The Coaching Pyramid: Time Allocation Differences Between Team & 1-ON-1 Coaching (PT.1)

If I asked you to think of a coach, the first thing that comes to mind is some guy or gal standing out in a field with a whistle around their neck and a clipboard in there hand inaudibly yelling something and pointing at something else. If we further explore this brief thought we'd likely describe a group of young athletes huddled around on their knees intently looking at said coach. What makes this image particularly interesting is the perception of team size, and how on average, people would describe a coach being in charge of more athletes than few. Though we could talk about the inherent image of a coach and how people perceive them I wish to cover a specific angle, that of responsibility.

Coach's in large are responsible for a group of athletes. Overseeing their practice, progression, and pursuit of sport. However, though the role of a coach is complex, the coach's role as the 'attention giver' is one that I would like to shine light on. . In any given sporting group from U8 hockey to the NHL, there is always going to be a discrepancy in talent, work ethic, and need for attention. Some may be independent and excel on their own, needing little attention, while others may be equally talented but need a helping hand at nearly ever step on the way. This is exacerbated the larger the group becomes. This is where the coaching pyramid comes in ,and along with it, the principle of specificity.

Not to be confused with the principle of specificity seen in program design, this principle of specificity relates to the total equatable time a single coach can spend with an individual athlete based on their collective responsibility to the group. In the case of a 1-on-1 client, a coach can spend every minute attentively acting on that individual; providing exact data and details for their programming, adjusting ever rep and set, and effectively being at their every service and need. In this example this coach can provide 100% specific attention to their athlete. As the numbers grow that specificity becomes more generalized in order to reach the collective goal.. What happens then is a bit of a challenge. Say a coach is working with 40 athletes. They are competing at the same sport, same level, and with relatively the same experience. But from a physical standpoint each individual needs different requirements. The easiest approach is to lump needs into categories and apply the best suitable programming to the most amount of people. Example: Rugby players, 40 athletes, 20 need a strength approach, 10 need speed approach, and 10 need core and shoulder stability approach. The program must then suit all members equally while providing emphasis to each sub group to improve their deficits. Due to limited time and space, the higher the number of athletes a coach has the more creative they need to be. Regardless, no single athlete will ever get the degree of specificity that a 1-on-1 client or a small group would. This illustrates one half of the pyramid.

Fig 1.0

At the the bottom of the pyramid there is the base, the highest degree of attention and specificity, and smallest group size. At the top the lowest degree of attention and specificity with the largest group size. What makes it a pyramid is the addition of the 'experience / professional " variable. In addition to group size, the relative level of experience and or professionalism dictates a coaches specificity to each member of the team. As you approach the level of professional, as in the example of the NFL, you have fewer players requiring attention. This is for several reasons. Firstly, many have their own strength and conditioning coaches; thus your time spent with them is 'unnecessary', secondly, they're highly experienced and independent, therefore time spent with them is unnecessary outside of potentially testing or check ups. And thirdly, they're adults who make their own decisions, so if they aren't interested in training then that's their choice (in cases where it is not team mandated). So without the third variable the scheme would be more of a double variable line showing more specificity at lower group sizes and less at larger group sizes. (As seen above in fig 1.0)

Fig 2.0

The point now to bring up is one of consideration. Consideration by players, especially when working with young athletes is tough to come by. Even at the professional level i'm sure it is as well. But getting the buy in and understanding from players that a coach has to firstly provide the best approach to adhere to the teams goals and needs, and then each individuals wants and needs is paramount, but very difficult. It comes from trust, trial & error, and respect. Regardless, navigating the pyramid is tough. On one end you get to provide your best self, so to speak, providing every ounce of your time and knowledge, while on the other end you have to sacrifice giving your full attention to everyone in order to reach the collective goal. It would seem that reaching the collective goal is more important to the group, but in many sports where there is competition for spots, placement in leagues, or requirements at the next level of competition, although everyone wants their team to win, they still look out for themselves. Which is understandable, but can put a lot of pressure on a coach when they have 20-40 athletes needing what simply can't be provided.

Every coach, whether a head coach or strength coach, have gone through these trials and understand the difficulty of putting enough eggs in the basket to reach the team goals without stepping on too many egg shells along the way.

This article is more of a conversation starter. If you've read this, it's my hope that if you're an aspiring S&C coach or head/Assistant coach and this helps you understand why certain players act towards you in a certain way or at least paint a picture of one of the many many intricacies of the job. And if you are reading this out of pleasure or interest let me know what your thoughts are, any applicability you see in other areas of work? And for seasoned coaches, any tips and tricks on handling this more smoothly?

Evolve Through Xperience - ETX

"Progression is built through consistency and tested by passion"

JB