Competition or Development

I was recently speaking with a friend, Dr. Nicholas Molinaro, a sports psychologist and  wrote who an article entitled “The Truth About Competition.” The article deals with a subject near and dear to my heart, youth sports and how the system is set up to “win” and not for “player development.”  I have been saying this for years while writing this blog, the system is set up for coaches to put their best players in the most important positions and ensure they are “coached up” while leaving the rest of the team to fend for themselves when it comes to learning the sport they may be competing in. 

While speaking with Dr. Molinaro, I asked why he wrote the article because when we speak, it is not a subject he discusses, so he explained his reasons for the article.  In the article, he discusses two players, one who played soccer and another played hockey, and how their high school/junior hockey coaches did not recognize their athletic abilities, thus limiting their playing time.  Dr. Molinaro’s thesis is that “he has repeatedly witnessed programs that are labeled as “developmental” where limited competitive opportunity restricted - not revealed - potential.”  He writes further to state that the examples he cites (the soccer and hockey player) are “not indictments of coaching; rather, they highlight how limited exposure can obscure an athlete’s capabilities from both athlete and staff.”  Dr. Molinaro states his paper explores the often-overlooked role of competition in athletic development. 

The stories regarding the players are as follows: the soccer player was a technically skilled player who only received brief varsity opportunities despite strong junior varsity performance.  The child’s father proceeded to assemble a video highlight reel and distributed them to Division III programs, and multiple offers followed which was evidence that the athlete’s ability had not been observed within his own program.  In the case of the hockey player, he was excluded from a high number of competitions under the belief, shared by his coach, that he needed to “get faster.”  Despite teammates, who were surprised and noted that several peers playing regularly struggled in performance metrics.  When the player was given game exposure, the player’s composure and positional awareness quickly became visible strengths. 

I can so relate to what Dr. Molinaro is stating in his paper as I lived it while coaching baseball.  The league I was coaching decided to start a “fall ball” season that was, as per my understanding, supposed to be a “developmental season” whereby coaches were supposed to be moving players around letting them “experiment” at other positions to develop stronger players and ultimately a stronger league.  Well, due to the American belief in youth sports where, it is all about “winning” with “development” taking a back seat, it was not long before the coaches were playing for the “Fall Ball Championship” which originally did not exist.  The players who played the premier positions, shortstop, catcher, first base and pitcher continued to play those positions and the players who were deemed “not good enough to play those positions” were relegated to the outfield, which in my opinion, defeated the purpose of the league which was to help young baseball players get better.  Thankfully, the manager of the team I was coaching with, a good friend of mine, understood the assignment, and we moved players around allowing them to play the “premier positions” and even allowed them to pitch. While we did not win many games, we had a group of players who improved, had fun, and got better as the fall season went on. 

One of the premises of Dr. Molinaro’s paper is “many sport programs emphasize player development yet inadvertently restrict its most essential ingredient, competition.”  He goes on to state “athletes who spend extended time on the bench often lack the experiential context that allows training gains to transfer under pressure.  Without exposure to authentic competition, attentional, emotional and decision-making capacities cannot fully consolidate into consistent performance.”  Now admittedly, I was coaching in recreational leagues where children are required to play half a game (the two instances referenced above are of high school players and the rules change once you reach high school) but the premise remains the same, if you are just “sticking players in the outfield” and not developing them to play other positions you are hurting the player, the team and the league.  My reasoning for this is you never know when you may need to move a player into a position they have not played before, and if you have to do that, what do you think the player is going to do with no practice in that position?  He/she will probably make mistakes leading coaches to yell at them because of the mistakes, but should the coach be yelling at the child or take responsibility for not preparing the whole team and not just the “premier position” players?  

Now, at the higher levels: high school, college and the pros, the coach goes with the best players, and the second stringers get limited repetitions with the first string, and that makes total sense as championships and millions of dollars are at stake. The professional level players should be able to step into a position and play because of all the years of practice and play.  However, at a recreational level nothing is on the line except for the ego of the coach who wants to “win at all costs” to the detriment of the young players. If we are not developing players at the youth level, professional sports will suffer.  Dr. Molinaro states “experiences suggest that developmental limitations are often perceptual rather than instructional.  If an athlete is never placed in situations demanding higher levels of execution, neither the athlete nor the coach can accurately gauge readiness or potential.  Development without competition becomes simulation, and simulation can never fully expose or evolve ability.”  Dr, Molinaro goes on to state “providing competitive exposure does not challenge a coach’s philosophy, it expands it, allowing both athlete and coach to access new information about capability and growth.” 

In an earlier blog, I extensively discussed the European Model of youth sports where competition in youth sports does not start until the children reach the age of 12 or 13 years old.  Before that age, children are taught the sport they are playing in small developmental settings where children learn the game and are taught skills, while in America, 70% of the youth playing sports are quitting by the age of 13 years old due to the pressures put on them by their parents, coaches and the specialization that starts at younger and younger ages.  Youth soccer in this country is the perfect example of this problem.  Besides the developmental leagues being “pay for play” (that would be a different blog post…LOL) we will never be able to compete with the rest of the world at the elite level because while the Europeans are “developing” youth and teaching their players the skills that are needed to play the sport, Americans are playing for championships and ranking youth teams at ages as young as 5 and 6 years old.  So, while at the age of 13 the European soccer players are getting ready to compete on an elite level, 70% of the American players are quitting for various reasons. 

I have been preaching for years that the “American Model”, if you can call it that, needs to be reevaluated and we need to explore making our youth sports more “developmental.”  In the conclusion of Dr. Molinaro’s paper he gives practical applications for coaches, 5 applications that I total agree with: 

1.     Rotate with Purpose – Create planned competitive moments for every athlete  

2.     Reinforce Process Under Pressure – Highlight effort, focus, and composure 

3.     Allow Constructive Struggle – Permit challenges to unfold before intervening 

4.     Monitor Competitive Readiness – Track emotional regulation and attentional control as performance metrics 

5.     Model a Mastery Climate – Frame competition as learning, not evaluation 

Now, I realize this is a lot to ask of recreational coaches, but it is something that needs to be looked at so we can make our youth sports and athletes better and enhance the experience for all of our youth sports athletes.