The "tough/hardass" coaching model occasionally works on the HS/college level because athletes have no control.

It largely fails on the pro level because athletes have more autonomy & understand their value

Pro's want to be treated as people, not subordinates.

Why? A thread:

It's not that young athletes don't want the same things (autonomy) as older. It's that there's an inherent power differential and they are nearly powerless to escape it.

They "survive" the 'tough' training, they don't thrive under it.
Human motivation is very simple. Self Determination Theory boils it down to 3 basic needs:
1. Feel like you belong
2. Feel like you can make progress
3. Feel like you have some control over your life (autonomy)
Intrinsic motivation largely fuels the "obsession" you see from top performers to practice their craft over and over.

That doesn't come from a coach or someone dictating and directing. Over the long haul, it has to come from within.
As you can see, the "hardass" all the time approach runs counter to at least one of our basic motivational needs.

Over time, you erode self-motivation and have to replace it with something else, or else you lose people.

That something else if often more extrinsic motivation.
I like to think of extrinsic motivation as a temporary booster. There's nothing wrong with it, but it's like throwing lighter fluid on the fire. You may need some from time to time, but it burns quickly and burns out. You need something more sustainable over the long haul.
All of this is why the 'tough' all the time approach generally only works if you are consistently winning or there's a finite time in which an athlete has to tolerate it.

A high chance to win supplements some of the lost motivation, temporarily at least.
A short period to tolerate (i.e. college career) with a potential big payoff at the end (i.e. get drafted) helps athletes get through it.

But as I said, you have to replace that loss of motivation provided via autonomy with something. And that something often is short term.
If you think this if gibberish, consider a study a few years ago using NBA coaches/players.

They found that having an "abusive leader" as a coach changed the trajectory of players careers.

They had more technical fouls and worse performance over the trajectory of their career.
It's worth emphasizing that this didn't occur only while they were being coached by an "abusive leader," it impacted the rest of their career.

Players trajectories, in terms of player efficiency metrics, shifted downwards
https://t.co/dqpknRc3vc
All of the above is one of the reasons you see college coaches who have excelled at that level using a control/disciplinarian style fail at the pro level. It doesn't translate.

The style wears on you. It pushes you away from intrinsic motivation.
The same lessons apply off the court and field. If you have talented and driven individuals, the quickest way to turn them into complacent, "lazy" workers is to diminish their intrinsic motivation by taking away their basic psychological needs.
If you enjoy insights into the science of performance, follow along here or sign up for my free weekly newsletter, which you can find here: https://t.co/2qjLh6cLXk

More from For later read

I’ve asked Byers to clarify, but as I read this tweet, it seems that Bret Stephens included an unredacted use of the n-word in his column this week to make a point, and the column got spiked—maybe as a result?


Four times. The column used the n-word (in the context of a quote) four times. https://t.co/14vPhQZktB


For context: In 2019, a Times reporter was reprimanded for several incidents of racial insensitivity on a trip with high school students, including one in which he used the n-word in a discussion of racial slurs.

That incident became public late last month, and late last week, after 150 Times employees complained about how it had been handled, the reporter in question resigned.

In the course of all that, the Times' executive editor said that the paper does not "tolerate racist language regardless of intent.” This was the quote that Bret Stephens was pushing back against in his column. (Which, again, was deep-sixed by the paper.)

You May Also Like

🌺कैसे बने गरुड़ भगवान विष्णु के वाहन और क्यों दो भागों में फटी होती है नागों की जिह्वा🌺

महर्षि कश्यप की तेरह पत्नियां थीं।लेकिन विनता व कद्रु नामक अपनी दो पत्नियों से उन्हे विशेष लगाव था।एक दिन महर्षि आनन्दभाव में बैठे थे कि तभी वे दोनों उनके समीप आकर उनके पैर दबाने लगी।


प्रसन्न होकर महर्षि कश्यप बोले,"मुझे तुम दोनों से विशेष लगाव है, इसलिए यदि तुम्हारी कोई विशेष इच्छा हो तो मुझे बताओ। मैं उसे अवश्य पूरा करूंगा ।"

कद्रू बोली,"स्वामी! मेरी इच्छा है कि मैं हज़ार पुत्रों की मां बनूंगी।"
विनता बोली,"स्वामी! मुझे केवल एक पुत्र की मां बनना है जो इतना बलवान हो की कद्रू के हज़ार पुत्रों पर भारी पड़े।"
महर्षि बोले,"शीघ्र ही मैं यज्ञ करूंगा और यज्ञ के उपरांत तुम दोनो की इच्छाएं अवश्य पूर्ण होंगी"।


महर्षि ने यज्ञ किया,विनता व कद्रू को आशीर्वाद देकर तपस्या करने चले गए। कुछ काल पश्चात कद्रू ने हज़ार अंडों से काले सर्पों को जन्म दिया व विनता ने एक अंडे से तेजस्वी बालक को जन्म दिया जिसका नाम गरूड़ रखा।जैसे जैसे समय बीता गरुड़ बलवान होता गया और कद्रू के पुत्रों पर भारी पड़ने लगा


परिणामस्वरूप दिन प्रतिदिन कद्रू व विनता के सम्बंधों में कटुता बढ़ती गयी।एकदिन जब दोनो भ्रमण कर रहीं थी तब कद्रू ने दूर खड़े सफेद घोड़े को देख कर कहा,"बता सकती हो विनता!दूर खड़ा वो घोड़ा किस रंग का है?"
विनता बोली,"सफेद रंग का"।
तो कद्रू बोली,"शर्त लगाती हो? इसकी पूँछ तो काली है"।
First update to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL since the challenge ended – Medium links!! Go add your Medium profile now 👀📝 (thanks @diannamallen for the suggestion 😁)


Just added Telegram links to
https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL too! Now you can provide a nice easy way for people to message you :)


Less than 1 hour since I started adding stuff to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL again, and profile pages are now responsive!!! 🥳 Check it out -> https://t.co/fVkEL4fu0L


Accounts page is now also responsive!! 📱✨


💪 I managed to make the whole site responsive in about an hour. On my roadmap I had it down as 4-5 hours!!! 🤘🤠🤘