Darst PW. Systematic observation of behaviors of winning high school head football coaches. J Teach Phys Educ 4: 256–270, 1985.

6. Coakley J. Sports in Society: Issues and Controversies. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, 2007. pp. 100–101.

15. Magill R. Motor learning: Concepts and applications. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, 1998.

7. Coutts AJ, Murphy AJ, and Dascombe BJ. Effect of direct supervision of a strength coach on measures of muscular strength and power in young rugby league players. J Strength Cond Res 18: 316–323, 2004.

16. National Strength and Conditioning Association. Strength and Conditioning Professional Standards and Guidelines. Available at: http://www.nsca-lift.org/ Publications/standards.shtml. Accessed: August 24, 2008.

8. Fleser D. Lady Vols conditioned to respect Mason. Knoxville News Sentinel. Available at: http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2004/ Oct/09/lady-vols-conditioned-to-respectmason/. Accessed: August 24, 2008.

17. Pullo F. A profile of NCAA Division I strength and conditioning coaches. J Strength Cond Res 6: 55–62, 1992.

9. Freire P. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum, 2000. pp. 52–67.

18. Riemer HA and Chelladurai P. Leadership and satisfaction in athletics. J Sport Exerc Psychol 17: 276–293, 1995.

10. Gallimore R and Tharp RG. What a coach can teach a teacher, 1975–2005: Reflections and reanalysis of John

19. Tharp RG and Gallimore R. What a coach can teach a teacher. Psychol Today 9: 75– 78, 1976.

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 2 | APRIL 2009